Given the dramatic fallout from the first presidential debate on June 27th that resulted in Joe Biden dropping out, there his a great deal of media hyping about the one to be held tomorrow (Tuesday the 10th) at 9:00pm Eastern time. The usual expectations game is being played, with each side boosting expectations for the opponent so that anything other than a boffo performance can be portrayed as a loss.

I will watch it but do not expect anything dramatic to happen. Kamala Harris seems like someone who is disciplined and on message and is unlikely to get rattled. Creepy Donald Trump will be his usual self, constantly lying and making all manner of unfounded assertions. Harris has already preemptively said that she expects creepy Trump to lie a lot and I hope she says so again early and often during the debate. What I will be watching for is how unhinged creepy Trump’s attacks will be.

Harris has issued a set of policy proposals that she is likely to refer to during the debate, if asked about specifics. It also compares those proposals with ones in what she calls ‘Trump’s Project 2025 Agenda’, referring to the document put out by the right wing Heritage Foundation. You can see discussion of what the document says here.

About two-thirds of authors and editors involved in Project 2025’s plan served in the Trump administration. HUD Secretary Ben Carson, acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller, deputy White House chief of staff Rick Dearborn, former OMB director Russ Vought, and top DHS official Ken Cuccinelli contribute chapters, just to name a few. And John McEntee, the White House personnel director who purged officials viewed as disloyal to Trump, has a key role in collecting staff recommendations for the project. (CNN reported that at least 140 former Trump administration officials were in some way involved in it.)

Trump also praised the Heritage Foundation at an April 2022 event, calling it a “great group” that would “lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do” when “the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.” (Obviously, that conflicts with his recent claim that he has “no idea who is behind” it and that he has “nothing to do with them.”) Much of the plan also seems crafted to appeal to Trump specifically, and there’s tons of stuff in it that he openly supports.

This document has become seen as so toxic that creepy Trump has tried to disassociate himself from it but that is proving hard for him to do since so many of its authors are closely allied with him, and his running mate weird JD Vance has spoken favorably of the ideas and authors. Whether creepy Trump likes it or not, Project 2025 has been hung around his neck as his agenda. I am curious to see how far he will go during the debate to explicitly repudiate the document.

You can be sure that the moderators will ask the question that they always ask when Democrats propose things that improve the lives of ordinary people, and that is how those will be paid for. This question rarely arises when it comes to expanding the already bloated defense budget or giving tax breaks to the rich. Harris has already been asked this and she answered well, saying that the increased growth created by her proposals will create the required revenue, and that we need to measure the return on investments more broadly. (Thanks to Tabby Lavalamp for the link.)

Is that true? Who knows? Economic predictions are notoriously difficult. But that is the standard answer given by Republicans when asked how their tax cuts for the rich will be paid for and that answer tends to be accepted with little or no question. That kind of bogus deficit hawkery that Sam Seder refers to in that clip tends to surface when Democrats propose new ideas, and needs to be stomped on.