Guest post by Matt Kane – republished with permission

As election night approaches, armchair campaign managers across America are attributing the allegedly tightening presidential race to poor decision-making by the Trump campaign. This baseless speculation is likely to intensify as we get closer to election night. However, the irony in the “tight race” narrative being pushed by the mainstream media is that President Trump is actually winning. Bigly.

The same outlets that for years covered for Biden’s cognitive decline, then pretended to be shocked by his debate performance, are now insisting that Kamala is surging. However, this narrative was set long before she officially became the nominee, as a crucial step in the Biden coup was ensuring there was another puppet ready to take the torch. Once she received the seal of approval from Obama and his allies, the mainstream media rebranded her as a formidable, game-changing candidate, despite her well-deserved reputation as the least popular vice president in American history based on approval and disapproval ratings. Kamala’s uninspiring performance in the 2020 primary further disproves the possibility of her sudden “surge.” She received zero delegates and was soundly defeated by Biden, who went on to become the least popular president in history. All demographics have grown increasingly disillusioned with the Biden administration, and given her central role in it, it’s naive to believe that Kamala is bucking this trend.

Kamala played a key role in implementing the policies that have made Biden historically unpopular. The top issues for voters right now are the economy and inflation, foreign affairs, and immigration. Kamala cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of the inflation-worsening Inflation Reduction Act. She has also contributed to the deterioration of foreign affairs by encouraging Ukraine to seek entry into NATO, fully aware that this could directly involve the U.S. in the war with Russia. Additionally, as the designated Border Czar, she bears responsibility for the unmitigated disaster at the southern border.

Kamala would be a weak candidate even if she were running unopposed. When factoring in President Trump as her opponent, the tight race narrative becomes even less believable. Trump is currently more popular than he was four years ago when he garnered the most votes ever for a sitting president. The current harsh realities have fueled an even greater longing to return to his America First agenda. As a result, Trump has increased his standing across all demographics, most notably with Democrats thanks to recent endorsements from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard, both formerly prominent members of the party. If Kennedy and Gabbard—figures no one ever imagined would align with a Republican—can make the change, it’s likely that many of their numerous “average” American Democrat supporters will follow suit.

A key reason the Kamala propaganda goes unchallenged is close polling. However, polls showing President Trump with a slim lead or trailing within the margin of error actually spell good news for him, as he was historically under-polled in both 2016 and 2020. In fact, prior to Biden’s withdrawal, state-specific polls showed Trump leading in all the swing states from the past 12 years, as well as in states like Minnesota and Virginia. He even led in some New Jersey polls and was within the margin of error in New York in another. The Biden-for-Kamala swap has undoubtedly shifted the narrative coming from the out-of-touch media, but most people respond to this coverage with scoffs and agitation rather than allowing it to alter their voting intentions, given Kamala’s association with the Biden administration.

Additionally, much attention is being given to the personalities of the candidates. Last week, Fox & Friends asserted that “if Trump sticks to policy, he’ll win, but if it’s about personality, he’s in trouble,” which is perhaps one of the worst of their many awful takes to date. President Trump arguably has an even greater advantage in personality than he does in policy—a margin that is already substantial. He commands every room he enters, fills arenas, and is met with thunderous applause at every major sporting event he attends. He is an American icon, a larger-than-life figure comparable to Babe Ruth, Marilyn Monroe, or Elvis. His displays of tremendous fortitude, bravery, and resilience in the face of assassination attempts, indictments, and more have only added to his legend.

In contrast, Kamala Harris is a career politician who advanced through undesirable means. She comes across as perpetually nervous, unconfident, inaccessible, and out of touch with the common person. Every time she goes off script, her media allies scramble into damage control mode. Meanwhile, every time Trump goes off script, he creates another iconic, viral soundbite. Trump’s sentencing in his sham criminal conviction on September 18th will also likely benefit him, serving as another reminder of the lawfare being waged against him.

While some prominent voices in the conservative movement believe that promoting a “Trump is losing” narrative will prevent voter complacency, this logic is dangerous. Given all that has unfolded over the past four years—both to our nation and to President Trump personally—no one inclined to vote for Trump will be staying home on election day, even if polls show him with a 100% chance of winning. In the event the election is stolen (an unfortunate possibility), if the public believes it was a legitimately tight race, there will be less mobilization to lawfully and constitutionally contest the results. Therefore, it would be more beneficial for the vast majority of the nation to be aware of the improbability of a Kamala victory, making a steal less likely.

Trump is winning, and he always has been. Just as he was always leading the primary, despite claims that Republicans would give him a run for his money before he set numerous records and clinched the nomination in record time. He beat Hillary Clinton despite outlets giving him single-digit chances as late as election eve. He did even better in 2020, until 3 AM on November 4th, when the subsequent days of endless mail-in ballots ensued until Biden was crowned. He has been winning the 2024 race since the moment he left office, thanks to the destruction that followed his departure. He was trouncing Biden and is likely to fare even better against his Marxist replacement.

If there were ever times in our nation’s history when public perception was accurately depicted by the media, this certainly isn’t one of them. The vast majority of people vote for what is in their best interest, and President Trump clearly holds the winning argument on all the most important issues compared to the Harris-Biden administration. Yet, the close race narrative persists, despite no visible enthusiasm for Kamala Harris outside of the Democrat Party elite. If you want to gauge the pulse of the nation yourself, attend both a Trump and a Kamala rally in a “tossup” state, and you will witness the enthusiasm gap firsthand.

No matter how hard the media attempts to detach Kamala from all her failures, voters won’t forget when they enter the voting booth on election day with the chance to move on from her reign. That’s why President Trump isn’t on pace to squeak out an electoral college victory, nor is he on pace to simply replicate his comfortable 2016 map. Instead, in a fair election, he could win a historic, referendum-style landslide. Only when we step away from our TV sets, think logically, and talk to our “average” American neighbors do we realize this and discover that the tight-race narrative the media is feeding is impossible.

Matt Kane graduated from Stony Brook University with a bachelor’s degree in political science. His work has been posted by President Trump and published by Human Events, Real Clear Politics, American Thinker, and AMAC. Follow on X/Twitter: @MattKaneUSA, Truth Social: @MattKane

The post As Election Night Approaches – Trump Is Winning appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

In the latest attempt to hoodwink the American public, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz sat down with Dana Bash for what was supposed to be a transparent interview about their policies and plans if Harris were to ascend to the presidency.

Instead, what unfolded was a masterclass in political double-speak, half-truths, and outright lies, all carefully curated to mislead voters.

Kamala Harris made it clear during the interview that she has no intention of moderating her extreme positions. When asked if her values had changed, she proudly declared, “My values have not changed.” And that’s exactly the problem.

Harris’s values include support for mass amnesty for illegal immigrants, ending cash bail for criminals, decriminalizing illegal border crossings, banning fracking, and even abolishing private health insurance.

One of the most blatant lies Harris told during the interview was regarding her stance on fracking. She claims she won’t ban fracking, despite having enthusiastically supported such a ban in the past.

The hypocrisy is staggering. What changed, Kamala? The polls? Or was it the reality that banning fracking would devastate key swing states like Pennsylvania?

Dana Bash: I want to get some clarity on where you stand on some key policy issues. Energy is a big one. When you were in Congress, you supported the Green New Deal. In 2019, you said, “There is no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” Fracking, as you know, is a pretty big issue, particularly in your must-win state of Pennsylvania. Do you still want to ban fracking?

Kamala Harris:  No, and I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020, that I would not ban fracking. As Vice President, I did not ban fracking. As President, I will not ban fracking.

Dana Bash: In 2019, I believe, at a town hall, you were asked, “Would you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking on your first day in office?” and you said, “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking. So yes.” So it changed in that campaign?

Kamala Harris: In 2020, I made very clear where I stand. We are in 2024, and I’ve not changed that position, nor will I going forward. I kept my word, and I will keep my word.

Dana Bash: What made you change that position at the time?

Kamala Harris: Well, let’s be clear. My values have not changed. I believe it is very important that we take seriously what we must do to guard against what is a clear crisis in terms of the climate.

And to do that, we can do what we have accomplished thus far, the Inflation Reduction Act, what we have done to invest by my calculation, over probably a trillion dollars over the next 10 years, investing in a clean energy economy.

What we’ve already done, creating over 300,000 new clean energy jobs. That tells me, from my experience as Vice President, we can do it without banning fracking. In fact, Dana, excuse me, I cast the tie-breaking vote that actually increased leases for fracking as Vice President. So I’m very clear about where I stand.

But the questioning didn’t stop there. Bash put Harris on the spot over her shifting stance on fracking.

Harris had previously stated in 2019, “There is no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” but now she claims, “I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would… pic.twitter.com/bkT30GRQoP

— The Vigilant Fox (@VigilantFox) August 30, 2024

In one of the more absurd moments of the interview, Harris tried to paint the economic disaster of “Bidenomics” as a success.

Bash pointed out that many Americans remember better economic times under President Trump when groceries were cheaper, and housing was more affordable. Harris, rather than addressing these concerns head-on, deflected by blaming the pandemic and Trump’s management of it.

She claimed that the Biden-Harris regime had brought inflation “down” to a higher level than it was when they took office.

This is simply not true. Inflation was 1.4% when President Trump left office, and it hasn’t been back to that level since Harris and Biden have been in power. The worst inflation crisis in over three decades has cost American families thousands of dollars in increased living costs, and Harris’s response was nothing short of insulting.

Dana Bash: You talked about, you call it the opportunity economy. You are well aware that right now many Americans are struggling. There’s a crisis of affordability. One of your campaign themes is “We’re not going back.” But I wonder what you say to voters who do want to go back when it comes to the economy, specifically because their groceries were less expensive and housing was more affordable when Donald Trump was President.

Kamala Harris: Well, let’s start with the fact that when Joe Biden and I came into office, it was during the height of a pandemic. We saw over 10 million jobs were lost… The economy had crashed, in large part, all of that because of mismanagement by Donald Trump of that crisis. When we came in, our highest priority was to do what we could to rescue America. And today, we know that we have inflation at under 3%.

Then something remarkable happened. CNN unexpectedly asked a good question, pressing Harris on economic issues.

Bash brought up Harris’s campaign slogan, “We’re not going back,” and asked, “I wonder what you say to voters who do want to go back when it comes to the economy,… pic.twitter.com/38ABc5XZeQ

— The Vigilant Fox (@VigilantFox) August 30, 2024

Dana Bash: So you have been Vice President for three and a half years. The steps that you’re talking about now, why haven’t you done them already?

Kamala Harris: Well, first of all, we had to recover as an economy, and we have done that. I’m very proud of the work that we have done that has brought inflation down to less than 3%.

Dana Bash: “You have been Vice President for three and half years. The steps that you are talking about now, why haven’t you done them already?”

Kamala: We’ve brought inflation “down” to a higher level than it was during President Trump’s administration.

YIKES. pic.twitter.com/qp9f3k7GKN

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 30, 2024

On immigration, Kamala insisted that the record number of illegal border crossings during her tenure had somehow “resulted in a number of benefits.” Benefits for whom, exactly? Certainly not for the American citizens who are footing the bill.

U.S. taxpayers spent $150 billion on illegals last year thanks to Kamala‘s open border.

During their administration, illegal immigrants crossing the border are at a record high.

Dana Bash: Why did the Biden-Harris administration wait three and a half years to implement sweeping asylum restrictions?

Kamala Harris:  Well, first of all, the root causes work that I did as Vice President that I was asked to do by the President has actually resulted in a number of benefits, including historic investments by American businesses in that region. The number of immigrants coming from that region has actually reduced since we began that work.

But I will say this, that Joe Biden and I, in our administration, worked with members of the United States Congress on an immigration issue that is very significant to the American people and to our security, which is the border.

And through bipartisan work, including some of the most conservative members of the United States Congress, a bill was crafted, which we supported, which I support. And Donald Trump got word of this bill that would have contributed to securing our border. And because he believes that it would not have helped him politically, he told his folks in Congress, “Don’t put it forward.” He killed the bill.

Kamala Harris: That bill would have allowed us to increase seizures of fentanyl. Ask any community in America that has been devastated by fentanyl, what passing that bill would have done to address their concern and the pain that they’ve experienced.

Dana Bash: So you would push that legislation again?

Kamala Harris: I just want to ask about— Not only push it, I will make sure that it comes to my desk and I would sign it.

Then came the question about the border crisis—a glaring issue for the Biden-Harris administration.

When Bash asked why it took three and a half years to implement asylum restrictions amidst record illegal border crossings, Harris didn’t hesitate to shift the blame to Trump.… pic.twitter.com/XGipfXnTy0

— The Vigilant Fox (@VigilantFox) August 30, 2024

When questioned about whether she would legalize illegal border crossings, Kamala dodged the question.

Dana Bash: When you first ran, there was a debate. You raised your hand when asked whether or not the border should be decriminalized. Do you still believe that?

Kamala Harris: I believe there should be consequences. We have laws that have to be followed and enforced that address and deal with people who cross our border illegally, and there should be consequences.

And let’s be clear, in this race, I’m the only person who has prosecuted transnational criminal organizations who are trafficking guns, drugs, and human beings. I’m the only person in this race who actually served a border state as Attorney General to enforce our laws, and I would enforce laws as President going forward. I recognize the problem.

The CNN Dana Bash: “You raise your hands when asked whether or not the border should be decriminalized, do you still believe that?”

Kamala refuses to say whether she’d legalize crossing the border illegally pic.twitter.com/E2C3IHiw04

— AJ Huber (@Huberton) August 30, 2024

Bash confronted Kamala with Trump’s accusation of “turning black” for “political purposes.” Kamala deflected, claiming Trump was “recycling the same old tired playbook” before quickly adding, “Next question, please.”

Bash questioned Kamala on Trump’s allegations of “turning black” for “political purposes.”

After a long and awkward pause, Kamala replied that Trump’s using the “same old tired playbook” before saying, “Next question please.”

This is actually a new play that Trump developed for… pic.twitter.com/bLAusjS652

— The Vigilant Fox (@VigilantFox) August 30, 2024

Kamala admitted she has NO REGRETS about covering up Biden’s cognitive decline.

Kamala’s willingness to lie to the American public and conceal the truth about Biden’s fitness for office is a betrayal of her oath of office and a disqualifying act of deception.

She then urged Americans to “turn the page on the last decade of what has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies,” conveniently ignoring that a significant portion of that decade was shaped by her and Biden’s policies.

Dana Bash: Vice President Harris, you were a very staunch defender of President Biden’s capacity to serve another four years. Right after the debate, you insisted that President Biden is extraordinarily strong. Given where we are now, do you have any regrets about what you told the American people?

Kamala Harris: No, not at all. Not at all… And so, one, I am so proud to have served as Vice President to Joe Biden. And two, I am so proud to be running with Tim Walz for President of the United States, and to bring America what I believe the American people deserve, which is a new way forward, and to turn the page on the last decade of what I believe has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies.

Dana Bash: But the last decade, of course, the last three and a half years has been part of your administration.

Kamala Harris: I’m talking about an era that started about a decade ago.

Kamala: “Turn the page on the last decade of what has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies.”

CNN: “The last decade, of course, the last three and a half years has been part of your administration.”

Kamala: “I’m talking about an era.” pic.twitter.com/VJ7lmH7O0k

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) August 30, 2024

Throughout the interview, what was glaringly absent was any acknowledgment of the mess Harris and Biden have created or any substantive plan to repair the damage. Instead, we were treated to a parade of lies, evasions, and a steadfast refusal to take responsibility.

The post Here’s What You Missed in Kamala Harris’ Trainwreck Edited Interview with Chaperone Tim Walz on CNN appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Former President Donald Trump announced a groundbreaking policy on in vitro fertilization (IVF) during his speech at a steel plant in Potterville, Michigan.

In-vitro fertilization (IVF) is an assisted reproductive technology that enables individuals or couples to conceive by fertilizing an egg with sperm outside the body. ​Once an embryo is formed, it is transferred into the woman’s uterus with the aim of achieving a successful pregnancy.

The average cost of an IVF cycle in the United States ranges from approximately $12,000 to $17,000, which may vary based on various factors including location and specific needs of the patient, according to WebMD.

During his speech, Trump outlined his plan to make in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments more accessible to American families, addressing the economic challenges and financial burdens that have plagued the nation under the Biden-Harris regime.

“I’m announcing today in a major statement that under the Trump administration, your government will pay for, or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatment, fertilization for women…” Trump said during the rally.

“Because we want more babies, to put it very nicely. For this same reason, we will also allow new parents to deduct major newborn expenses from their taxes so that parents that have a beautiful baby will be able.”

In addition to covering IVF costs, Trump pledged to allow new parents to deduct major newborn expenses from their taxes.

“We’re pro-family. Nobody’s ever said that before. But the IVF treatments are expensive. It’s very hard for many people to do it and to get it. But I’ve been in favour of IVF right from the beginning,” Trump added.

WATCH:

NEW POLICY ALERT

“I am announcing today that under the Trump administration, your government will pay for or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatment.”

“We want more babies!” pic.twitter.com/ZtsGkNUdl6

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 29, 2024

A reporter pressed Trump on the political nature of IVF and what his administration plans to do if re-elected.

Reporter: “IVF has been an issue that has become political. A lot of people talking about it. What’s the Trump administration going to do when it comes to IVF if you get elected?”

Trump: “Right. Well, as you know, I was always for IVF right from the beginning. As soon as we heard about it—it’s fertilization, and it’s helping women and men and families—but it’s helping women who are able to have a baby.

Some have great difficulty, and a lot of them have been very happy with the results, as you know. And what we’re doing, and we’re doing this because we just think it’s great, and we need great children—beautiful children—in our country.

We actually need them. And we are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment. So, we are paying for that treatment. All Americans who want it?

For all Americans that get it, all Americans that need it. So, we’re going to be paying for that treatment, or we’re going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.”

WATCH:

BREAKING: Trump just announced that his administration will pay for IVF and mandate insurance companies to cover the treatment, allowing couples with fertility issues to have kids

“We are going to be paying for that treatment, so we are paying for that treatment…all Americans… pic.twitter.com/B47eJR1RVO

— George (@BehizyTweets) August 29, 2024

The post Trump Announces Bold New IVF Policy: Government or Insurance Company to Cover All Costs for Aspiring Parents appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Failed Republican presidential candidate and former governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, has landed a new job at Yale.

Christie will teach a new course at Yale titled “How to Run a Political Campaign.”

The new course will be available to Yale’s Jackson School of Global Affairs undergraduate and graduate students.

The course description of the class reads, “When deciding whether to run for any office all of these issues must be confronted in addition to the core considerations of issue positions, fundraising and the most important question of all: If I do win, what do I want to accomplish and what kind of leader do I want to be?”

Christie’s decision to teach a class on how to run a political campaign is quite amusing, considering the former Governor dropped out of the 2016 and 2024 republican primaries after failing to run a successful campaign.

In 2016, Christie received 0.18%  of the vote in the Republican presidential primary, and in 2024, he received 0.63%.

Chris Christie, ex-NJ gov and failed presidential candidate, will teach course on running for office at Yale https://t.co/1nx72WCQpg pic.twitter.com/oJc0ymNQby

— New York Post (@nypost) August 29, 2024

Per The New York Post:

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who suffered two unsuccessful presidential bids, will be joining the Yale University roster this fall to teach a course — on running for office.

The weekly seminar taught by Christie, 61, entitled “How to Run a Political Campaign,” is open to undergraduates as well as graduate students at Yale’s Jackson School of Global Affairs, and will focus on navigating the challenges of running for office in the new “confusing,” political landscape.

“When deciding whether to run for any office all of these issues must be confronted in addition to the core considerations of issue positions, fundraising and the most important question of all: If I do win, what do I want to accomplish and what kind of leader do I want to be?,” the course description reads

Christie served as the Garden State’s governor from 2010 to 2018 and was the US attorney for New Jersey from 2002 to 2008.

Since dropping out of the 2024 presidential race, Christie has refused to endorse Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

READ:

WATCH: Chris Christie Shocks The View Hosts by Announcing He’s Not Voting for Trump or Biden

The post Failed Presidential Candidate Chris Christie Lands New Job appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.