Subscribe
In the midst of the United States presidential election campaign, Donald Trump decided to get ahead of his rival Kamala Harris by flying to Arizona to visit the “hot” border with Mexico. The objective of this strategic move is clear: to criticize the Biden administration’s immigration policy and highlight the weaknesses of Vice President Harris, who was responsible for the immigration portfolio during her tenure.
It is no coincidence that Trump chose the very day when Harris officially accepts the Democratic nomination for president, seeking to divert media attention from his rival. Just hours before heading to Arizona, the former president attended an outdoor rally in North Carolina, his first since the attempted attack on July 13. Protected by bulletproof glass, Trump did not hold back on criticism, accusing Barack Obama and his wife Michelle of personal attacks against him: “They tell me to only talk about politics and not to attack personally, but then they do exactly the opposite,” he declared. Often in a shameful manner. The first African American president of the United States mocked the tycoon during his speech in Chicago by talking about the size of Trump’s reproductive organ. Such a low blow makes one wonder not only how low the American debate has sunk but also what would have happened if it wasn’t a Democrat making such statements, but a Republican. Another aspect that must not be ignored is the powerful image of candidate Trump during his rally behind bulletproof glass. Is this the freedom for a man who is not left-wing? Why hasn’t an image like this made headlines worldwide and sparked outrage? In the land of democracy, it is in no way normal that a candidate has to hold rallies protected by bulletproof glass.
Trump then announced that he would broadcast Harris’s speech on his social network, Truth, promising to “expose her.” Regarding the abortion issue, he reiterated that he would not introduce any federal ban, while he labeled Harris’s running mate, Tim Walz, as “inconsistent” and unfit for the presidency.
Meanwhile, Trump launched a cryptocurrency platform called “The DeFiant Ones,” presenting it as an alternative to the offerings of major banks and financial institutions, accusing them of having oppressed Americans for too long.
About two months before the election, The New York Times revealed that the FBI raided the homes of two American commentators linked to Russian television, in an attempt to curb possible Kremlin influences on the vote. The individuals involved are Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector, and Dimitri K. Simes, an adviser to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Although no formal charges have been announced yet, further raids and potential indictments are expected.
In the meantime, Trump continues to regain ground after the week of the Democratic Convention, forging a new alliance with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the well-known member of the American political dynasty. The latest polls, most of them politically biased, predict his defeat. The former president embarked on a tour de force of events, attending rallies in key states like Nevada and Arizona, where he appeared for the first time with Kennedy, who just suspended his campaign in ten states and endorsed Trump. The former president proudly welcomed Kennedy’s support, calling him “an exceptional person, respected by everyone.”
Robert Kennedy Jr., while acknowledging ideological differences with Trump, emphasized that their values overlap in certain areas, such as food security and the fight against chronic diseases. However, Kennedy’s decision to support Trump has sparked mixed reactions, especially within his own family, with some of his siblings calling the choice “a betrayal of family values.”
Despite their mutual support, Trump has yet to reveal what role Kennedy might have in a potential administration, though Kennedy hinted that he could tackle the epidemic of chronic diseases. Trump also announced that, if victorious, he would establish an independent presidential commission on the attacks against presidents and candidates, including his own, with the goal of releasing the remaining classified documents on the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
The alliance with Kennedy could prove crucial for Trump, especially in swing states where Kennedy’s support could make a difference. While polls credit Kennedy with only 3-4% of the national vote, these votes could be decisive in a close race. The game is more open than ever.
On the other side, Kamala Harris, fresh from the Democratic Convention in Chicago, now faces a decisive phase of the campaign. With a lead in the polls and a flood of donations, Harris must focus on substance, preparing for the televised debate on September 10 with Trump, an event that could change the course of the race.
Harris has promised to cut taxes for the middle class, build three million new homes, and halt rent increases, but now she faces pressure to explain in detail how she intends to finance these initiatives and address the country’s most pressing issues, such as immigration, climate change, gun violence, and crime. Her nomination acceptance speech, broadcast from the Democratic Convention, attracted more viewers than Trump’s, marking a symbolic but important victory in the battle for audience. At the same time, it is necessary to underline that, despite over 30 days since she started her electoral campaign, she has never granted interviews to newspapers and television.
In the coming months, Harris will face a series of challenges, including the need to win states that were considered lost during Joe Biden’s campaign, such as North Carolina, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia. Harris is ready to travel to Georgia next week, but she plans to reduce travel to focus on preparing for the debate with Trump.
Jen O’Malley Dillon, Harris’s campaign chair, admitted that it will be an extremely tight race, but Harris is trying to present herself as the candidate of change, despite her role in the Biden administration. The Democratic candidate has already invested nearly $400 million in advertising through the fall, aiming to present her agenda and overshadow Trump.
In her nomination acceptance speech, Harris promised to be a “president for all Americans,” appealing to independent voters and Republicans opposed to Trump. She also harshly criticized her rival, calling him a “man of little seriousness” and warning that his return to the White House would have serious consequences.
On the issue of immigration, Harris promised to reform a system she considers failing, rejecting the idea of playing politics with the country’s security. On the economic front, she pledged to cut taxes for families and the middle class, seeking to capitalize on the enthusiasm generated by her candidacy.
Despite the enthusiasm, critics continue to argue that Harris offers little concrete information on how she will achieve her goals, a point on which Republicans are focusing their attacks. Anyone can promise to change the world, but in a country in crisis like the United States of America, what is promised must be backed by possibilities and facts. As the BBC explained, Kamala Harris is not very truthful either. A small example: Harris said that during the Biden administration, in which she was vice president, inflation fell below 3%. True, but it is also true that inflation under Biden reached 9%, and even the current 2.9% is a figure that the Trump administration never touched; on the contrary, it was always below that.
Meanwhile, Trump continues to try to regain ground, and the endorsement of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could be a turning point in his campaign, especially in swing states. However, it remains to be seen how much this support will actually translate into votes.