Biden-Harris Policies Ignited Global Chaos: WW3 Fears Rise as 2024 Election Nears

As the 2024 election approaches, the Biden-Harris administration’s foreign policy has left the world in utter chaos and teetering on the brink of World War III — from the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal to the Israel-Hamas war — all while Russia, China, and Iran, once restrained under Trump’s tough stance, are emboldened, raising concerns that a Harris term would spell irreversible disaster.

Since taking office, the Biden-Harris administration has made a series of failed foreign policy moves, many of which have shifted long-standing U.S. strategies. President Joe Biden himself recently underscored Vice President Kamala Harris’s involvement in such decisions, describing her as “a major player in everything we’ve done,” as he directly tied her to their administration’s policy failures.

In fact, last month Biden admitted he had delegated “everything” as commander-in-chief to Harris, including both foreign and domestic policy, a significant admission as Harris has repeatedly attempted to distance herself from the administration’s record. 

Meanwhile, Trump senior adviser Jason Miller stated that Harris is directly responsible for the current administration’s failures, particularly on foreign policy, citing her involvement in decisions that led to disastrous results from Afghanistan to Ukraine and the Middle East. 

With 8 out of 10 Americans fearing World War III, the Biden-Harris administration faces growing scrutiny over its handling of foreign crises.

Middle East

One of the current administration’s first major foreign policy moves was removing the Houthis from the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) list, reversing Trump-era policies aimed at curbing the Iranian-backed group. Though the president would later admit the Houthis are “terrorists,” it would come only after dozens of attacks against U.S. military and international commercial warships in the Red Sea.

The decision to delist the Houthis as an FTO was seen as part of the Biden-Harris administration’s broader attempt to revive the failed Obama-era Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), which has been widely criticized for empowering Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism worldwide. The current administration has further emboldened Tehran and its terror proxies through the easing sanctions and by providing the Islamic Republic with financial resources to support terrorism and regional aggression.

Additionally, weak responses to attacks by Iranian-backed militias and policy shifts in the Middle East have been viewed as “appeasing” the theocratic regime. The Biden-Harris administration also allowed sanctions on Iran’s ballistic missile to expire last year, a mere six months before a ballistic missile attack on Israel in April. According to a report citing new government data from last week, the Biden-Harris administration gave the Iranian regime access to $200 billion in oil revenues through lax sanctions enforcement. 

While under Trump, a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign crippled Iran’s ability to finance proxy terror groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, the Biden-Harris administration’s diplomatic overtures — including efforts to renew the nuclear deal and a more lenient stance on enforcing oil sanctions — have allowed additional revenues to flow to Tehran, enabling it to continue funding terror through its regional proxies.

The consequences came to a head in October 2023 when Hamas, heavily funded by Iran, launched a large-scale assault on Israel which left 1,200 dead inside the Jewish state, over 4,800 more wounded, and at least 240 hostages of all ages taken — of which nearly one hundred remain captive. The vast majority of the victims are civilians and include dozens of American citizens.

The war shocked the region, with critics pointing to the Biden-Harris team’s failure to maintain the hardline pressure Trump applied to Tehran. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that the current administration’s “weakness” emboldened Iranian proxies, leading to catastrophic consequences across the Middle East.

The ongoing Israel-Hamas war has also highlighted the strained U.S.-Israel relations under the Biden-Harris administration, which began with his administration showing early hostility toward Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by delaying official meetings. In fact, the administration has reportedly been using a four-part plan, involving diplomatic pressure and protests, to undermine Netanyahu’s government, signaling an unprecedented interference in Israeli domestic politics during a critical war.

In May, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin confirmed that the U.S. had withheld a shipment of large bombs to Israel, citing concerns about civilian safety in Rafah during Israel’s ongoing operations against Hamas. In a more recent development, the Biden-Harris administration is reportedly considering an arms embargo on the Jewish State over humanitarian concerns in Gaza, with Harris signaling openness to the idea.

The administration’s executive order which sanctions Israel under the pretext of targeting “extremist settler violence,” empowers the anti-Israel BDS movement and undermines a critical U.S. ally during a time of crisis.

In July, the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) condemned Harris for boycotting Netanyahu’s address to Congress to attend a sorority luncheon, viewing it as a clear signal of hostility toward Israel. Critics argue that it was part of a broader pattern in which Harris has consistently aligned with anti-Israel sentiments, even expressing support for the “emotion” behind protests that have involved overt antisemitism. 

This contrasts with Trump’s full support of the Jewish State, exemplified by his decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and the historic Trump-brokered Abraham Accords — peace agreements normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab nations, stabilizing a volatile region, all while avoiding new foreign wars during his presidency.

Afghanistan

The 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal is perhaps the most glaring example of Biden-Harris foreign policy failures, a move that left major U.S. allies questioning the reliability of American commitments, ultimately leading to further global instability. 

What was supposed to be a strategic exit from America’s longest war turned into a hasty, disorganized retreat, leaving the country to be swiftly overtaken by the Taliban. The resulting humanitarian disaster and the deaths of U.S. service members during the evacuation were only part of the fallout.

Many blasted the Biden-Harris administration’s “weakness” and “incompetence” while accusing the president of allowing Taliban terrorists to “call the shots” by “dictating foreign policy” and calling for his immediate resignation.

As fighting intensified in Afghanistan, the Biden-Harris team set a withdrawal timeline while assuring that the U.S.-backed Afghan military could withstand the Taliban, but within weeks, Kabul fell, President Ashraf Ghani fled with $169 million, and the Taliban swiftly seized control of the country despite nearly two decades of U.S. and NATO efforts to build Afghan security forces. 

A report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction found that the withdrawal left $7.2 billion worth of U.S. military equipment in the hands of the Taliban, including missiles, aircraft, and biometric devices. Some of the weapons even reportedly ended up in the Gaza Strip, with groups like Hamas potentially utilizing them.

A recent report by the House Foreign Affairs Committee that slams the Biden-Harris administration for prioritizing the optics of the Afghanistan withdrawal over the safety of U.S. personnel, specifically highlights Harris as a key player in the decision-making process. In fact, Harris even admitted she was “the last person in the room” when Biden decided to abruptly evacuate U.S. troops from Afghanistan, boasting of her support for the disastrous decision, while expressing admiration for the president’s supposed courage in making the call.

At the time, former President Trump said the Biden-Harris team “surrendered Afghanistan to terrorists and left thousands of Americans for dead.” The former president also called the bungled withdrawal the “single most embarrassing moment in the history of our country.”

The success of the Taliban, which immediately declared its intentions of imposing a strict Islamic sharia law system on Afghans, has been a growing concern for various groups, including ethnic and religious minorities within Afghanistan.

Furthermore, the Biden-Harris administration faced backlash for a botched drone strike in Kabul, which killed 11 civilians, further tarnishing the U.S. reputation. The withdrawal also exposed failures within the State Department, whose evacuation efforts left thousands of Afghan allies behind, now facing life under Taliban rule.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates remarked that Biden has been “wrong on nearly every major foreign policy issue” in the last 40 years, a sentiment clearly validated by the Afghanistan debacle.

Russia-Ukraine War

The mishandling of the withdrawal also emboldened adversaries like Russia and China, with then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) asserting that the actions of the Biden-Harris administration, together with their executive orders, have “emboldened all the evil leaders of the world.” The chaotic pullout signaled U.S. vulnerability, leading experts to argue that President Vladimir Putin saw it as a display of weakness, paving the way for Russia’s more aggressive actions. 

Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, argued that Putin’s invasions of Crimea in 2014 under Obama and Ukraine in 2022 under the Biden-Harris administration demonstrate that “two weak presidents” emboldened Putin, further linking the current conflict to the “humiliation of the United States.”

The now nearly three-year-long Russian invasion of Ukraine underscores the Biden-Harris administration’s mishandling of U.S. deterrence. 

The president’s now infamous comment about a “minor incursion” by Russia into Ukraine, made in early 2022, sent the wrong message to Putin, with the indecision emboldening Moscow to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Initially, the Biden-Harris team even offered Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a ride out of the country instead of providing the military support Ukraine desperately needed. Such decisions have not only deepened the crisis but also led to widespread criticism of the president’s lack of foresight in managing Europe’s security situation.

U.S. weakness under Biden-Harris stands in sharp contrast with Trump’s foreign policy, where under his watch, Putin refrained from aggressive moves.

Trump has argued that if Harris wins, she would prolong the Russia-Ukraine war and continue funneling billions of U.S. tax dollars into Ukraine, warning that her inaction could lead to “millions” of deaths and potentially a global conflict.

China

The Biden-Harris administration’s approach to China has been similarly criticized, with current policies seen as lacking, and Beijing emboldened by American inaction.

From the infamous spy balloon incident, where a Chinese surveillance balloon was allowed to traverse U.S. airspace, to rising military threats in the South China Sea and over Taiwan, the current administration’s responses have been criticized as inadequate, including the failure to impose sanctions on Beijing.

China’s assertiveness, having grown, has led to fears that Taiwan could be the next flashpoint of major conflict.

Under Trump, the U.S. took a much harder stance on China through tariffs and aggressive diplomacy. Trump’s administration also built stronger alliances with nations in the Indo-Pacific, sending a clear message to Beijing that any aggressive moves would have serious consequences.

Global Threats

Beyond these major crises, the Biden-Harris administration’s foreign policy blunders span numerous regions. 

North Korea, for instance, has openly resumed arms deals with Russia, further straining global security dynamics. The current administration’s failure to rein in Iran has allowed Tehran to infiltrate U.S. politics, raising alarms about Iran-backed operatives influencing domestic policy. 

Meanwhile, Russia’s development of hypersonic missiles has gone largely unchecked, marking a dangerous escalation in the global arms race.

Trump’s foreign policy, in contrast, was defined by a doctrine of deterrence. 

The assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani impaired Iran’s ability to conduct terrorist operations across the Middle East. Trump also maintained a strong military presence to dissuade North Korea and China from expanding their militaristic ambitions. His method of diplomacy and maintaining U.S. dominance globally led to a far more stable international environment.

Elections

As the 2024 election nears, foreign policy remains pivotal. While the Biden-Harris administration’s approach has been seen as “emboldening America’s enemies,” Trump is credited with maintaining global stability through strength and clear red lines. 

Meanwhile, Harris failed her foreign policy efforts in Central America, as China expanded its influence in the region, and promised investments through her initiatives fell far short of expectations. Other key events include the terminating of Keystone XL, which hurt U.S. energy independence, and green-lighting the Nord Stream 2 pipeline — moves that undermined U.S. leadership globally.

Surrounded by advisers with anti-Israel ties, including her national security adviser Phil Gordon, who is currently under investigation for alleged links to an Iranian influence network, Harris faces increasing scrutiny over her foreign policy team.

Just last month, Harris claimed that no active-duty U.S. troops were engaged in combat; however, U.S. forces remain deployed in Iraq and Syria, facing frequent attacks from Iran-backed militias — prompting more concerns about her grasp of the complexities required for effective foreign policy leadership

Furthermore, she published a policy page on her website, claiming she is “ready to be Commander in Chief on day one,” but cited a notorious foreign policy blunder — mistakenly referring to North Korea as a U.S. ally during her 2022 visit to the Korean Demilitarized Zone — as evidence of her diplomatic experience.

The Biden-Harris administration has also been blamed for contributing to the military’s largest recruitment crisis in decades, with critics pointing to the administration’s focus on “woke” policies like diversity initiatives as a key factor​.

In addition, the current administration is also grappling with massive illegal immigration across the southern border — thanks to the repeal of Trump-era border policies and an economy strained by inflation.

In her role as “Border Czar,” Harris has been blamed for the administration’s failure to enforce immigration laws, which critics argue has compromised national security and led to preventable crimes. Unprecedented crossings of individuals on terrorist watchlists have also been documented at both the southern and northern borders, with some reportedly planning attacks​. 

“The Biden-Harris administration has intentionally left us vulnerable,” declared Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX), during a hearing on terror threats from the border, emphasizing the connection between their border policies and the surge in national security risks.

With tensions rising across the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, voters face a critical choice: continue the failed Biden-Harris policies or return to Trump’s assertive policies to restore U.S. leadership. with a recent survey revealing that 80% of Americans fear World War III is imminent, the stakes for U.S. foreign policy couldn’t be higher.

Joshua Klein is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jklein@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

‘Insulting to Black Men’: Kamala Harris’s Dating Show-Style Ad Garners Backlash

Vice President Kamala Harris has received backlash after offending black male voters with a campaign ad depicting women turning them down for dates due to their voting record.

The online ad, which is being hosted on social media sites including Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook according to the Daily Mail, was produced in the format of the popular genre of dating game videos that feature a line of potential dates who can pop a balloon to reject a male suitor.

In the video, a black man walks into the studio before several women and introduces himself:

“What do you do, and how much do you make?” the presumed “host” of the dating show asks.

He replies, “I work in finance and I make six figures.”

One of the women in line with the balloons then asks him how tall he is, to which he says 6’5″.

The women then say “Ooooh” to each other in response to his enticing answers, before another one asks if he plans to vote in the upcoming November election. 

“Uh, I didn’t plan on it,” he replies, prompting all of the women to pop their balloons, signaling an instant rejection.

The ad was created by Harris’s deputy director of creative strategy, Brian McBride, who “hid” many negative comments he got on X after posting the video. 

“Goofiness. The outreach is out of touch and senseless,” one user wrote.

“Their audience is mostly women and teenagers,” another commenter said, referring to the primary viewers of dating game videos. “So how will this convince black men to vote if this doesn’t target them and instead shames them which is also not a good persuasion method?”

“Did Trump make these? Because this doesn’t help Kamala,” yet another comment “hidden” by McBride said.

It appears that he gave up on hiding comments after more bad reviews came pouring in, with another person remarking, “As always, black women wanting to keep black men down”:

“‘Vote or no [sex] for you’ is quite the sales pitch. Deeply insulting to black men,” another person said:

“How is this going to convince Black men??? This is insulting,” a black male user wrote:

“And you geniuses wonder why she’s got a black men problem?  Or a male voter problem???”:

Conservative personality Graham Allen asserted that “this is what a failing campaign looks like”:

Podcast host Cash Loren said “It’s hard to describe how cringe Kamala is”:

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

WATCH: “I Think We Should Not Allow Voting Machines of Any Kind” – Elon Musk Calls for One-Day Voting on Paper Ballots With No Voting Machines

Elon Musk speaks at town hall in support of Trump in Pennsylvania – October 20, 2024

Elon Musk delivered remarks at a town hall on Sunday in Pennsylvania, where he called out the rigging of our elections and called for elections with “paper ballots in person with ID.”

“I’d be happy if it was just that, you know, citizens voted. You know, I call that a win, he told the crowd. “If we can just make sure that only legal citizens can vote, which is how it’s supposed to be, I’d say that’d be quite a victory compared to what we have right now.”

A massive crowd turned out to see Elon Musk today. Here’s a look at the line via Matthew Smith on X:

Elon Musk has been on the campaign trail for Donald Trump over the past week. As The Gateway Pundit reported, Musk was in the swing state for a Wednesday town hall event and told the crowd, “This election, I think, is going to decide the fate of America, and along with the fate of America, the fate of Western civilization.”

This is why the Democrats are trying to stop him. The Gateway Pundit reported on Sunday that Musk is now coming under fire from Democrats like Pennsylvania’s Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro, who said law enforcement should ‘take a look’ at the billionaire entrepreneur’s daily $1 million giveaway to signers of his petition in support of constitutional rights.

HERE WE GO: Democrat Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro Attacks Elon Musk, Says Law Enforcement Should ‘Take a Look’ at Daily $1 Million Giveaway to Signer of His Petition (VIDEO)

This is how much the Democrats hate our Constitution. They want to criminalize petitioning in support of our rights as Americans.

The event venue for tonight’s event was completely filled hours before Elon took the stage:

During the event, Elon spoke about electronic voting machines, sharing that in his experience computers are "easy" to hack and that "the last thing we want to do is have electronic voting machines."

Watch below:

Musk: Well, I mean, frankly, I’d be happy if it was just that, you know, citizens voted. You know, I call that a win. If we can just make sure that only legal citizens can vote, which is how it’s supposed to be, I’d say that’d be quite a victory compared to what we have right now. So just—and I think having more transparency on elections, maximum transparency on elections, and as I’ve said before, I think we should not allow voting machines of any kind. So, you know, I’ve been programming computers since I was nine years old. And, you know, I know how easy it is to, you know, get a line of software wrong or hack a computer. And so, I think the last thing we want to do is have electronic voting machines. We want paper ballots in person with ID.

And actually sort of, in terms of a real AI danger that hopefully is not there this year, but will certainly be a danger in the future, is that advanced AI will be super good at hacking computers. And so, if you have voting machines that are connected to the internet, and you’ve got super advanced AI that can potentially affect those machines, I think that’s very dangerous. So what I’m saying is that I’m normally someone who favors technology. I’m super; you know, I’m a 21st century technology boy, right here. And I’m saying no, no machines for voting.

The post WATCH: “I Think We Should Not Allow Voting Machines of Any Kind” – Elon Musk Calls for One-Day Voting on Paper Ballots With No Voting Machines appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/

Triggered: Kamala’s Running Mate Tim Walz Fires Off Psychotic Social Media Response to Trump’s McDonald’s Work

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) issued a seemingly triggered response to former President Donald Trump working at a Philadelphia McDonald’s on Sunday.

Walz, the vice presidential running mate of Vice President Kamala Harris, responded to a video of Trump wearing an apron at McDonald’s and learning how to make french fries. In his post on X, Walz referenced Harris’s unproven claim that she had previously worked at a McDonald’s.

“This guy spent decades stiffing workers pay, cut overtime benefits for millions of people, and opposed any effort to raise the minimum wage,” Walz wrote in his post.

“You know who has actually worked at McDonald’s, joined workers on picket lines, and fights for working people?” Walz added, “@KamalaHarris.”

Walz’s social media post criticizing Trump’s visit to McDonald’s where he learned to make french fries, served customers their orders, and spoke with several customers in the drive-through.

One customer told Trump that he and his wife were praying for him

“Thank you, Mr. President,” the customer said from the drive-through window. “You made it possible for ordinary people like us to meet you. Thank you so much for everything you are doing. We pray for you, and you are the type of person we want to be the president.”

The customer’s wife added: “Thank you for taking the bullet for us.”

“Mr. President, please don’t let the United States become Brazil, my native Brazil,” another customer told Trump.

“We’re going to make it better than ever,” Trump responded.

Trump’s visit to the McDonald’s comes as Harris has previously alleged that she used to work at a McDonald’s.

During an interview with Drew Barrymore, Harris was asked if “rumors” that Harris had worked at a McDonald’s were true.

“I did,” Harris said. “Yes, I did work at McDonald’s. When I was at school … I did fries. I did fries. I did fries, and then I did the cashier.”

Harris has also previously claimed during a labor rally in 2019 while running for president in the 2020 presidential election that she used to work at McDonald’s.

“I worked in McDonald’s,” Harris said at the time. “I was a student when I was working in McDonald’s.”

Harris’s claims that she used to work at a McDonald’s come as she has previously “never mentioned it” while campaigning or even put it in her “two books,” the Washington Free Beacon reported in August, adding that McDonald’s was also not listed on her previous job applications or resumes:

Harris’s work at McDonald’s, which allegedly took place at a franchise in the California Bay Area the summer after her freshman year in college, is a recent addition to her carefully curated life story. For decades, Harris never mentioned it, not on the campaign trail nor in two books. It’s absent from a job application and resume she submitted a year after she graduated from college. Third-party biographers did not write about it. Not until Harris ran for president in 2019 and spoke to a labor rally in Las Vegas did she mention the jobb, telling the crowd that she “was a student when I was working in a McDonald’s.”

A campaign ad for Harris from August also references the McDonald’s claim: “She grew up in a middle-class home. She was the daughter of a working mom, and she worked at McDonald’s while she got her degree. Kamala Harris knows what it’s like to be middle-class, it’s why she’s determined to lower healthcare costs and make housing more affordable.”

The Washington Free Beacon adds that while “it is possible that Harris” actually worked at McDonald’s when she was younger, the “absence of that detail in public records and her campaign’s coyness and refusal to provide any further details raise questions”:

Politicians who worked menial food service jobs as teens are often quick to mention it as proof of their working class bon fides. Future president Barack Obama, during his 2008 campaign, said his first job scooping ice cream at a Baskin-Robbins in Honolulu instilled in himm the virtues of responsibility and hard work.

Trump’s visit to McDonald’s was also criticized by MSNBC host Alex Witt, and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), who noted that “there’s no logic to it.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

CBS News SEETHES Over Trump McDonald’s Workday, Dismisses As ‘Political Stunt’

In keeping with an earlier promise, former President Donald Trump visited a Pennsylvania McDonald’s for a 15-minute shift at the fry station and drive-through. The CBS Evening News came unglued.
Watch as correspondent Caitlyn Huey-Burns dismisses the Trump workday as little more than a “political stunt”:
CAITLIN HUEY-BURNS: Former President Donald Trump put on an apron today to pull off a political stunt in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Working the fryer to try and claim, without any evidence, that Vice President Kamala Harris didn’t work at a McDonald’s while in college as she said she did.
DONALD TRUMP: She never worked at McDonald’s.
One imagines the hushed, reverential tones that Huey-Burns might deploy were Kamala Harris to take a shift working the Baby ChopVac 9000 at the local Planned Parenthood. She might even call it an example of Harris being relatable. She certainly wouldn’t sneeringly call it a “stunt”. 
But, alas, this is Donald Trump. At a McDonald’s. Doing something we used to call “retail politics”. And the Regime Media, in their perpetual bitterness, are bitter at the fact Trump can pull these things off without running away from unscheduled human contact. 
In this bitterness, Huey-Burns is left to firefight for Kamala Harris’s college job at McDonald’s which, without evidence, she claims to have worked. 
If it weren’t for Regime Media, we’d have none at all. 
Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on the CBS Weekend News on Sunday, October 20th, 2024:
CBS WEEKEND NEWS
10/20/24
6:02 PM
JERICKA DUNCAN: We begin tonight with both presidential candidates barnstorming in battleground states in a push to get out the vote. Harris marked her 60th birthday, making two stops at two churches in Georgia. Stevie Wonder joined her at one of them to sing “Happy Birthday.” Meanwhile, Donald Trump made a brief stop at a McDonald’s in Pennsylvania before heading to a rally in that state. CBS’s Caitlin Huey-Burns is covering it all for us and leads us off tonight in Pittsburgh. Caitlin, good evening to you.
CAITLIN HUEY-BURNS: Good evening to you, Jericka. Well, the stark contrast between these two candidates was on full display today, with Kamala Harris working to turn out churchgoers in Georgia and Donald Trump working at a McDonald’s near Philadelphia. 
Former President Donald Trump put on an apron today to pull off a political stunt in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Working the fryer to try and claim, without any evidence, that Vice President Kamala Harris didn’t work at a McDonald’s while in college as she said she did.
DONALD TRUMP: She never worked at McDonald’s.
HUEY-BURNS: At a rally in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh Saturday, Trump delivered some of his harshest insults of Harris yet.
TRUMP” You’re a (shit) Vice president. The worst — you’re the worst vice president. 
HUEY-BURNS: And went on a lengthy and lewd riff about the legendary golfer Arnold Palmer, who is also from Latrobe.
TRUMP: This is a guy that was all man. This man was strong and tough. And I refuse to say it, but when he took showers with the other pros, they came out of there, they said, oh, my god. That’s unbelievable.
HUEY-BURNS: Today the vice president reacted to Trump’s name-calling.
KAMALA HARRIS: The American people deserve so much better.
HUEY-BURNS: Harris started her day in another battleground, Georgia.
She attended church with Stevie Wonder and marked her 60th birthday.
HARRIS: We each as individuals and as a community have the power to make decisions through these next 16 days that will be about a statement about what kind of country do we want to live in.
HUEY-BURNS: Both candidates are here in Pennsylvania this evening. Harris will be campaigning near Philadelphia with Liz Cheney tomorrow. And Trump is back here in Pittsburgh to attend a Steelers game tonight. Jericka.
DUNCAN: Caitlin, thank you.
 

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/

Wall Street Going “All-In On Trump”

Wall Street Going "All-In On Trump"

Matt Drudge’s slide into mainstream media obscurity has been one of the more remarkable events of the post-Trump era, yet – like an insane uncle locked up in the attic – few would bring it up in polite conversation (especially since so little is known about what caused Drudge’s striking U-turn in his one-time embrace of Trump). However, his tweet (or post) from last week that according to Wall Street, Kamala had a 72 chance to win (since deleted)…

… prompted us to respond.

We were the first, but hardly last, and shortly after our response to Drudge, both Goldman and JPMorgan chimed in, with reports that validated our criticism of Drudge’s naive – and dead wrong – claim.

Later that day, JPMorgan’s closely followed Positioning Intelligence team published a must read report (available to pro subs), in which John Schlegel summarized the recent hedge fund positioning rather simply: "all-in on Trump themes."

This is how the JPM trader summarizes the findings of his report:

As odds of a Trump presidency and Red Wave have increased over the past few weeks, we’ve seen themes that are perceived to be Republican Winners (JPREPWIN) outperform Democratic Winners (JPDEMWIN) by ~7% over the past month. Crypto stocks and small caps have performed better, while Renewables have underperformed. In addition, the wider US equity market continues to make new ATHs and positioning appears to be elevated. Based on the thematic shifts, historical returns around elections, and elevated positioning, there’s room for a bit of disappointment and reversal in coming weeks if odds start to shift the other way.

In other words, the "smart market" is increasingly going all-in on a Trump victory.

Below we excerpt the main highlights from the report (much more in the full report available to professional subs):

  • 1. All in on Trump Themes? Hedge Fund flows have shown a strong preference for Republican themes with Rep Winners (JPREPWIN) bought over the past few weeks, putting positioning near ~2yr highs, while Dem Winners (JPDEMWIN) were sold throughout the year and positioning at multi-year low. The relative Rep vs. Dem flows have shifted from -2z a few weeks ago to +2z over the past 10 days. Renewables (JP11RNEW, a clear proxy for a Dem win) have been sold a lot in the past couple weeks and positioning is turning more bearish again.

  • Crypto stocks have seen volatile flows, though buying lately has not been as strong as it was in mid-July.

  • 2. Flows Turning Positive & Positioning Relatively High Ahead of Election (vs. Prior Cycles). HF and ETF flows have been turning more positive lately and 4 week HF net flows have shifted materially from -2z in early Sep to +1z most recently.

  • ETF flows tend to stay positive post elections and even in years when they’re very strong, but S&P returns are often very muted in Oct during election years since 1950 (avg +10bps with range of +2.6% to -2.7% (ex. 2008)).

  • Overall positioning level for US equities remains somewhat elevated (+1.0z, >90th %-tile) and in prior election years since 2012, both positioning and SPX returns have tended to trend lower in the weeks heading into the election.

  • 3. Small Caps and Momentum…What’s the Setup? Small Caps / Russell 2000 is perceived to rally if we get a Red Wave, but Russell 2000 futures positioning seems pretty elevated already (vs. more neutral prior to the July bump).

  • Looking at a 3yr z-score of net positioning, it’s at +2z already, in line with prior highs. ETF flows into small cap ETFs vs. the broader universe are neutral, though not as bearish as they were heading into the July rally, while HF net exp to Size factor is biased more towards Large on a multi-year basis, but not particularly so on a 12m basis.

  • Momentum tends to underperform in the 10d leading up to the election (and continues to decline on average in 3m post-election), but its performance has been quite correlated to the wider market.

  • HFs don’t appear to be running material net exposure to Momentum, but flows have shown a bias towards selling laggards lately

* * *

Turning to Goldman Sachs, we find a similar bias. As we noted last week, a Republican Sweep Scenario, has emerged as one of the bank’s preferred trades ahead of the elections. This is how Goldman put it:

Long our Republican Policy Pair (GSP24REP), consisting of long Republican Policy Outperformers (GS24REPL, ex-commods version is GS24RLXC) vs short Republican Policy Underperformers (GS24REPS)

  • Buy GS24REPL 20Dec24 107% / 117% OTC call spread for 1.30%. 7.69x net leverage. 15% delta. 23 iv. Max loss premium paid.
  • Buy GS24RLXC 20Dec24 108% / 118% OTC call spread for 1.30%. 7.69x net leverage. 16% delta. 25 iv. Max loss premium paid.

As shown below, the Goldman Republican victory pair trade discussed above just hit an all time high.

Decomposed into its constituents indexes, we find that the Republican Victory basket just hit an all time high, while the Democrat Victory basket is back to Biden levels.

In a new report from Goldman FICC vice president Vincent Mistretta (available here to pro subscribers), the trader confirms what we have said, namely that "positioning in markets leans toward Trump-win expressions. That has been the case since even before the recent run up in betting market odds for Trump."  To help its clients, the bank has come up with a dashboard enumerating these aforementioned preconceived notions, and some trades that should perform well in scenarios that feel under-positioned, underappreciated or are anti-consensus.

GS Trading Views:

  • Anshul Sehgal (Co-Head of Global Interest Rate Products Trading & Head of US Interest Rate Products) – Don’t have strong views or a robust framework for the election. It’s a binary event, and unclear what the policies/implications will be either way. Rates have been and will continue to be volatile. The market is pricing a 20bp breakeven move over the election, which seems a bit high, but not so high that you want to be short that convexity over the event. If you have a Republican sweep scenario, the night of the market probably doesn’t move a lot – it’s rates higher, risk assets higher initially, largely because what you would likely expect is that the Trump tax cuts get extended and there may well be more fiscal coming. We think the right area of the curve to be short is 2y2y. On Harris victory with divided Congress, we expect the curve to initially bull steepen, and for risk assets to trade weaker – which we would view as an opportunity to set up belly shorts.
  • Mark Salib/Fernando Alvarado Aguilar (FX Trading):  Many clients are long USDCNH via risk reversals to position for a possible Trump presidency, as there isn’t a strong case for USDCNH to depreciate significantly from here. We also like AUDJPY or USDJPY topside on a Trump win. On a potential Harris win we think USDMXN downside is one of the best trades, with favorable entry levels after the recent squeeze higher amid buying from all client types this week, including hedge funds to position for a possible Trump win (especially given Trump’s comments throughout the campaign on implementing tariffs) as well as CTA and real money buying. In a Harris scenario we think EURUSD may rally around 1.5%, but think the moves would be larger in USDMXN and would prefer to express the trade there.
  • Shawn Tuteja/Joseph Clyne (Equities Derivatives Trading/Index Trading) – Among a host of macro factors, we think that the run up in stocks, the collapse in implied vols, and the outperformance of RUT over NDX are partially due to the recent uptick in Trump odds, and a reversion of that move could reverse all three trends. Generally, we like owning year-end upside in SPX on a 12 vol handle which we think can carry flat/positive through the election while having spot up vol up beta on any sustained rally. On the sector side, we’ve seen the “Trump trades” from 2016 start to work, as this last leg higher in SPX has been driven by regional banks (KRE), large-cap banks (XLF), and energy. We’ve seen this buying come at the expense of AI in the past week or so. Interestingly, we’ve gotten a lot of questions from clients in the past 24 hours on best ways to “fade a Republican sweep,” thinking the odds and market pricing have run too far on this.
  • Nick Bartal (Oil Products Trading) – There is currently little positioning in oil directly related to the election. The conflict in the Middle East has shaken a short/low positioned oil market into having length. However, the consensus still remains that the oil balance will be heavy in 2025, which led to the short positioning coming into the Israel/Iran conflict rally in early October. While little direct positioning surrounding the election exists, a Trump victory would likely be day 1 bullish for oil, as he may strengthen sanctions on Iran.

Much more in the Goldman note available to pro subscribers.

* * *

Taking a quick look at UBS, the bank has its own thematic pair trade, and writes that the recent surge in the "Republican Sweep" basket supported the S&P 500 rallying to an all-time high. Indeed, as shown below, the UBS Republican Win basket has trounced the Democrat Win having closed higher for 14 consecutive days! Also, UBS notes that the dramatic ascent in dollar has largely been driven by Chinese Yuan weakness thanks to the surge the Republican Sweep theme.

Elsewhere, in a note from UBS trader Michael Romano, he writes that "the UBS Republican vs. Democrat election pair trade is up 15% month to date to fresh highs in virtually a straight line, suggesting the market has largely priced former President Donald Trump’s victory." Romano adds that "the election repricing, driven primarily by banks and solar, coincided with a growth re-pricing following a strong payrolls and strong earnings, making it less clear whether the recent moves are election or growth driven."

His conclusion: "While the end result is the same, i.e. banks higher, cyclicals/consumer/growth oriented stocks higher, the more the repricing was driven by an actual growth re-pricing, the more upside there still is on a Trump win. As most of the moves followed bank earnings, with strong follow-through on consumer, my money is on a lot more upside to come on a Trump win."

* * *

By now the big picture should be clear: whether due to his surge in online betting markets, or simply because Kamala’s honeymoon is dead and buried, there has been a rush of sentiment – by people who put money where their mouths – into the Trump Victory/Republican sweep camps, which also largely explains why stocks continue to make new all time highs day after day. However, if one takes a step back and asks a more neutral question without assuming the outcome, such as How will markets react to different US election outcomes?

To help with the answer, we go to a recent note from Deutsche Bank’s George Saravelos (available to pro subscribers), who took recently published Deutsche Bank Research economics estimates of the likely impact of different election outcomes and translated them in to a market reaction across asset classes with a specific focus on FX. The table is intended to capture the immediate market reaction to year-end rather than the long-term impact. Below are DB’s four main conclusions:

  • There is large variance of opinion on the likely market and growth outcomes within the DB team. This largely stems from uncertainty on three fronts: the fiscal outcomes in the event of divided government, the extent to which tariff policy is applied, the medium-term effects of supply side policies relating to regulation, immigration and energy. Even with full certainty on tariff policy for example, the countervailing growth-inflation impact of a negative supply shock creates great ambivalence.
  • The largest variation in fiscal policy and growth outcomes is likely under a Trump administration: a red sweep would likely lead to the largest deficits while divided government could lead to the smallest deficits via the revenue impact of tariffs. By extension, a Trump victory has the most potential to generate the largest market moves in both directions in bond markets.
  • The largest variation in relative growth differentials between the US and the rest of the world is likely under a Trump versus Harris administration, irrespective of the Congressional outcome, due to tariff policy. By extension, the FX market outcome is more clear cut than the bond market in the event of a Trump victory.
  • We see the most bullish dollar outcome as a red sweep and the most bearish dollar outcome on a blue sweep, but the magnitude of the moves is likely larger in the former. There is also likely to be a large degree of variation in market response across different currency pairs: we see the dollar rising across all currency pairs in a red sweep. We see the dollar strong but FX carry trades as most likely to suffer in a Trump victory without Congress. Asia FX is likely to rally the most in the event of a Harris victory without Congress, while the broadest dollar losses would likely be in a Blue Sweep, albeit more limited than the dollar gains in a Red Sweep. We see short EUR/CAD and long MXN/ZAR as the two most asymmetric trades in FX heading in to the election.

Much more int he full notes from JPMorgan, Goldman, UBS and Deutsche Bank

Tyler Durden
Sun, 10/20/2024 – 22:45

via ZeroHedge News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.zerohedge.com

Victor Nieves: The Christian Case for Trump

2 Chronicles 7:14If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

The presidential election is only days away. It is estimated that there are around 210 million Christians in this country. Without question, Christians hold the power to decide the result of this election and chart our nation’s future. Tragically, it is believed that as many as 32 million Christians will not be voting.

Our nation is plagued by immorality, corruption, and sin. Christians have sat idly by for years as our nation turned its back on the Biblical worldview that founded this country’s ethic. Now we are faced with a dichotomy, either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris will be the next president of the United States. As Christians, we get to decide which candidate best aligns with the greatest attainable good.

Comparing the respective records, the answer is clear as day. While Donald Trump is an imperfect sinner in need of the grace of God, as are you and I, he is by far the best attainable good for our nation.

Lets look at his record as the 45th president of the United States. Trump has proven to be a steadfast defender of the Christian worldview. As president, he had the honor of appointing three Supreme Court Justices to the bench and while he could have picked anyone, he picked originalist Christians. These three would later play a pivotal role in securing some of the greatest wins for Christianity in recent memory.

  • Kennedy v. Bremerton. Coach Kennedy was fired from his job as a high school football coach for praying at the 50-yard line. Kennedy sued for a violation of the 1st Amendment and won. The court’s decision in this case ended the Lemon test, which was used to discriminate against Christians for decades.
  • Dobbs v. Jackson. Overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed for pro-life states to enact common sense protections for the most innocent and vulnerable of God’s children, those in the womb.
  • Groff v. DeJoy. The Court ruled that Americans should not be forced to make a choice between their occupation and their faith. This protected Christians who want to uphold the sabbath.
  • Carson v. Makin. The Court ruled Maine could not discriminate against religious schools for generally available tuition assistance payments.

Donald Trump also has been an adamant defender of Christianity and common sense in his proposed policy. Donald Trump has:

  • Vowed to keep men out of women’s sports.
  • Vowed to STOP genital mutilation surgery for minors.
  • Vowed to promote a positive education of the nuclear family and Biblical gender roles.
  • Promised his Education Department would impose “severe consequences” on any teachers or school officials who “suggest to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body.”

Trump has publicly declared, “They want to tear down crosses where they can, and cover them up with social justice flags, but no one will be touching the cross of Christ under the Trump administration, I swear to you.”

Another statement from Trump said, “I LOVE THE TEN COMMANDMENTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, PRIVATE SCHOOLS, AND MANY OTHER PLACES, FOR THAT MATTER. READ IT — HOW CAN WE, AS A NATION, GO WRONG???”

He also said, “The left is trying to shame Christians… they’re trying to shame us. I’m a very proud Christian.”

Following the assassination attempts against him, gave credit to God saying, “I stand before you only by the grace of Almighty God. Many people say it was a providential moment. It probably was.”

The significance of a president that would publicly say such things cannot be overstated.

While it is not disputed that Trump is a sinful man, God has a long history of using flawed and sinful men. Acts 13:22 says, “After removing Saul, he made David their king. He testified concerning him: ‘I have found David son of Jesse a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do.’” Trump is no David, but the point stands that if a murdering adulterer like David can be used as a leader, so can someone like Trump.

Trump could be better, so could you. Unfortunately however, if Trump does not win Kamala Harris will. Her record speaks for itself. She is an unapologetic enemy of the Christian faith.

During her time as vice-president and candidate for president Kamala Harris has:

  • Dishonored Easter by declaring it the “national day of trans visibility.”
  • Run on a platform of “reproductive freedom” aka her radical support for unrestricted all trimesters abortion. She has repeatedly refused to outline ANY restrictions on abortion that she would support. Her running mate Tim Walz signed legislation as governor that allowed abortion until birth in Minnesota.
  • Been an avid supporter of transgenderism and one of her first appearances upon becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee was on the RuPaul Drag show.
  • Defended transition surgery for minors and pornographic hyper sexualized content in public schools, as shown by ravenous opposition to legislation that would protect children in Florida.
  • The Harris-Biden administration proudly hosted a “pride month celebration” on the south lawn of the White House where transgender activists were invited from around the country, one of which famously walked around topless in the presence of children.
  • The Biden DOJ and FBI have targeted believers and specifically Catholics as “potential terrorists.”
  • Recently at a Kamala Harris campaign event someone in the audience shouted “Christ is Lord.” In response Kamala publicly humiliated them and told them that they were at the wrong rally.

Comparing the lives of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris shows what every Christian should already know, they are both flawed sinners in need of God’s grace. Unless Christ our savior descends from heaven and runs for office, this will be true of every election. It is a Christian’s duty to be good stewards of what God has given us, including our right to vote.

Some Christians will refuse to vote claiming they will not vote for the, “lesser of two evils.” However, this thinking is flawed. To refuse to vote for the so-called lesser of two evils mandates that the Christian withdraw from politics entirely as every vote cast is for someone who is a sinner. Instead of this flawed thinking, we should pursue the greatest attainable good.

We are faced with a political dichotomy. Either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris will become our next president. It is up to us to decide which candidate is best for our families, churches, neighbors, and community members. The results of this election will impact American’s abilities to pay for their groceries, avoid foreign wars, and worship freely.

Christians that do not vote for the greatest attainable good are complicit in the evil that Kamala Harris would enact. Not making a choice is inherently a choice. If 32 million Christians refuse to vote and Kamala Harris wins by a few hundred thousands votes it will be Christians to blame for every abortion, every transgender surgery on a minor, every family suffering financially, and every attack on Christianity caused by a Kamala presidency.

The post Victor Nieves: The Christian Case for Trump appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/

Left McTriggered After Trump Does Fun Publicity Stunt

Left McTriggered After Trump Does Fun Publicity Stunt

On Sunday, Donald Trump poked fun at Kamala Harris’ dubious claim that she ‘worked at McDonald’s and made fries,’ by going to a McDonald’s and making fries, plus working the drive-thru.

Ding, fries are done!

Memes have been made.

McTriggered!

While most on the right thought it was a fun pre-election publicity stunt, it really triggered the left – which didn’t know what to do.

The sourpusses even posted a gotcha! Suggesting that because the McDonald’s closed for Trump’s event, the whole thing was staged. Well, duh. The guy was only almost assassinated twice (or thrice) and this is for fun.

Tim Walz had jazz hands of fury – and despite all the lies, insisting that Kamala Harris actually worked there. We’re sure he’s not lying this time too.

Even Matt Drudge opined (2016 Matt, blink twice if you need help).

Hilariously, The Atlantic‘s David Frum revealed he doesn’t know the difference between grilling and frying (and earned a nice ratio).

This is how you know the publicity stunt worked…

Tyler Durden
Sun, 10/20/2024 – 23:20

via ZeroHedge News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.zerohedge.com

The Strategic Consequences Of Kamala Harris’ Incompetence

The Strategic Consequences Of Kamala Harris’ Incompetence

Authored by James E. Fanell and Bradley A. Thayer via Americvan Greatness,

Vice President Kamala Harris’s disastrous performance in her interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier was notable for two reasons.

  • First, to the degree that there was any discussion of foreign national security threats to America, Harris only mentioned Iran. She failed to mention the disastrous war in Ukraine, where more than a million are dead, and the threat of nuclear war exists. Harris failed to reconcile her administration’s billions in dollars of military and civilian aid to Ukraine and policy actions against Russia for the most significant military threat in Europe since the end of World War Two. Worse though was her failure to make any reference to the existential threat from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

  • Second, her performance in response to salient questions—ones that had the chance to inform American voters—was an amalgamation of incoherence, anger, and deception that revealed a candidate who is uniquely unsuited to be president of the United States. The fact that she is the Democratic candidate and might become president is alarming to America’s friends, as it is welcomed by America’s enemies.

In the interview, she had the opportunity to discuss her analysis of threats to America. While Iran is certainly a regional danger and a threat to the U.S. and its allies in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, it pales in comparison to the existential threat of the CCP. Indeed, Iran and Russia would be far less of a concern if the CCP were not given a free hand to back these aggressor nations. That the PRC is a grave and fundamental threat is revealed by its hyper-aggressive policies against the American people, U.S. allies like Japan and the Philippines, and partners like India and Taiwan.

An example of the CCP’s threatening military posture was put on display when Exercise Joint Sword 2024B launched on October 14, in which People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forces encircled Taiwan to coerce its new leader, President Lai Ching-te, into a posture of subservience to the PRC. Thus far, those coercive attempts have failed. But Joint Sword 2024B revealed three aspects of the growing PRC threat. First, it showed the increasing capabilities of the PRC. Second, it demonstrated the ever-increasing penetrations of Taiwanese air and seaspace in an effort to normalize those violations and mask the actual invasion when it comes. Third, the first participation of the Chinese Coast Guard in the encirclement of Taiwan occurred.

  • First, with respect to the increased capabilities of the PLA Navy, it should be noted that their first aircraft carrier, Chinese Navy Ship (CNS) Liaoning/CV-16, conducted 90 fixed-wing take-offs and recoveries and 50 more from their embarked helicopters during their operations in the exercise. That is 140 sorties from a PLA Navy aircraft carrier in just one day. By any measure, the PLA Navy’s carrier aviation capabilities are now approaching U.S. Navy aircraft carrier air wing levels in terms of the number of sorties. It is the case that PLAN aircraft have a more limited range and weapons capacity than their U.S. Navy counterparts, due to the Liaoning’s ski-ramp launch, but the fact remains that within just two years, the Liaoning has gone from launching an average of just 30 sorties a day in 2022 to a 140 today. That is a real strategic trendline that presidential candidate Harris demonstrated no awareness or strategy to counter.

  • Second, regarding PLA incursions into Taiwan’s air and seaspace, exercise Joint Sword 2024B provides another inflection point in the PRC’s dramatic transformation of the military status quo in the cross-strait environment. During the exercise, Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense reported that it detected a total of 153 PLA aircraft, 14 PLAN ships, and 12 Coast Guard ships operating around Taiwan and that 111 of those aircraft crossed the centerline of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s air defense identification zones from the west, southwest, and east. To put that into perspective, from 1954 to 2020, PLA aircraft only crossed the centerline four times. This pattern of PLA air force incursions across the centerline began in earnest in 2022 when the PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that the PRC no longer recognized the centerline—a clear violation of the previous agreements between Beijing, Taipei, and Washington to not forcibly alter the status quo. Yet since then, and now with exercise Joint Sword 2024B, the Biden-Harris administration has made no mention of this hyper-aggressive behavior by Beijing or taken any actions to rectify it.

  • Third, the Joint Sword 2024B exercise was unique in that it demonstrated the use of non-PLA ships from the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) in this PLA-led exercise. Taiwan’s Ministry of Defense reported up to 17 CCGs were detected operating in the waters off Taiwan, or as the PRC’s Global Times noted, the “CCG conducted multi-unit, multi-formation, and multi-subject drills around the island of Taiwan, focusing on strengthening the control network around the island.” The implications of these unprecedented actions by the CCG are to demonstrate that the CCP’s strategy to bring Taiwan under its control, either by blockade or an outright invasion, will use the entirety of the PRC’s assets—a whole of government effort. These facts at sea demonstrate that the PRC’s 2019 declaration of a “People’s War” against the United States is not just propaganda but is advancing in tangible ways.

Americans need to understand the scope and scale of the CCP’s grand strategy as evidenced by the PLA Navy and the CCG’s demonstrated actions during exercise Joint Sword 2024B. The evidence is undeniable: the CCP intends for the PRC to become the dominant naval force, not just in Asia but across the globe.

This reality comes against the backdrop of a Biden-Harris administration that keeps downsizing the size and capabilities of the U.S. Navy.

So, when Bret Baier asks candidate Harris what America’s number one foreign adversary is and there is no mention of the PRC, Americans know this candidate is not competent to assume the office of the Presidency. Americans need to pay attention because U.S. national security is on a knife’s edge—to the U.S., the CCP is a hyper-aggressive regime that is determined to realize its grand strategic objective of dominance. Yet Harris displays no strategic gravitas. She evinces no evidence of the seriousness of the situation or of an understanding that deterrence of the CCP’s hyper-aggression is on her shoulders—let alone having a plan to address this threat.

Deterrence of the CCP is everything. If it fails, this country will be at war with the PRC. Harris appears oblivious to the demands and requirements of deterrence. Accordingly, before the PRC blockades or invades Taiwan or launches an attack against the Philippines in the South China Sea, Americans must have a president sitting behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office who has the knowledge, experience, and courage to prepare our nation for the demands of deterrence of the CCP’s aggression. It must have a president who signals in stark and no uncertain terms to the CCP that their aggression is certain to fail—and so they had better not try it in the first place. A president who not only can talk tough but has the wherewithal to rebuild the U.S. deterrent. The catechism of deterrence is straightforward: weakness invites aggression; strength deters it. Americans must elect a president who understands this catechism and so defends our nation from all threats—most especially from the existential threat of the PRC.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 10/20/2024 – 23:55

via ZeroHedge News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.zerohedge.com

Video: Trump Roasts Kamala at McDonald’s

In new hilarious developments, Donald Trump has roasted Kamala at McDonald’s, announcing: “I’ve now worked for 15 minutes more than Kamala.”

Don’t miss it!

Reader Interactions

In order to eliminate spam comments that have historically flooded our comments section, comments containing certain keywords will be held in a moderation queue. All comments by legitimate commenters will be manually approved by a member of our team. If your comment is “Awaiting Moderation,” please give us up to 24 hours to manually approve your comment. Please do not re-post the same comment.

via FrontPage Magazine » FrontPage

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.frontpagemag.com