Signing Off on Biden

These signs are plastered all over Midtown. Every time I see one, I imagine the true names are there: Corrupt/Liar. It is certainly discouraging to realize that so many of our neighbors are so misguided, blind and perhaps corrupt themselves.

There’s also something creepy about the logo. It hasn’t escaped the notice of one writer who looked up three red banners on Wikipedia. Turns out it means socialism.

hree Red Banners (Chinese: 三面红旗) was an ideological slogan in the late 1950s which called on the Chinese people to build a socialist state. The “Three Red Banners” also called the “Three Red Flags,” consisted of the General Line for socialist construction, the Great Leap Forward and the people’s communes.

After the first Five-Year Plan, the People’s Republic of China continued its socialist construction by introducing “Three Red Banners Movement”. The General Line directed the Chinese people to “go all out, aim high, and build socialism with greater, faster, better, and more economical results.” By the end of 1958, nearly all Chinese peasants had been organized into communes averaging 5000 households each. All privately owned property was taken for or contributed to the communes and people were not allowed to cook their own food and instead ate in communal dining halls. The Great Leap Forward, begun in 1958, was a campaign to rapidly modernize by using China’s vast labor resources in agricultural and industrial projects. The Leap instead resulted in economic destruction and tens of millions of famine deaths, and had been mostly abandoned by early 1962. Membership in communes was gradually reduced in the early 1960s, with some private property ownership and enterprise again being allowed. The communes continued until being dismantled in the early 1980s under Deng Xiaoping.

It even occurs in this one:

Turns out there are even more objections.

From CreativeBloq:

Biden’s campaign features a logo that has attracted the wrath of online design critics.

What does and doesn’t make for a good logo can be a heated topic at the best of times, but chuck politics into the mix and it looks like you’ve got a match made in hell. We’ve already covered everything you need to know about good logo design, so let’s take a look at how the Biden campaign measures up.

The campaign includes two logos, a circular version and another one that confidently stacks the word ‘Biden’ on top of ‘president’. Each is suitably decked out with the familiar red, white and blue of the Star-Spangled Banner, and they firmly establish Biden as the front runner of the Democrats.

The most notable element of the logo though is that the ‘e’ in Biden strays away from the rest of the sans-serif lettering. Instead, it’s depicted with red flag stripes. Why is this notable? Well, it depends on who you ask. We’re going to remain as politically neutral as possible here, but it’s impossible to discuss the kickback to these logo without addressing Biden’s behaviour.

Of course Biden is closely linked to Obama, having served under him during his time as president. However maybe it would’ve been a good idea for Biden’s campaign to set him apart from Obama, rather than appearing to rely on a connection to what’s gone before.

Other complaints focus on the shape of the lettering and the spacing between the red stripes. According to critics, these have been laid out in a haphazard manner, with the slant on the letter ‘J’ not running parallel with the slope on the number 2.

A misalignment of the logo elements is also being blamed for why viewers might be finding the design difficult to look at without knowing exactly why…

There’s no shying away from the major flaw some people have found though, and it all comes back to those red stripes. According to critics, these conjure up the image of a red hand. This is also an open goal for Biden’s opposition to remind everyone of his harassment allegations, especially as they claim that the kerning looks like the letter ‘e’ getting a little too up-close-and-personal with the letter ‘n’.

Of course, reading into the logos of politicians is nothing new. Cast your mind back to the 2016 presidential race, and similar attacks we’re being launched at Clinton’s logo. At the time her opponents were claiming that it was stolen from WikiLeaks and that it contained hidden meanings.

It did. We know how that turned out.

Trump’s Not So Secret Weapon

How do you fight a media that won’t tell the truth?

President Trump has a few methods up his sleeve.

Last night in Erie, Pennsylvania, the Trump campaign set up a giant video screen. OANN’s Jack Posobiec tweeted, “Trump has a giant video screen set up at his PA rally and is playing Biden and Kamala’s comments about banning fracking to the audience Now he’s talking about ‘the laptop from hell’.”

How better to convey to fracking jobs dependent Pennsylvanians than to show them the truth about what Biden and Harris have stated – but deny when in Pennsylvania – in the past.
What if he starts using that jumbotron to play the video of Biden admitting he got the Ukranian prosecutor fired after threatening them with withholding American money? This screen has many possibilities!

Taking it directly to the voters is his best tactic. Look for more of this in the coming rallies.

Trump has a plan to undermine the liberal TV people, too. Having taped an interview with Lesley Stahl for 60 Minutes, Trump revealed to the audience that he expects editing to twist his words. It’s surprising he would even do an interview with that atrocious CBS propaganda outlet. Perhaps it falls in the category of all publicity is good.

Anyway, Trump is wise to their ways. He repeated an earlier tweet: “I am pleased to inform you that, for the sake of accuracy in reporting, I am considering posting my interview with Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes, PRIOR TO AIRTIME! This will be done so that everybody can get a glimpse of what a FAKE and BIASED interview is all about..”

Do it!

It has been reported that Trump walked out of the interview. He tweeted a video of Stahl not wearing a mask after the interview, saying, “Much more to come.”

The New York Times clutched its pearls: “The spectacle of a president, two weeks out from Election Day, picking a fight with the nation’s most popular television news program began on Tuesday after Mr. Trump grew irritated with Ms. Stahl’s questions, according to two people familiar with the circumstances of the taping.

“One person briefed on what took place said that Mr. Trump had spent more than 45 minutes filming with Ms. Stahl and her CBS News crew, and that the taping had not wrapped up when the president’s aides had expected it to.

“So Mr. Trump cut the interview short, and then declined to participate in a ‘walk and talk’ segment with Ms. Stahl and Vice President Mike Pence, the people said.

“It appeared that Ms. Stahl’s approach did not sit well with the president.”

In Erie, Trump added, “You have to watch what we do to ’60 Minutes.’ You’ll get such a kick out of it. You’re going to get a kick out of it. Leslie Stahl’s not going to be happy.”

But we will. Everyone knows the media is corrupt and no one likes them. Taking it to the people is the right thing to do. We can make up our own minds.

Trump set a trap and it appears they walked right into it.

Democrats’ Descent into Madness

What a contrast between Trump rallies where people are energized and dancing to YMCA and the hysteria the Democrats are engaging in.

There are ample videos of women screaming about Trump, screaming after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsurg and about the election.

Here’s Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer in an interview on Sunday. If you look on the table behind her she has something that says 8645. 86, of course, means to kill someone and 45 refers to President Trump. When do you allow hatred that strong to possess you?

Or how about this: CNN’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin was caught masturbating on a Zoom call. The call concerned the election. “Two people who were on the call told VICE separately that the call was an election simulation featuring many of the New Yorker’s biggest stars: Jane Mayer was playing establishment Republicans; Evan Osnos was Joe Biden, Jelani Cobb was establishment Democrats, Masha Gessen played Donald Trump, Andrew Marantz was the far right, Sue Halpern was left wing democrats, Dexter Filkins was the military, and Jeffrey Toobin playing the courts. There were also a handful of other producers on the call from the New Yorker and WNYC.”

What sane person does this?

Or this?

In Boston Antifa members held a satanic ritual in the street over the weekend. This time the Antifa drank blood and squeezed a heart in the street. The heart was supposed to be Trump’s and they shouted that catchy and intellectual refrain F— Trump. Then they danced around a burning US flag chanting, “Praise to the chaos god!”

Then there was the man in Chicago who said he was a member of Black Lives Matter, dangled from Trump Tower and threatened to cut the rope with his knife unless he spoke to Trump. He broadcast this live on Facebook.

Or at the Women’s march in Washington over the weekend when a Trump supporter was stomped, beaten and choked.

And the young black Trump supporter in San Francisco who was beaten and had his teeth knocked out.

And here’s something really scary:

Conservative Union president Matt Schlapp tweeted, “These fliers are being left in Kansas City neighborhoods. This on top of our former KS National Committeeman getting run over on his yard due to his Trump sign. Please pray that America will reject this violence and hate.”

No wonder you don’t see many Trump signs.

Nor is there much ammunition or guns to purchase. People are afraid.

Afraid of people like this:

 

What Is Going On?

Last night Mark Levin was set to interview Rudy Giuliani on his show. Like me, many were interested in it.

Just before it went on, Levin tweeted (or parlered since that is where he has gone to protest Twitter’s treatment of him) that the President’s rally was taking up most of his show time, but to be sure and DVR it or catch it at 10 p.m.

Fine. We DVRd it and when we went to look at it this morning, it wasn’t there. Hm. So I went to YouTube and looked for it. I found it and started watching. But after 31 minutes (no ads), the show ended. It wasn’t finished.

Seems highly unusual.

This afternoon, in reading a piece from the American Thinker blog, the writer had placed the video of the show in the story and urged people to watch. Writer Thomas Lifson said to pay particular attention to the last 15 minutes.

Good, I figured I could watch it there.

No. “Video unavailable” came up. “This video has been removed by the uploader.”

Really?

What do they say? There are no coincidences? How desperate is Big Tech to keep the truth from us?

Are Midtown Attitudes on Guns Changing?

Yesterday someone put this up on Nextdoor:

“It’s so strange to me that we are amazed, frightened or startled when gunshots are heard throughout our communities when no one wants to give up their guns or put restrictions on gun ownership.”

I expected to see an almost unanimous positive response to this. That is, yes, we need more gun control, more restrictions, oppression of poor minorities, we don’t understand crime, etc.

This time, it got push back. Here are the replies, sprinkled with the original commenter’s responses:

Its not the guns, its the people! Memphis needs new leadership, across the board!! I’m never amazed of what goes on in Memphis, we have a murder every single day, and we are still voting for the same politicians, so what can we expect?

How is a politician supposed to baby sit people who just go out and kill other people in memphis?

Gun violence increase was expected after large spike in gun sales in March April. Public health research has repetitively linked the two fairly strongly.

Similar to the feigned surprise that people have unwanted pregnancies after minimal sex education. Public health has shown strong associations there as well.

There was a gun buy-back event here in 2017, where police offered gas, groceries and Grizzlies tix in exchange for firearms. How can we as a community prompt this to happen again?

No one is selling their guns

According to someone in a news article in the ca, 42percent of the homicides have been between people who knew each other. The mindset that you shoot people as one of the options to settle disputes is difficult to understand.

What restrictions would make a difference? Law abiding/licensed gun owners are not the ones shooting guns in the air or committing violent acts.

Original commenter: What about restrictions on those who have been accused of domestic violence, the mentally infirm, those threatening domestic violence, underaged and immature, those who do not have the capacity to store their weapons responsibly…

Original commenter: Mostly they are the ones storing their guns improperly, allowing their guns to be stolen or picked up by children.

Do you have any data to support that?

So it’s the gun owners fault someone else breaks into their car or home? Makes sense 🙄

Try focusing on the real issue. Criminals. Hard and heavy penalties for crimes committed with firearms, for stealing firearms or getting caught with a stolen firearm.

Yes, because the laws and restrictions on drugs work wonderfully. It’s impossible to buy a gun in Chicago, but yet they continually lead the country in gun violence.

Original: Just goes to show you most guns get in the wrong hands, those who can’t buy the weapons get them simply because they exist and are around.

Yeah not sure these are licensed guns we are hearing.

Original: Are you sure? Check with the police department to see how many guns are stolen everyday.

Of course it is the guns.. But that is the “American” way of life baby! Freedom to have everything, do everything, say everything. Some people genuinely believe guns will help them in their houses. Study after study says you are much more likely to die in your home if you have a gun. It is the wild-wild West, in all aspects baby.. That is why it is not possible to control covid, and won’t be with any president (not that I like Trump).

No, no.. I am talking people having guns in their homes to defend themselves and they get aggressive when there is an intruder and die in a gun fight. This is what statistics show is highly likely to happen..

“Get aggressive when there’s an intruder”??? Do you want to reread that?

Look, if you want to cower and beg for your life, your wife or daughter etc…. that’s your prerogative. Who’s to say they wouldn’t kill you anyway?

America is about freedom… if you don’t want a firearm… guess what? Don’t buy one! It’s that easy.

It used to be people were responsible for their actions and knew it. No more.

It is so strange to me that we are amazed, frightened or startled when gunshots are heard throughout our communities that there are individuals who want to give up their guns or put restrictions on legal and responsible gun ownership.

Always hesitant to start a “FB like” chain, but I do like your endorsement of “legal and responsible”. I’m not nearly expert on the subject, but what I’ve read points to the 2013 TN “guns in trunks” law, after which firearm thefts went up very significantly (~2.5x in Nashville, I believe). Have seen posts on here that many car break ins are related to looking for guns. If we really cared, we might revisit that decision, and ask the sheriffs and police chiefs of the state what their recommendations are.

Original: I have never needed a gun to defend myself nor my family. Thank God not guns!

I totally agree.. found are for killing people. Then we should allow machine guns, bazookas, missiles, they are to kill people too. Really, why not? Tell me the difference. I say include all, then we can all go down the drain quicker..

Those are just inconvenient to carry and my driveway won’t fit a tank AND my wife’s car so she probably wouldn’t go for it.

It’s Memphis people…what do you expect??

Original: I love Memphis people including you.

Just carry to protect yourself and be prepared to use it or stay as far away as you can which unfortunately means stay at home in this town…my daughters both carry and I’ve told them if you feel you have to pull it out, don’t hesitate or thugs will take it and use it against you…they have been trained so they know what to do if necessary

Original: Sorry you are so fearful and are spreading that fear into the atmosphere through your family.

Original: I learned how to deal with guns from the Andy Griffith Show. Andy was so wise. He only allowed Barney Fife to have one bullet. Maybe you are all too young to remember, but didn’t Barney shoot himself in the foot with that one bullet?

Having a gun for protection LEGALLY is our right! Having guns that are not registered and are to use for CRIME is NOT OK! The gun shots we hear are to kill people. They are shooting at each other and a random bullet will hit innocent people.
(nameed)…there is a big restriction on gun ownership..if you are a convicted felon you can not buy a handgun in a gun shop…there are background checks. But none of these gangsters buy guns in gun shops, they steal them or buy from their friends. What are you gonna do..?, send a dozen cops to search every house in Memphis all at once.?…

Original: I agree it is not ok when guns are used for crime but that is exactly what we allow to happen when just called get one, two or a zillion and they ultimately end up in the wrong hands

Original: Lawyers, we have a right to free speech but should we yell , FIRE in a crowded theatre?

We’re Americans, and truth is, many of us are not going to give up our firearms. Over the last decade, I have spent a bit of time (as a scientist) on Military bases in our recent “conflict zones”. Everyone is armed, often in Condition 3, with a full magazine. People are eating at the DFAC with slung weapons. There are seldom unintentional shootings or missing weapons. Why?
1) Everyone is trained and required to periodically re-qualify.
2) You personally are responsible for your weapon(s), and the process includes regular checks and record keeping by your superiors.
3) If you misplace a firearm, even if it is just to leave it in the head, your ass is going to be handed to you, battered and deep fried.
Most hunters are experienced, careful, and responsible gun owners. Plenty of people that carry for personal protection train to higher levels than is required by law, are responsible and aware of how dangerous firearms can be.
Unfortunately we don’t require that level of commitment from all gun-owners, and those people who have purchased and carry stolen firearms only have to follow one rule, “don’t get caught”.

Original: Keywords “conflict zones”. Are we in “conflict zones”. Some will say yes. Some will say no. I say possession of guns causes the likelihood of conflict. It emboldens those who would otherwise talk the conflict out rather than shoot it out.

What amazes me is that I hear gunshots several times a week, but I never hear any police sirens afterwards. What are people doing with their guns at that hour, if they’re not shooting at someone? Taking pot shots at rats? Shooting in the air?

Original: Well if you paid all this money for your weapon, license and “training” . You might want to practice and use what you have learned on live targets, right. You might even start to manufacture reasons.

Oh and this ain’t Mayberry

Lol…You are in a “conflict zone” if you haven’t figured that out yet…and yes prepared to use them on live targets if needed

We have guns but somehow I resist the urge to go out and murder someone!

If you leave your gun in a car and it’s stolen then you’re an idiot for allowing a gun to be in the hands of a criminal. Further, if you are the victim of a home burglary and a gun is stolen then, once again, you’re an idiot. I wish there were penalties against those whose guns are stolen due to their idiocy.

So the victim of the crime is at fault…

Good comment. Also, there’s an article in today’s NYT about loud cars in NYC and says one problem is a special kind of muffler that can sound like multiple gun shots. Being a Pollyanna, I hope that some of the gun shots are actually cars with those mufflers.
(New York Fantasy Times)
We could only wish!

We hear shoot outs over here all the time. I think Fortunately many of them are really crappy shooters because they don’t know what they’re doing and they’ve never been to a range and not supposed to have a gun in the first place. I also work in a hospital and I cannot tell you how many people walk in off the street or have their family members drop them off at the door people don’t always call the police you won’t always hear sirens. You certainly won’t hear sirens if they are looking for a shooter they will just flash their lights.

Would anyone support raising the penalty for stealing firearms? It’s only a misdemeanor currently.

I’m for imposing a penalty for allowing a gun to be stolen. How about you?

Kristopher Pappas There are laws against theft. There are no laws regarding stupid people and gun ownership.

So it’s currently only a minor misdemeanor to steal a firearm. Would you support increasing the penalty?

Also, yes, people are charged all the time if a child discharges a firearm that wasn’t secured.

All these are quite different from before. Maybe the BLM/Antifa riots changed some minds. Many residents would be shocked to find out how many of their Midtown neighbors are packing. They just don’t broadcast it.

I particularly liked the comment about Mayberry. This is no longer the city of the 1950s and earlier when Memphians didn’t even lock their doors. What happened? The family unit was assaulted, faith was cut back and it’s not surprising that our communities go downhill.

Here’s the Next Debate Moderator

Welker has deep Democrat ties according to this story from the New York Post:

All eyes are turning to NBC News White House correspondent Kristen Welker as she prepares to host the third and final presidential debate Thursday.

President Trump and Joe Biden will square off at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., in a 90-minute debate starting at 9 p.m.

Welker, 44, has been the White House correspondent at NBC News since 2011, after working as a news reporter in Rhode Island.

But Trump supporters who took issue with hard questioning by previous moderators like Chris Wallace and Savannah Guthrie may find themselves pining for those combative hosts after Welker is done with the president.

Welker comes from an established Democratic family — who have poured cash into party coffers, and to Trump opponents, for years.

Her mother, Julie Welker, a prominent real estate broker in Philadelphia, and father, Harvey Welker, a consulting engineer, have donated tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates and close to $20,000 to Barack Obama alone.

There was also $3,300 for Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and $2,100 for Hillary Clinton’s doomed 2016 presidential effort against Trump. Another $7,300 was contributed to the Democratic National Committee between 2004 and 2020.

In 2012, Welker and her family celebrated Christmas at the White House with the Obamas.
Though Kristen Welker’s party registration is not listed today, she was a registered Democrat in Washington, DC, in 2012 and in Rhode Island in 2004.

Throughout Welker’s tenure as a White House correspondent, she has earned a reputation for a scathing style of questioning.

“Mr. President, yes or no. … have you ever worked for Russia. Yes or no?” she demanded during a confrontation in January 2019.

The treatment stands in stark contrast to her handling of Democratic politicos.

In March 2016 Welker was busted on live television tipping off Hillary Clinton’s Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri about at least one question she planned to ask her during a post-debate interview in Michigan. At the time Clinton was locked in a fierce fight for the Democratic nomination against Sen. Bernie Sanders.

“I’m going to ask you about Flint,” Welker said of the Michigan city’s infamous water crisis.
Welker deleted her Twitter account last week, heading off a more complete look at her past statements and views. It was later restored.

“Anyone who’s ever dealt with Welker knows she’s an activist, not a reporter. The White House press team views her the same way they would AOC or Pelosi if they walked in the office,” a senior White House official told The Post.

Signs Point to Reelection

The terrific blogger Don Surber always has good observations about the political scene. He was an editorial writer for a newspaper in West Virginia and has the gift of insight from all those years of practical experience that most media people lack.

He has some optimistic takes on the 2020 election.

He notes that Politico wrote the day before the 2016 election, “Record-breaking early voting fuels Democratic optimism.”

The story said, “More than 46 million votes have been cast in advance of Election Day, breaking records in state after state and suggesting the prospect of a heightened Hispanic turnout that could upend politics in several battleground states.

“While there’s no way to know whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is ahead, the available data about who has voted so far, and where, provides some insight into what the results might hold. There are signs of an unusually diverse electorate, marked by robust Hispanic numbers in places like Florida and Nevada. Women seem to have turned out in disproportionately high numbers in some states. In others, Republicans appear to have made late gains.”

Finally, this post does have some news. Fox News ratings are through the roof.

On Wednesday, its prime-time audience beat every network show except the Masked Singer on Fox.

Heck, The Five at 5 PM drew 5 million viewers and beat everyone except the Masked Singer.

But big numbers at Fox News are nothing new. What is new is Fox News is attracting viewers. Carlson, Hannity, and Ingraham were No. 3, 4, and 5 on cable among people 18-49. Only two baseball games beat them on cable.

In fact the entire Fox News lineup from 5 PM to midnight held top 10 slots in that age bracket.

Carlson was No. 1 among women 18-49.

Among people 18-34, Carlson was No. 3 and Hannity No. 4, and the rest of the Fox News lineup also scored high.

This bodes well for President Trump in that it shows the under-50 crowd is engaged in conservative politics.

Wait a second, that was not silly enough for this post.

This is.

WPVI reported, “It’s a heated election season and political conversations can get a little tricky. But in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, a bakery is adding a little levity by making the race more fun and delicious.

“Political cookies flying off the shelves at Lochel’s Bakery in Hatboro. They feature the name and party color of each candidate. The bakery tallies the sales like votes in an unofficial, tasty little poll that’s now sweeping the nation.

“‘Everyone can agree on a cookie,’ says Kathleen Lochel, the owner of Lochel’s Bakery.

“But this is an election year and that means everyone’s picking their cookie on party lines.”

The story also said, “For the past three elections, the sugary sales have accurately predicted the presidential winner.”

And the Lochel woman said, “If the winner was chosen today, from our poll, Donald Trump would blow it out of the water.”

Although he did miss this story: “NORTH CHARLESTON, SC (FOX Carolina) – A squirrel in North Charleston has made his official prediction for the winner of the 2020 presidential election in November.

“Owners of the squirrel, ChrisChris, said they placed 10 nuts in two separate bowls that had each candidate’s name attached to it. Whichever one ChrisChris ate the most hazelnuts out of will be determined the winner.

“The owners said this will be the first election that ChrisChris will participate in. Their first squirrel, Gnocchi the Squirrel, was the original participant, but he recently passed away at the age of 16.

“After munching a little from each bowl, ChrisChris decided that President Trump will win another four years in office.”

Now that cinches it.

Shrill Host Hogs Townhall

Twenty minutes into NBC’s “Townhall” with President Trump last night, not a single audience member had yet asked a question.

The “moderator” – more correctly chief inquisitor – Savannah Guthrie, acted as if those people (who were mostly women, by the way, which I’ll touch on farther down) were insignificant. Certainly they could not be trusted to ask the important questions she did. These oh so pressing questions for the nation included the exact time pre debate that the president had his Covid test; white supremacy; Q Anon; and whether he would leave office if he lost.

In her eyes, while Americans struggle with job losses, pandemic fears, school openings and other life impacting issues, 20 minutes haranguing Trump on topics we’ve visited ad nauseam and that he has repeatedly discussed were more important than their concerns. She interrupted, disputed everything he said and badgered him as if she were his opposing candidate in a debate. Talk about a Karen! We’re all familiar with the type of screamer she is; if a parent, you’ve probably engaged in this kind of argument with a teenager.

Guthrie went on and on about wearing masks. When Trump quite rightly said there was no absolute scientific knowledge on whether they are effective, the all too eager Guthrie hung onto the topic like a starving dog with a bone. The more she held onto the topic, the more people at home she enraged.

When a third of the program’s time allotment had passed, Guthrie at last gave up and allowed an audience member to ask a question. This one was, of course, again about the pandemic and why if Trump knew in January that it was a bad one, he didn’t act sooner. Even then, Guthrie couldn’t wait to jump in and revisit the mask issue and interrupted.

Trump handled it fairly well; why people expect science and the government to conquer all that we need to know about an unknown virus a week or two after its appearance seems ridiculous to me, but media people are ridiculous anyway.

Interestingly most of the questions came from women. One black man, a Democrat, was stuck in traffic and didn’t get to ask his question about the stimulus in person. Another man, again a Democrat, asked about the correctness of a Supreme Court justice being nominated so close to the end of a term. Trump tackled both questions well, explaining that Nancy Pelosi refuses to negotiate and that he was within his rights to fulfill his duties during his term. Trump pointed out that in his position the Democrats would surely have gone forward with a nomineee, too.

Aside from these two, the other questions were asked by women. This was no accident. Guthrie was aiming to undermine Trump with women – especially suburban women – and she hoped to trip Trump up with this voting block.

I don’t think it worked. The women all seemed pretty satisfied with the answers he gave. Viewers all commented on the woman behind the president, who nodded in agreement with him time and again. I hope she remains anonymous as liberals are quite ticked off about it and could make her life miserable.

Someone who watched Megyn Kelly’s podcast wrote that she “recently mentioned that she lives among and is friends with many of these upper-middle class suburban women who ‘hate Trump’. And she said that they’re all basically lying. Privately they have, almost to a person, said they are voting for Trump.”

Even Trump supposedly didn’t believe Guthrie’s tactics worked. Jack Posobiec tweeted, “WH source tells @OANN that after walking offstage at townhall, Trump said to everyone, ‘I expected worse. She tried, God bless her…she tried.'”

I don’t put a lot of import on body language, but I couldn’t help noticing the President’s. He looked relaxed and at ease. Guthrie looked like a vulture tottering on a branch waiting to pounce on her victim.

She didn’t succeed. Trump did well and remained calm, drawing an even sharper contrast between him and the out of control moderator.

Chris Wallace has got to feel good about this. Disaster that he was, Guthrie outdid him.

Part of this might have been because of the backlash NBC actors and employees were giving their own network. Rumor has it that their “stars” were outraged that the network gave their most hated enemy, Donald J. Trump, a full hour’s appearance. Here’s a sample as noted by Forbes:

“The point of a news organization is to serve the public. This is the opposite,” Vivian Schiller, NBC News’ former chief digital officer, wrote on Twitter Wednesday. “[NBC News] could literally run this any other day, or any other time. Shameful.”

Former Today anchor Katie Couric tweeted that “having dueling town halls is bad for democracy” by forcing voters to choose, calling the move a “bad decision” and predicting the town hall “will be good for Trump because people like to watch his unpredictability.”

Former NBC News producer Mark Lukasiewicz said the opposing town halls were “a bad result for American voters,” and former NBC News executive vice president Cheryl Gould wrote on Facebook she was “dismayed” and “disgusted” by NBC being “complicit in Trump’s tantrum.”

Merrill Brown, the former executive editor of MSNBC.com, told Variety that while the network had the “right instinct” in holding a town hall, it “could have held it at a point that was not opposite ABC’s.”

Martin Gero and Brendan Gall, the creators of NBC comedy series Connecting, said on Twitter they “strenuously object” to the town hall scheduling and called for the event to be rescheduled.

Connecting star Shakina Nayfack tweeted that she is “disgusted by my home network giving Trump a platform for fear mongering, bigotry and disinformation,” adding, “Shame on NBC.”

Once again, DJT has the last laugh.