The New York Times has always been a weaselly accommodationist to Trump’s nonsense, putting a positive spin on his words and downplaying his general incoherence. That pattern might be ending — they just ran an article titled Trump’s Speeches, Increasingly Angry and Rambling, Reignite the Question of Age. It’s scathing.

Mr. Trump frequently reaches to the past for his frame of reference, often to the 1980s and 1990s, when he was in his tabloid-fueled heyday. He cites fictional characters from that era like Hannibal Lecter from “Silence of the Lip” (he meant “Silence of the Lambs”), asks “where’s Johnny Carson, bring back Johnny” (who died in 2005) and ruminates on how attractive Cary Grant was (“the most handsome man”). He asks supporters whether they remember the landing in New York of Charles Lindbergh, who actually landed in Paris and long before Mr. Trump was born.

He seems confused about modern technology, suggesting that “most people don’t have any idea what the hell a phone app is” in a country where 96 percent of people own a smartphone. If sometimes he seems stuck in the 1990s, there are moments when he pines for the 1890s, holding out that decade as the halcyon period of American history and William McKinley as his model president because of his support for tariffs.

It’s brutal. I’m not used to seeing this kind of analysis of Trump’s speeches from the NY Times.

He does not stick to a single train of thought for long. During one 10-minute stretch in Mosinee, Wis., last month, for instance, he ping-ponged from topic to topic: Ms. Harris’s record; the virtues of the merit system; Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s endorsement; supposed corruption at the F.D.A., the C.D.C. and the W.H.O.; the Covid-19 pandemic; immigration; back to the W.H.O.; China; Mr. Biden’s age; Ms. Harris again; Mr. Biden again; chronic health problems and childhood diseases; back to Mr. Kennedy; the “Biden crime family”; the president’s State of the Union address; Franklin D. Roosevelt; the 25th Amendment; the “parasitic political class”; Election Day; back to immigration; Senator Tammy Baldwin; back to immigration; energy production; back to immigration; and Ms. Baldwin again.

It’s interesting, because the NY Times is not written for us — it’s the paper of record for lawyers, stock brokers, wealthy Long Island nepo babies, the aspiring upper class, etc. Maybe the Times has detected a shift in the biases of their readership, which they are quick to pander to.

It could be a good sign of troubles for the lyin’ grifter ahead…

We all know that the one thing that Donald Trump is most sensitive about is the size of the crowds at his rallies — don’t you dare impugn his popularity! Kamala Harris derailed him at their debate by mentioning that lots of people leave his rallies early, and he had to deny that. Well, the Washington Post had reporters investigate, going to his rallies and asking the people trickling out early why they were leaving.

The Republican presidential nominee consistently draws large, enthusiastic and rowdy crowds to his rallies and other campaign events, and at nearly all of them, another trend is clear: Scores of people leave early.

Most stay. But Trump often runs late and goes long, prompting many to bow out because of other responsibilities, priorities or, sometimes, waning patience and interest, according to Washington Post interviews and observations across dozens of events. Some said they wanted to beat traffic or had work the next day. Others complained about sound quality. One man wanted to go home to his French bulldog. Another needed to get home to his daughter. A third had a Yorkie with him that started acting out. A fourth man said his phone died.

Trump is in denial.

“Honestly nobody” leaves the rallies, Trump said at a recent town hall in Flint, Mich. At an event in Walker, Mich., Trump insisted “nobody ever leaves,” before adding, “and when they do, I finish up quick, believe me.” Trump then suggested that it looks like people are leaving their seats because they want to come up and take photos with him.

He thinks the people just love to hear him ramble on for hours.

Trump repeatedly has resisted entreaties from advisers and allies to cut down on his speeches. “They want a show. They want two hours,” Trump said this year to an ally who suggested shorter speeches. Like others, the ally spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation.

The former president has told advisers that after people stand for so long and wait for so long, he needs to give them something more than a “boring policy speech,” one person who has spoken to him said. The speechwriters craft remarks that are usually designed to go for 60 to 90 minutes, a campaign adviser said, but they know Trump will veer repeatedly off the script.

I’ve only heard short excerpts from Trump speeches — I think two hours of an old man babbling off topic would drive me insane, and I’m never attending one of these rallies. However, I encourage him to continue them, because the repetitive nonsense about sharks and batteries and windmills and eating cats and dogs are the only soundbites that are going to make the news, and they do make him look demented.

Because I knew our media would give me a short, objective, non-judgmental response this morning.

That is accurate. No pinocchios. It is true, if the Republicans deport 12 million people, that will make more housing units available for purchase or rental. That actually is a kind of housing proposal.

Politics is personal, as Rudy Giuliani’s daughter, Caroline Rose Giuliani, demonstrates. She’s voting for Kamala Harris because Trump wrecked her father.

As Rudy Giuliani’s daughter, I’m unfortunately well-suited to remind Americans of just how calamitous being associated with Trump can be, even for those who are convinced he’s on their side. Watching my dad’s life crumble since he joined forces with Trump has been extraordinarily painful, both on a personal level and because his demise feels linked to a dark force that threatens to once again consume America. Not to disregard individual accountability in the slightest, but it would be naive for us to ignore the fact that many of those closest to Trump have descended into catastrophic downward spirals. If we let Trump back into the driver’s seat this fall, our country will be no exception.

She still cares about her dad! She wants his descent to stop.

I know that some people may question whether I truly care about my father, since another Trump presidency could theoretically mitigate some of the problems he’s facing. It distresses me to think that my dad might even wonder this. But if you zoom out, Trump being the president was the worst thing that ever happened to my dad, to my family, and to our nation’s modern history. The consequences will only be more severe—and irreversible— a second time around. Thanks to the extremist Supreme Court he stacked, Trump would take office with full immunity: no checks on his power whatsoever. If the president isn’t going to be subject to the law like every other citizen, which remains incomprehensible to me, then our president had better have a moral compass. A 34-time convicted felon who’s been found liable for sexual abuse, tries to steal elections, and demeans people based on their race, sexuality, disability status, and gender falls remarkably short of the bar we must set for ourselves as a country. Fortunately, we have another choice in this election: a life-long public servant who has spent her career upholding justice and fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves.

Listen to your daughter, Rudy.

Hurricane Helene has passed by now, leaving wreckage in its wake.

If you suffered any losses, you know how you can fix it? Close your eyes! Project 2025 wants to close the National Hurricane Center and NOAA because they keep telling people about these kinds of natural disasters.

“The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated,” reads the introduction to Project 2025’s chapter on proposals for the Department of Commerce (of which NOAA is an agency). It goes on to simply say “Break up NOAA” as the first sentence in the section covering that agency.

Project 2025 calls NOAA and the National Weather Service “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry,” and “harmful to future U.S. prosperity.”

See, the damage due to Helene was simply alarmism. If you don’t know about it, it didn’t happen.

Their idea of prosperity, though, is to privatize and commercialize weather forecasting. Make people pay for their warnings and safety.

Oliver also unearthed a 2018 interview with AccuWeather’s Founder and Executive Chairman Joel Myers, describing what he felt was a success story for privatized-weather forecasting, but which actually stands as a cautionary tale:

“Union Pacific: We told them that a tornado was heading to a spot. Two trains stopped two miles apart, they watched the tornado go between. Then unfortunately it went into a town that didn’t have our service and a couple dozen people were killed. But the railroad did not lose anything,” Myers said.

Success: a couple dozen people died, but the railroad company didn’t lose any money.

AccuWeather’s Founder and Executive Chairman Joel Myers is no relation, and if he is, I disown him.

Cool. Very Darwinian.

Yes? If a boy needs a tampon, what else are you going to do? Let him bleed?

You know what’s fun? Put JD Vance in front of a friendly interviewer and let him talk. In this case, He sat down with a Breitbart drone and felt confident to just unfurl his freak flag and sing.

I actually think we have to destroy the universities in this country. They get too much money, they have too much power, I don’t think they do anything good.

He also claims that universities teach students to hate your country and hate your family. I had to quickly review my syllabi to see if I included those points…oops, no, I guess I’m going to have to spend my weekend doing revisions.

There’s so much hatred of education and learning in that interview…I’d go on, but he’s such a prolific source of insanity that The Cut listed a guide to his most unhinged public statements. It doesn’t even include his DESTROY ALL UNIVERSITIES talk.

And he’s just the vice president candidate. CNN compiled a list of 12 blatant lies Trump said in the last month.

The New Tolerance Campaign is a weird little right-wing organization founded by Log Cabin Republicans who are claiming to be “tolerant”, but their entire raison d’etre is to hate Muslims and anything “woke”. They are also hating on gay people who think Palestinians don’t deserve to be killed.

They have a Hate Map page that lists all the organizations across the country that they hate. Antifa, they hate. Muslim student associations, they hate. Socialists, they hate. Multiple chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace, they hate (because they’re anti-Semitic, obviously). You get the idea. This organization is run by people so twisted by hatred for Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular that they have put every faintly left-wing organization on a List.

They’ve also come up with a stunt.

The New Tolerance Campaign has secured $1,000,000 to underwrite expenses for an LGBTQ Pride Parade in Gaza or the West Bank!

Oh, wait. It’s not a publicity stunt. We know this because they say so.

This isn’t a joke. It’s not a publicity stunt. Our offer is real.

It’s absolutely insane, though, and reflects a lack of understanding and empathy on the part of the New Tolerance Campaign. They are incapable of comprehending the idea that people can simultaneously recognize that people living in a conservative, patriarchal culture or following a religion that is antithetical to LGBTQ values are not on their side, and that those people don’t deserve to die for their beliefs. You can believe that the best approach to dealing with a group that contains many misogynists and homophobes is education, coexistence, and, you know, tolerance, while recognizing that they do not share your goals.

I don’t know what the New Tolerance Campaign expects to demonstrate with this PR stunt (which is what it actually is). That LGBTQ people are actually aware that some people have ideological values that harm LGBTQ people? I think they’re already very aware of that. But maybe, just maybe, they’re capable of empathizing with other groups that are being oppressed and persecuted, and are able to allow them to live.

Maybe they’re also smart enough to realize that the West Bank and Gaza are free-fire zones for the IDF, and taking a walk with banners and flags is a good way to get a bomb dropped on you. Also maybe they can see that this is a relatively trivial cause to throw in the face of people who are being bombed, who might resent a stupid parade through the ruins of their homes.