The 2024 national election has been described by pollsters as the closest since 2000, when it took more than a month of divisive recounting and legal challenges for the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, to put an end to the drama by certifying the original statewide vote count which gave George W. Bush the victory in Florida by 537 votes, and in the Electoral College by a margin of 5 votes, 271-266 (with 1 abstention).
Going into Election Day, most pollsters said the outcome of the race was far too close to call for either Vice President Kamala Harris or former President Donald Trump. The outcome of the last pre-election average of opinion polls in all seven battleground states, Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, were said to be within their statistical margins of error. These included a couple of polls that had proven to be most accurate in calling the last two presidential elections, which had Trump narrowly ahead in each of those seven states this time around.
Pennsylvania, with its 19 Electoral College votes, more than any of the other battleground states, was expected to be the most likely state to determine who the next president would be. That is why both presidential campaigns spent the lion’s share of their ad budgets in the state and sent their candidates back to it repeatedly during the final weeks of the campaign.
CLOSE OUTCOMES ALSO PREDICTED FOR CONTROL OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE
The dead-heat nature of this election race extended beyond the White House to the contest between the Republicans and Democrats for control of the U.S. Congress. Going into this election, both chambers were nearly equally divided, with Democrats in 51-49 control of the Senate and Republicans in control of the House of Representatives by a margin of 220-212 (with 3 vacancies). Any small shift in the balance of power in each of the congressional chambers will determine the extent to which the new president will be able to implement their legislative agenda until the next midterm election two years from now.
The only pre-Election Day prediction that seemed safe was the likelihood that Republicans would win back majority control of the Senate, based upon polls indicating that the GOP would gain at least two seats with the retirement of longtime Democrat Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia likely to be replaced by a Republican former governor of that state, Jim Justice, and the likely defeat of Montana’s incumbent three-term Democrat Senator, Jon Tester, by Republican challenger Tim Sheehy, a 38-year-old first-time political candidate and a decorated former U.S. Navy SEAL. Meanwhile, the rest of the incumbent senators whose re-elections were in any serious doubt on Election Day were all Democrats, seeming to assure Republicans of at least a 51-49 working majority in the new U.S. Senate.
TRUMP ENTERED ELECTION DAY A VERY SLIGHT FAVORITE
According to the closely followed RealClearPolitics (RCP) average of polls, during the final days of the campaign, Trump and Harris were in a virtual tie (a 0.1 percent advantage for Trump) in the nationwide popular vote, which does not determine the winner, and a small (0.8 percent) net advantage for Trump in all seven of the battleground states. According to the RCP averages, Trump would win the presidency in the Electoral College by a margin of 287-251. But the uncertainty of that predicted outcome is reflected by the fact that if Harris were to win in Pennsylvania, with its 19 Electoral College votes, where she was trailing Trump in the last RCP polling average by just 0.3%, she could conceivably win the presidency by the narrowest possible margin of 270-268.
The final predictions in the presidential race by other respected pollsters, such as former New York Times pollster Nate Silver and ABC network’s 538 poll, also gave Trump a slight advantage. But these pollsters also heavily hedged their bets by declaring that the presidential election’s outcome was too close to predict with any real confidence. Professional gamblers put the last-minute odds in favor of a Trump victory at 58-41, indicating that they believed Trump would probably win, but that his victory was far from certain.
POLLS IGNORED A LARGE REGISTRATION SHIFT IN FAVOR OF THE GOP
The only political expert who predicted a surprise blowout election victory for either one of the presidential candidates was veteran GOP strategist Alex Castellanos. He told Fox News that all of the polls indicating an extremely close outcome in the race between Trump and Harris had neglected to take into account “a massive shift in voter registration” by party in 30 out of 31 states over the past four years in favor of the Republicans. That included a substantial reduction in the size of the majority of registered Democrat voters in the key battleground state of Pennsylvania, which Scranton-born Joe Biden carried four years ago with a 1.17% margin consisting of about 80,000 votes.
Castellanos suggested that the registration shift might be the only advance hint of an unexpected electoral “red wave” in favor of Trump and the down-ballot GOP candidates across the country. But an overwhelming consensus of other pollsters was still predicting one of the closest races in American presidential election history.
That last week of campaigning was marked by high-profile controversies sparked by Trump’s dramatic campaign rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City on October 27 attended by 20,000 enthusiastic Trump supporters representing a wide variety of ethnic and economic backgrounds, including working-class white, Black and Latino men, as well as Orthodox Jews, Evangelical Christians, and Catholics, in addition to traditional-conservative grassroots Republicans.
BATTLING NARRATIVES FOR TRUMP’S MADISON SQUARE GARDEN RALLY
From the outset, Democrats and the Harris campaign tried to mischaracterize the event as a re-enactment of the notorious February 20, 1939 rally in an arena of the same name held by the pro-Nazi German-American Bund six months before Hitler’s invasion of Poland started World War II in Europe. While Trump’s campaign speech at the end of the rally was relatively benign and upbeat, his opponents seized upon a comment made by professional comedian Tony Hinchcliffe on stage before Trump even arrived at the arena. The comic made a joke about an ongoing garbage crisis in Puerto Rico, calling the U.S. territory “a floating island of garbage.”
The Trump campaign immediately disavowed the comedian’s remark by declaring, “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign.” Nevertheless, Joe Biden seized upon the “garbage” comment during a get-out-the-vote campaign phone call with Latino Harris supporters two days later, in which the president said, “The only garbage I see floating out there is his [Trump’s] supporters.” After a pause, Biden then added, “His [Trump’s] demonization of Latinos is unconscionable and it’s un-American.”
Biden’s cutting remark was clearly intended to demean all of Trump’s supporters, despite desperate White House efforts to soften its meaning by altering the official transcript of Biden’s insulting remark after the fact. To understand its significance, Biden’s remark has to be viewed in both its historical and current political context.
A REPETITION OF HILLARY CLINTON’S “BASKET OF DEPLORABLES” INSULT
From the historical point of view, it was strongly reminiscent of the infamous comment by then-Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during a speech to her liberal campaign contributors in Manhattan on September 9, 2016. Mrs. Clinton said, “You could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?”
For the rest of that presidential campaign, Trump’s working-class supporters enthusiastically adopted the “deplorables” label, which Clinton had also meant to be a deliberate insult, as a badge of honor. The Trump campaign was then able to use the “deplorables” label as a constant reminder to voters of the utter contempt with which Clinton and her elitist liberal supporters held the other half of the American people for supporting Trump.
The current political context of Biden’s “garbage” remark, which was intended to imply that Trump and his campaign have no respect for voters from Puerto Rico, and, by extension, all Latino voters, was a series of recent polls indicating that the traditional support of Hispanic voters for Democrat presidential candidates has seriously eroded during this election cycle. Democrat political demographer Ruy Teixeira wrote on his Liberal Patriot blog that in the last polls taken just before Tuesday’s election, Trump was trailing Harris with Latino voters by just 13%, whereas he lost to Biden among Latino voters by 23% in the 2020 election, and to Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election by 39 points.
HIGHLIGHTING THE DECLINE IN LATINO VOTES FOR DEMOCRATS
Hispanics comprise one of the fastest-growing segments of the American electorate. Their defection to Trump was expected to boost his chances of winning in the competitive battleground states with large Hispanic populations that he lost to Biden in 2020, such as Arizona and Nevada. On the strength of the same polls, Latino voters were also expected to further increase Trump’s expected majorities in the large red states of Texas and Florida.
The former president also recognized that he could use Biden’s “garbage” remark to emphasize his political message to a much broader audience. In order to identify himself more personally with working-class voters of all ethnic backgrounds who feel abandoned by elitist liberals like Vice President Harris who dictate the far-left agenda of the Democrat party, Trump donned a bright orange and yellow safety vest typically worn by sanitation workers when he emerged from the plane taking him to a campaign rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin on October 30. He then conducted a press conference with reporters while seated in a garbage truck bearing a big Trump “Make America Great” campaign slogan on its side.
TRUMP PLAYS “GARBAGE MAN” TO RIDICULE BIDEN’S INSULTING REMARK
Trump was still wearing the orange and yellow vest rather than his usual blue suit jacket when he went on stage at the rally in Green Bay. The pictures of Trump in the garbage truck and on stage wearing the vest dominated the news cycle and further brought home, with an endearing touch of self-deprecating comedy, his message of unity with working-class voters across the country.
Trump’s playful and entertaining message stood in sharp contrast to the scolding tone that marked the two weeks of the Harris campaign, in which Democrat party leaders, such as former president Barack Obama and his wife, made urgent last-minute appeals to wavering Black and Latino working-class males, in particular, to vote for Harris despite their dissatisfaction with Biden-Harris administration policies on the economy and border security.
TRUMP REMINDS VOTERS THAT THEY ARE WORSE OFF THAN FOUR YEARS AGO
Though the rate of inflation during the Biden-Harris administration has fallen from its peak of 9.1% annually which it reached in June 2022, to less than 3% annually in recent months, prices for everything from supermarket basics to housing, energy and most consumer goods remain about 20% higher than when Biden and Harris took office almost four years ago. Wage increases have not been able to keep pace, so as a result, most working-class and middle-class Americans feel that they are much worse off economically today than they were when Trump was president, and many were expected to vote accordingly.
Many voters are also strongly opposed to the open border policies of the Biden-Harris administration. They believe that the more than 10 million illegal immigrants that Biden as well as Harris, acting as the president’s designated “border czar,” permitted to enter the country, have unfairly been getting preferential treatment from the federal government and sanctuary cities, to the detriment of millions of poor and homeless American citizens. Many working-class citizens are opposed to the admission of those millions of illegal immigrants because they compete with them for a limited number of low-level jobs as well as affordable housing. They have also lowered the level of education available to American-born kids in public schools that are now overcrowded with recently arrived immigrant children who don’t speak English.
THE HIGH PRICE OF AMERICA’S OPEN BORDER
Voters are also opposed to the tidal wave of illegal immigrants admitted to this country by the Biden-Harris administration because they have significantly impacted the quality of life in many American cities. In addition, the criminal element among illegal immigrants, especially those who are members of notoriously violent gangs, poses a significant threat to public safety, while most are being granted effective immunity by a Biden-Harris administration policy from criminal prosecution or deportation.
While Harris has campaigned on a misleading promise to voters that when she is president she will “turn the page” on government policies, it appears that what she intended to change were only the successful policies which were instituted by the Trump administration, which has been out of office for the past four years. Harris has completely ignored her own responsibility for the failed economic and open border policies of the Biden administration during the past four years in which she played an important role. This includes casting tie-breaking votes that enabled reckless Biden spending bills, that generated a disastrous spike in the rate of inflation, to pass in a 50-50 divided Senate, and Harris’ role as Biden’s titular border czar, enabling more than 10 million illegal immigrants to ignore current federal immigration laws.
HARRIS HAS SAID SHE WOULDN’T CHANGE ANY OF BIDEN’S POLICIES
In fact, whenever Harris was asked during the campaign whether she would have done anything different from Biden over the past four years, her answer was, “Nothing comes to mind.” By contrast, during the campaign, Trump proposed major changes in the federal tax code to give needed relief to Social Security beneficiaries, and people working for tips or on overtime. Most recently, Trump has also proposed that the interest on a loan to buy an American-made car be tax deductible, and federal benefits for those staying home to provide care for a loved one.
While Harris was calling for more job-killing tax increases and onerous regulations on American businesses, Trump was proposing further tax and tariff incentives for those businesses to make their products in American rather than foreign factories, thereby providing more jobs for American workers.
THE SOURCE OF HARRIS’ ADVANTAGE WITH WOMEN VOTERS
On the other hand, Harris was said to have built up a large lead among women voters, particularly those who are young, single, and college-educated, over Trump’s role in appointing three conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices who made possible the decision in 2022 which overturned Roe v. Wade. Harris and her fellow Democrats repeated the lie that Trump and his conservative Republican supporters would try to impose new nationwide restrictions on women’s rights, despite Trump’s repeated statements to the contrary.
Liberal Democrats have been using their support for the Roe v. Wade decision against their mostly Republican pro-life opponents as an effective campaign issue for more than 50 years. In the 2020 presidential election, Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by a margin of 13 percentage points among women voters, mostly based upon that issue, while losing the male vote to Trump by 6 points. That created a net “gender gap” between the two candidates of 19 points.
TRUMP EXPANDS THE “GENDER GAP” WITH MORE SUPPORT FROM MEN
In this year’s presidential election campaign, the demographic advantage by gender as reported by the Cook Political Report (CPR) remains roughly the same, (12 points) for Harris with regard to women voters, but a sharply improved advantage (14 points, an 8-point increase) for Trump among male voters.
That was not the only issue on which Democrats have deliberately misinformed the voters with regard to Trump’s policy intentions for a second term as president. Democrats continued to warn voters that Trump would seek to govern as a dictator if elected to a second term as president. They constantly referred to the largely spontaneous riot by Trump supporters at the Capitol building in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021, and the deliberate misinterpretation of carefully selected snippets from Trump’s public comments taken out of context to support their claim that he poses a threat to American democracy.
DEMOCRATS’ DANGEROUS “HITLER” RHETORIC AGAINST TRUMP
The Democrats also continued to demonize Trump as a power-hungry would-be fascist dictator, comparing him directly to Adolph Hitler, even after Trump was the target of two failed assassination attempts by lone gunmen who may have been motivated by the extreme political rhetoric the Democrats have used against him.
But since he entered presidential electoral politics in 2015, it is Trump who has been the victim of undemocratic procedures and repeated, knowingly false accusations by Democrats and the mainstream media.
First, he was falsely accused of “collusion” with the Russians to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, based upon a document that was secretly written and paid for by the Clinton campaign as a political dirty trick.
Then House Democrats impeached Trump twice but failed to get a conviction in the Senate that would remove him from office, the first time over what Trump said during a phone call on July 25, 2019, with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky in which Trump requested a Ukrainian investigation of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, and the second time over Trump’s actions regarding the riot by some of his supporter at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
DEMOCRATS’ LAWFARE ATTACKS ON TRUMP LARGELY FAILED
Most recently, Democrat lawyers in several states tried to remove Trump from the ballot, based upon an obscure reading of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but were prevented from doing so by a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court. They also prosecuted him in several state and federal jurisdictions based upon a variety of false or wildly exaggerated and politically motivated criminal and civil charges, many of which have been sharply reduced, thrown out of court, or declared to be unconstitutional.
The Democrats have also tried to associate Trump with Project 2025, a package of conservative policy initiatives developed by the Heritage Foundation, despite Trump’s repeated insistence that he does not support the plan’s more controversial proposals, such as making major cutbacks in the current Social Security retirement and Medicare benefits to prevent the federal trust funds which finance those programs from going bankrupt in about a dozen years, as now projected.
SERIOUS DOUBTS REMAIN ABOUT HARRIS’ FUTURE SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL
Many Jewish voters and other supporters of Israel are deeply concerned over whether Harris, as president, would continue to provide Israel with the level of military and diplomatic support it needs from the U.S. for the still unfinished war against Hamas in Gaza, given her close ideological ties to the openly antisemitic left-wing of the Democrat Party. Harris has also been criticizing Israel and shedding crocodile tears over the plight of the Palestinian civilians in Gaza which Hamas continues to use as human shields, thanks to the United Nations and Biden-Harris administration policies, while continuing to seek the creation of a Palestinian state.
Israel now needs even more U.S. support, as it addresses a greater threat from Hezbollah in Lebanon, and from the terrorist puppet masters in Iran, who now say publicly they are planning new attacks on Israel as they cross the threshold of nuclear weapons capability. Meanwhile, on the campaign trail, Harris has been discreetly signaling a willingness to impose a one-sided Gaza ceasefire agreement on Israel before Hamas is thoroughly defeated, in an effort to appease the Muslim voters in the hotly contested battleground state of Michigan who are angry with both Biden and Harris for continuing U.S. support for Israel.
HARRIS’ RECORD AS THE U.S. SENATE’S MOST LIBERAL MEMBER
Harris, during the four years she served as a U.S. Senator from California before becoming Biden’s Vice President in 2021, was an outspoken advocate for the most extreme “woke” left-wing policies promoted by the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, including CRT (Critical Race Theory) and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion).
During the race riots that devastated cities across the country during the summer of 2020, which were triggered by the death of George Floyd, who was black, at the hands of a white Minneapolis, Minnesota cop, then-Senator Harris made a public appeal for donations to a non-profit which bailed the violent rioters out of jail.
She also made an unsuccessful run for the Democrats’ 2020 presidential nomination on a platform supporting such radical proposals as a nationwide ban on all drilling for oil and natural gas using fracking technology, the ultimate outlawing of the sale of all gasoline-powered new cars, instituting the many other impractical provisions of the Green New Deal, undermining the American healthcare system by providing Medicare for All, and de-criminalizing immigrants who cross the American border illegally.
HARRIS’ POSITIONS HAVE CHANGED BUT HER LIBERAL VALUES HAVEN’T
During the campaign she ran after replacing Joe Biden as the Democrats’ 2024 presidential candidate this summer, Harris publicly disavowed most of those radical leftist positions she took before becoming vice president while paradoxically claiming that “my values haven’t changed.” That was recognized by many political professionals as a thinly disguised signal by Harris intended to reassure her radical-left colleagues that she was only supporting more moderate positions during the campaign to persuade gullible citizens to vote for her. But if she won the election and was safely in the White House, Harris intended to revert to the previous ultra-liberal positions that she was associated with before she became Biden’s vice president four years ago.
TRUMP’S KEY NEW ALLIANCES WITH ELON MUSK AND RFK JR.
Ironically, it was Trump, the only presidential candidate in this race committed to cleaning up and reforming the governmental “swamp” in Washington, DC, who empowered such visionary agents of change as bold industrial innovator Elon Musk and fearless consumer and health advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Trump recognized them as accomplished individuals with their own public following, as well as the rare knowledge, experience, and determination needed to get those difficult and dirty jobs done. They are also each strong enough to overcome opposition from the powerful unelected members of the so-called administrative state who have been leaders of the efforts to destroy Trump ever since he first emerged as a viable presidential candidate in the 2016 campaign.
HARRIS’ POOR CHOICE FOR A RUNNING MATE
By contrast, Kamala Harris’ “gut” decision to choose Minnesota’s ultra-liberal governor, Tim Walz, as her vice-presidential running mate, may well turn out to be fatal to her candidacy if she loses to Trump in the Electoral College due to a failure to carry Pennsylvania and its 19 presidential electors. Harris should have known that she didn’t need Walz’s help to carry his reliably “blue” state of Minnesota, and that he would be a much less valuable asset on the campaign trail and in the Electoral College than the early favorite to serve as Harris’ vice-presidential running mate, Pennsylvania’s wildly popular governor, Josh Shapiro.
Walz quickly turned out to be more of a liability than an asset to Harris during the campaign. A serious examination of his past turned up many troubling issues, including embarrassing exaggerations about his 24-year-long military record as a member of the National Guard, many visits to Communist China and his close associations with some of its officials, and an arrest for driving at 96 m.p.h. while intoxicated.
WALZ’S LIBERAL TRANSFORMATION
Walz served in Congress for 12 years as a relatively moderate Democrat, reflecting the political profile of his rural Minnesota district. But upon taking office as the governor of Minnesota in 2019, he turned overnight into an ultra-liberal who waited too long to act while violent Black Lives Matter criminals and anarchists were running wild and burning down parts of Minneapolis during the days that followed the death of George Floyd.
It also did not help the Harris campaign when Walz responded to criticism of his misstatements by publicly calling himself a “knucklehead.” Walz was also badly outclassed during his nationally televised debate on October 1 against Trump’s young and very eloquent vice-presidential running mate, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance.
TRUMP’S MUCH STRONGER RECORD OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY LEADERSHIP
Trump also ran on a promise to restore America’s prestige internationally by acting as a strong leader of the free world, in sharp contrast to Joe Biden’s disastrous foreign policy record. Biden’s lack of resolve was revealed to the world by the disgracefully botched withdrawal of American troops he ordered from Afghanistan. Biden’s weakness encouraged Russian President Vladimir Putin to believe that he could defy international law by invading and easily conquering Ukraine just six months later, without incurring any serious opposition from the U.S. or its NATO allies.
Trump campaigned on a promise to quickly negotiate a settlement that would put an end to the massive killing in Ukraine, and to crack down once again upon Iran and its terrorist proxies before Iran could acquire a usable nuclear weapons capability.
Biden’s misguided efforts to revive the fatally flawed 2015 Iran nuclear deal by halting enforcement of the sanctions that Trump had re-imposed when he was president on Iran’s oil trade, financed a revival of Iran’s terrorist proxies, including Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen and various other Islamic militias throughout the region, which increased their attacks on Israel. Iran also used that money to support the military buildup and provide training which led to the deadly Hamas October 7 attack on Israel from Gaza.
WHY HARRIS WAS PICKED TO REPLACE BIDEN BY DEMOCRAT PARTY BOSSES
Unfortunately, Harris had been hand-picked as Joe Biden’s emergency, last-minute replacement by Democrat party bosses who didn’t really care whether she was qualified or not as long as she followed their orders. All she had to offer the voters was four more years of the Biden administration’s failed big government, socialist-inspired, free-spending policies, and the forceful imposition of militantly secular, identity politics-driven, anti-democratic cultural standards upon all aspects of American society.
To camouflage Harris’ glaring shortcomings from the voters, the same mainstream media outlets that had covered up Biden’s cognitive decline until it became too obvious to hide, threw up a smokescreen around Harris based upon Democrat “joy” over the fact that they would not be led to a disastrous defeat at the ballot box by Biden. It required them to conspire with the mainstream media again to prevent Harris from embarrassing herself due to her inability to provide intelligible answers to serious questions from honest, unbiased reporters during the campaign about her policies.
Instead, the Harris campaign was only interested in talking about Donald Trump’s alleged dictatorial tendencies, massive ego, and his crimes, both real and imagined. Instead of well-thought-out new federal government policies by her administration, presidential candidate Harris only talked about providing a grab bag of new welfare entitlements and promises to provide narrowly-targeted policies benefitting only the members of the liberal-defined “oppressed” identity groups whose votes she wanted to buy.
PUNISHING WEALTHY AMERICANS AND BUSINESSES FOR THEIR SUCCESSES
According to Harris, this large but unspecified amount of increased federal spending was to be financed by further increasing taxes on profitable businesses and wealthy investors who, according to the socialist-inspired ideology of the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, are by definition evil, guilty, and deserving to be punished for their capitalist successes.
Instead of focusing on Harris’ lack of experience as vice president in managing all but the most routine foreign policy issues, mainstream media coverage during the campaign focused entirely on complaints about Trump’s tough-minded “America First” negotiating stance from liberal European leaders. The media also criticized Trump’s ability while he was president to defuse potentially dangerous confrontations with hostile foreign leaders such as Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un with a little bit of harmless flattery guided by his master deal-maker’s experience.
TRUMP HAS PROVEN HE CAN BE TRUSTED TO SUPPORT ISRAEL
Trump’s first term record had also proven that he could be trusted to give Israel the unlimited and unconditional U.S. support it now needs to finally defeat both Hamas and Hezbollah, and to restore the safety and security of all Israeli citizens, including those living in the north and south of the country, as well as in the West Bank.
As president, Trump also succeeded, with the help of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, in fashioning a new type of American Middle East diplomacy which resulted in the signing of the Abraham Accords forging peace between Israel and some of its former Muslim enemies in the region. However, upon taking office, the Biden administration abandoned the pursuit of further Abraham Accord-type agreements, despite their success, primarily because they were based upon Trump’s ideas. So American Middle East policy reverted, once again, to the hopeless pursuit of the desert mirage which is the two-state solution.
BIDEN AND HARRIS STILL BELIEVE ARAFAT’S BIG LIE
Biden and Harris have also been trying to revive the futile efforts of previous White House administrations to reform the thoroughly corrupt Palestinian Authority (PA), whose leadership is still able to fool gullible American leaders into believing the lie first told to them by Yasser Arafat 30 years ago as the basis for the Oslo Accords and peace process. The lie claims that the Palestinian Authority wants to live in peace side-by-side with Israel, while in fact, the PA continues to support, using U.S. and European-supplied money, its thinly veiled terrorism-based efforts to weaken and ultimately destroy Israel as a Jewish state.
Biden, Harris, and their fellow Democrats still cling to their naive belief in that lie. They seem to lack the imagination needed to understand that another, more comprehensive region-wide solution developed by the previous Trump administration to put an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict is not only feasible but also has been tested and proven to work.
Yet Biden and Harris are still very reluctant to consider the Abraham Accords as the blueprint for a practical alternative to the two-state solution which, at this point, most Israelis and Palestinians are convinced cannot possibly succeed.
FAILED BIDEN-HARRIS EFFORTS TO APPEASE IRAN
In addition, after nearly four years of repeated failure, the Biden-Harris administration has foolishly continued trying to appease the radical Shiite Islamic leaders of Iran, who are still working to dominate the region and destroy Israel with incessant attacks on multiple fronts by their terrorist proxies. By suspending enforcement of the Trump-reimposed sanctions on Iran’s oil exports and by paying billions of dollars of blackmail money to release innocent American citizens that Iran has been holding hostage, these misguided Biden-Harris policies have only served to make Iran into an even greater nuclear-capable threat to regional and world peace.
Similarly, the deliberately slow, piecemeal flow of U.S. military aid from the Biden-Harris administration to Ukraine in a life-or-death battle for its continued independent existence against the invading Russians, would mean that no end to that war is in sight if Harris is to be the next American president.
WHO CAN BEST STAND UP TO THE THREAT TO AMERICA FROM CHINA?
In addition, unlike Trump, neither Biden nor Harris has a viable strategy to respond effectively to Communist China’s growing challenge to the security of America’s allies in the Western Pacific region, or to America’s continued status as the world’s predominant economic, diplomatic and military superpower.
Unfortunately, very few of these vital issues were seriously addressed during this presidential campaign, leaving the American people largely in the dark when trying to decide whether or not Harris was qualified to serve as a viable alternative to Trump as the next American president in an increasingly dangerous world.
We can only pray to the Eibishter, whose hidden Hand will guide the hearts and minds of America’s newly elected leaders, and Who has promised to protect the surviving remnants of Klal Yisroel from the evil intentions of our enemies both here and abroad.
