Biden Gets Absolutely Wrecked in CNN’s Debate Flash Poll — 67 Percent Say Trump Won

Joe Biden was wrecked by former President Donald Trump in CNN’s post-debate flash poll.

Before the debate, 45 percent of debate watchers said they thought Biden would win, compared to 55 percent for Trump.

When asked about their confidence in each candidate to lead the country, 14 percent of the debate watchers said they had “a lot” of confidence in Biden, 29 percent said “some,” and a 57 percent majority said “none.”

Asked about Trump, 36 percent said they had “a lot” of confidence, 20 percent said “some,” and 44 percent said “none.”

Here are the takeaways from CNN’s flash poll results about the debate >>> pic.twitter.com/czpjnkr0WR

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) June 28, 2024

Biden’s performance was so bad that the liberals on the post-debate panel had to admit it was awful.

Reuters even ran the headline, “A ‘disaster’: Biden’s shaky start in debate with Trump rattles Democrats.”

“About halfway through the debate, a Democratic strategist who worked on Biden’s 2020 campaign called it a ‘disaster,’” the report stated.

Biden spent nearly a week studying and preparing for the debate, while Trump stayed on the campaign trail.

The second debate will be hosted by ABC News in September. The network has not yet announced moderators for that debate.

The post Biden Gets Absolutely Wrecked in CNN’s Debate Flash Poll — 67 Percent Say Trump Won appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Biden’s Debate Catastrophe May Be His Last

Biden’s Debate Catastrophe May Be His Last

But not because the Democrats remove him.

The first presidential debate of 2024 might also be the last—or at least, the last between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. His voice weak and memory failing, Biden performed so poorly that putting him on stage was pure sadism and, for his party, tantamount to suicide. Biden isn’t too old for a second term; he’s too old for his first. 

Trump is as old as Biden was in 2020, but he’s sharper than Biden was then, and by comparison with today’s Biden the ex-president seems like a brash bronze colossus. Trump was so confident that he wandered into minefields that would have been hazardous if he was facing any opponent more competent than Biden. Trump’s abortion answer was predictably tangled, emphasizing states’ rights but also the radicalism of the Democrats’ support for late-term and even partial-birth abortions—yet if, as Trump implied, those 8- and 9-month procedures are obvious to all as infanticide, they presumably should be banned by whatever level of government is necessary, with the federal government stepping in if states permit such horrors. Of course, if that’s true, then those for whom the humanity of the unborn is apparent even before the third trimester would be justified in calling for the federal government to overrule liberal states’ laws in other cases, and abortion wouldn’t remain a state matter at all. 

Yet pro-lifers who are displeased by Trump’s answers weren’t left in any doubt about how bad Biden would continue to be if he wins re-election. He wants to re-nationalize the issue in order to permit abortion everywhere. While single-issue abortion-rights voters will surely stick with the president for that reason, Trump’s triangulating will let him keep results-oriented pro-lifers while also giving him a chance of winning over voters on either side of the issue who are satisfied with a state-by-state approach. Roe was overturned in the first place not thanks to the efforts of pro-lifers alone, but thanks to originalists and federalists working with pro-lifers to overturn a decision wrong in method and substance alike. Trump’s approach keeps the victorious Dobbs coalition together.

Biden, by comparison, is touted by his supporters as a master of policy minutiae, but last night he often struggled to hold his train of thought in the middle of a sentence, leading to a disastrous gaff early in the night—“we finally beat Medicare,” he announced—that was echoed by another halting blunder when discussing the entitlement in his closing statement. Democrats have insisted with growing desperation in recent weeks that Biden really is still mentally competent, the latest iteration of this line, heavily promoted days before the debate, being that deposed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy had “admitted” that Biden was still lucid in all their policy discussions. Before that, the Democrats’ mantra was “don’t believe your eyes” when photos and videos showed Biden appearing to wander off in the midst of a meeting with foreign leaders. Whatever value Biden might have reaped from such campaigns was more than wiped out by his own hushed, stumbling words and fazed look throughout the debate. The man is not dealing with a senior moment or two; he’s fading into senility, and no one can claim he’ll be more vigorous or cogent four years from now.

Until last night, many ambitious Democrats might have been content to see the Biden-Harris ticket go down to defeat, clearing the way for the party to make big gains in the 2026 midterms—with Trump rather than Biden in the White House—and leaving the field for the 2028 nomination wide open, without the burden of a second-term Biden record as a millstone around the nominee’s neck. Politics is a long game, and a party can make long-term advances from short-term sacrifices, even in presidential elections. But Biden now appears so feeble that there’s a dire danger he could start to drag down his party’s entire ballot. A blowout loss for Democrats in the House and Senate, and a lousy performance in state elections, would make 2024 so bad that a predictable 2026 pendulum swing away from Trump and the GOP might not be enough to restore the Democrats to dominance. Would-be future Democratic nominees like California’s Governor Gavin Newsom and Michigan’s Governor Gretchen Whitmer now have to fear that Biden will leave the party so shattered that their own ambitions might be jeopardized. To be sure, until now Democrats running for the U.S. Senate this year have been outperforming Biden in battleground-state polls. But if Biden remains as much of an embarrassment as he was last night, the party as a whole is at risk.

Is there time for Biden to resign from office or refuse the party’s nomination in August? Would letting Kamala Harris ascend to the top of the ticket actually lead to any better result than sticking with Biden? Could even a white woman like Whitmer, to say nothing of a white man like Newsom, shove Harris aside and deny the nomination to the black woman who’s next in line? The answer to all these questions is still, most likely, “No.” Disposing of Biden at this late date would only make the party seem all the more ridiculous, when it has no choice but to run on the record it inherits from Biden anyway. Harris will not step aside quietly, and no politician as calculating as Whitmer or Newsom would favor the odds of winning in November after the agony of deposing Biden and thwarting Harris, only to be left with less than three months to mount a presidential campaign. It’s a kamikaze mission.

The Democrats are most likely stuck with Biden, and if he goes, Harris will take his place. Four years ago the party made the bet that Biden, an avuncular figure whose decrepitude was masked by the restrictions COVID imposed on campaigning, could beat Trump as a figure of stability and nostalgia—Biden would remind voters not only of the placid Obama-Biden era but also of such Irish-ish Democrats past as Bill Clinton and John F. Kennedy. The working-class white voters who made Trump president in 2016 would defect to Biden in numbers significant enough to cost Trump the Rust Belt, and with it the presidency. The plan worked, only from that moment on, Democrats were stuck with a man who evoked the right memories but whose own memory was deteriorating by the day. The price of victory in 2020 would be defeat in 2024—unless Democrats could succeed in convincing a timorous GOP to inflict another Mitt Romney on itself, or failing that a bold but unpopular orthodox conservative.

The GOP elite would have cooperated with the Democrats in that. But the voters stayed loyal to Trump, and now he appears to be on track to win more states than he did in 2016. That’s not just because Biden is old. It’s also because Biden’s record is painful and humiliating to most Americans: Inflation is painful, the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan and Biden’s floundering response to the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza has been humiliating, as has his administration’s inability to get the border under control even for the sake of winning an election. 

The voters who backed Trump in this year’s primaries, and who have stayed true to him since 2020, were rewarded last night. He was in prime form, emphasizing two of the three themes that made him a tribune for a new populism in 2016. He made immigration restriction the issue of the night, and he rejected the interventionist, internationalist consensus in foreign policy. He was in no sense soft on Vladimir Putin, yet he insisted that NATO presents a raw deal for America, and that Europe is capable of paying for its own defense. Trump was also unabashed about celebrating the tax cuts and regulatory reductions of his first term, despite Biden’s attempts to demonize tax relief as something only benefiting the rich. The former president likewise didn’t back down from his proposal for a wide 10 percent tariff, though industrial strategy wasn’t so prominent as foreign policy or immigration in his debate remarks.

Trump reminded everyone in the wide coalition that has supported in the past of why he was their choice, and he drew a contrast between his record in office and Joe Biden’s so stark that voters who simply want to return to the way things were before COVID have every reason to cast their ballots for the GOP ticket this time. Trump didn’t have to make Biden’s age an issue; Biden did that all by himself. What Trump did was to paint the ugliness of the Biden era in the harshest hues possible. Biden could call Trump a liar, but Americans have felt, as well as seen, the truth for themselves. And the dismal truth about Biden’s record is as plain as the diminished capacity of the president himself.

The post Biden’s Debate Catastrophe May Be His Last appeared first on The American Conservative.

INSANE VIDEO: Biden Tells Watch Party Crowd ‘I Wanna Go Home With Ya!’ — Before Turning Back to Crowd and Walking Off

In a moment of total insanity, even for Joe Biden, he told the watch party crowd after the debate, “I wanna go home with ya,” before turning his back to the crowd, handing the microphone back to the host, and leaving the stage.

The incident took place at a campaign watch party in Atlanta.

CNN cut to the watch party but pretended the incident had never happened after returning to their panel.

BIDEN: “I wanna go home with ya!” pic.twitter.com/yvjm9pKUaK

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) June 28, 2024

Joe Biden at a post-debate rally:

“I want to go home with you!” pic.twitter.com/ykhm5Nj8Gm

— Conservative War Machine (@WarMachineRR) June 28, 2024

Biden’s debate performance was so stunningly bad that the CNN panel asked each other if he realized how badly he had done just before cutting to a feed of the watch party.

CNN also quoted Democratic operatives as saying, “It’s hard to argue that Biden should be our nominee.”

The second debate will be hosted by ABC News in September. The network has not yet announced moderators for that debate.

The post INSANE VIDEO: Biden Tells Watch Party Crowd ‘I Wanna Go Home With Ya!’ — Before Turning Back to Crowd and Walking Off appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Andrew Yang Calls on Democrat Party to Switch Out Biden for New Candidate in Response to Debate Performance

Former Democrat presidential candidate Andrew Yang has called for the Democratic Party to switch out Joe Biden for a new candidate in response to his debate performance.

Yang ran for president in 2020 but dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed Joe Biden.

During Thursday night’s presidential debate, Yang posted to X, “Guys, the Dems should nominate someone else – before it’s too late. #swapJoeout.”

Guys, the Dems should nominate someone else – before it’s too late. #swapJoeout

— Andrew Yang (@AndrewYang) June 28, 2024

“Look I debated Joe 7 times in 2020. He’s a different guy in 2024. #swapJoeout,” Yang wrote in another post.

Look I debated Joe 7 times in 2020. He’s a different guy in 2024. #swapJoeout

— Andrew Yang (@AndrewYang) June 28, 2024

“What’s Joe Biden’s superpower? That he’s a good guy who will do the right thing for the country. In this case, that’s stepping aside and letting the DNC choose another nominee,” Yang added.

What’s Joe Biden’s superpower? That he’s a good guy who will do the right thing for the country. In this case, that’s stepping aside and letting the DNC choose another nominee. #swapJoeout

— Andrew Yang (@AndrewYang) June 28, 2024

In the post-debate discussion on CNN, the hosts all seemed panicked and conclusive that Biden had lost the debate.

Following his failed presidential bid, Yang also ran for mayor of New York — but was unsuccessful in that endeavor as well.

The post Andrew Yang Calls on Democrat Party to Switch Out Biden for New Candidate in Response to Debate Performance appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

When it Comes to the U.S.-Mexican Bilateral Relationship: It’s About the Border

When it Comes to the U.S.-Mexican Bilateral Relationship: It’s About the Border 

Leveraging the border—not promoting trade or foreign assistance—should be the core of the next president’s Mexico strategy.


Credit: Anna Moneymaker-Pool/Getty Images

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo faced a migrant crisis on the southern frontier, he did not hesitate to play his best card. Negotiating with Mexico’s Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard in November 2018, Pompeo minced no words. 

“Marcelo, here’s the deal,” the secretary recounted in his memoirs, “if in fourteen days State and DHS can’t return nearly every single asylum claimant to Mexico, we are going to completely shut down the Mexican border.”  

It was a classic border leverage moment that got results. Under pressure, Mexico’s President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) put aside his deeply held personal antipathy towards the gringos and immediately agreed to the “remain in Mexico” policy.  The Mexican president’s interest, above all, was protecting profits from legal commerce moving north.  AMLO’s quixotic ideological notions about the “human right to migrate” were tossed aside in a heartbeat. 

That moment established the central principle for our next president in managing complicated U.S.–Mexican relations: No diplomatic tool commands Mexico’s attention better than closing the border. With over 100,000 American deaths from fentanyl yearly and literally millions of illegal migrants crossing the border under the Biden administration, there should be no debate on that matter. By gatekeeping our southern border, a new president can, and must, leverage Mexico’s greatest national asset—i.e., its legal access to cross the U.S. land frontier—to compel our proud and stubborn neighbor’s security cooperation.  

Secretary Pompeo helped to prove the wisdom of this strategy. That’s why it was disconcerting to read Mr. Pompeo in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, in which he sounded more like a former Bush or Obama secretary of state than Trump’s. Pompeo’s concern in the WSJ article was not the border, but instead micromanaging governance issues inside Mexico that could affect the future of the U.S.–Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).  

Mr. Pompeo fears that AMLO, and later President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum, are engaging in Mexican domestic policies that will threaten USMCA renewal in 2026. While those concerns, in the abstract, are certainly valid, American security policymakers need to be planning and advocating a Manhattan Project–style endeavor to secure and control the border. To that end, they should also be asking larger questions, such as, what actually is the role of USMCA in helping to leverage the Mexicans to action in addressing the catastrophic bilateral security situation?

USMCA may or may not be integrated into the solution, but too many American businesspeople want to separate U.S.–Mexican commerce from bilateral security concerns.  It is the same short-sighted approach that underlay U.S.–China commercial relations for three decades, until Washington finally recognized the folly of that strategy.  Mexico is obviously not China, but it presents real security concerns that the American business community tends to ignore.

This business attitude, as typified by the WSJ, seems to be that commercial growth in trade is always good no matter the unanticipated consequences for U.S. national security. 

It is, of course, certainly possible that corruption and criminal impunity inside Mexico might be contained, or even become diminished, as bilateral economic enterprise expands. The three-decade NAFTA record, although accompanied by massive economic growth in Mexico, indicates that was not the case.

It is just as likely that Mexico’s corruption and organized crime problems may continue to move north and further infect American institutions. Americans need to put aside their own hubris to consider that possibility. What is certain is that Mexico’s underlying transnational crime and corruption rot has shown no signs of improvement, no matter how much bilateral trade expands.  

Pompeo’s WSJ article, in raising concerns about USMCA, harkens back to an outdated American policy vis-a-vis our southern neighbor that overvalued the impact of U.S. foreign assistance in making Mexico’s shaky democratic institutions function better. 

For example, Pompeo denounces AMLO’s plans to change the Mexican constitution to allow for the popular election of judges. Most American conservatives would also see this proposal as a bad idea, because it will likely help move the courts to the political left.  

That said, it is not as if the country’s current judicial system actually functions. Mexico does not have an independent judiciary that reliably resolves private disputes for ordinary Mexicans. Foreign investors do not litigate in Mexico courts; they insist on arbitration. The criminal courts are even more of a disaster. 

Not sounding at all like the Trump administration’s realpolitik practitioner, but more like John Kerry, Pompeo incredibly writes this on the Merida Initiative:  

[AMLO’s] judicial reform proposal would also undercut key U.S. efforts in Mexico. Since 2008, when funds began to flow to the Merida Initiative, a first-of-its-kind bilateral security program to combat drug trafficking and organized crime, the U.S. has invested billions to build an independent and competent judicial branch in Mexico.

Pompeo must be aware that the Merida Initiative, the heart of the Bush and Obama administration’s Mexico policy, ended in abject failure. The American effort under Merida to remake all of Mexico’s corrupt judicial system was fundamentally unrealistic from the start, on the order of trying to build from nothing a national army in Afghanistan. Moreover, AMLO denounced and ended cooperation under the program years ago. 

Yet Pompeo writes, “AMLO’s plan to have judges elected would toss away almost two decades of progress with the stroke of a pen.” Progress?  Americans should not deceive ourselves. Not only did Merida fail; Mexico’s security situation worsened with bloody cartel wars as U.S. assistance programs stumbled along ineffectually for years.

Merida was, in fact, a mini-Afghanistan in U.S. bilateral cooperation in Latin America, as measured by wasted resources and the resulting security position of both countries. Today, significant U.S. =Mexican joint operations do not exist, beyond AMLO trying to help the Biden administration camouflage the movement of illegal migrants.   

I recall my own personal frustration, working as a U.S. diplomat in Mexico on Merida projects and trying to cooperate with local court and police officials, whom we knew were under immense organized crime pressure. We were building on sand. Our Mexican partners were simply trying to survive; their families were vulnerable, while they all tried to live and work in geographic territory thoroughly controlled by the local criminal cartel. All this was just a handful of miles from the Rio Grande.

The lesson of Merida is how difficult this kind of security and development assistance inside Mexico actually is. Even Pompeo writes that an amazing one third of Mexican territory is under cartel control. Washington’s regular habit of just dumping vast financial resources on the problem is a successful strategy neither in Mexico nor Ukraine. 

Washington policymakers who expect that more U.S. foreign assistance better deployed in Mexico will move the needle are blind to the evidence. There may be moments when nimble and limited U.S. engagement inside Mexico can be constructive—e.g., sharing intelligence, training technicians, and taking in extradited criminals—but large security projects and strategies must be Mexican. Leveraging the border will concentrate Mexican thinking. 

The same realpolitik skepticism should pertain to notions that robust bilateral trade will both improve Mexican living standards and force good governance onto the country’s corrupt institutions. Arguably, NAFTA might have contributed to the former, but it failed miserably on the latter. 

The next president’s way forward with Mexico will likely be met by calls to reprise past questionable policies, but foreign assistance and bilateral trade will not bring about the security cooperation the U.S. desperately needs from Mexico.

Pompeo, a genuine patriot who served his country in uniform and at Foggy Bottom, is grappling with this. One hopes he will advocate closing the border again when that moment comes. 

The post When it Comes to the U.S.-Mexican Bilateral Relationship: It’s About the Border appeared first on The American Conservative.

Biden Claims Putin Wants a “Soviet Empire”

In tonight’s CNN-hosted debate, incumbent U.S. President Joe Biden stated that in his opinion Putin “has made one thing clear” and that is that he wants to “re-establish” the “Soviet Empire.” Biden also stated that Putin wants “all of Ukraine” and will take Poland and other NATO countries after Ukraine.

Biden’s rhetoric, particularly concerning the phrase “Soviet Empire,” harkens back to the Cold War, especially the 1980’s with Reagan’s “Evil Empire” speech. The attempted projection of the largely ideological struggle of the Cold War onto the territorial conflict over the Donbas, particularly given that the current conflict was largely driven by the debate over NATO enlargement, a debate where Russia has played a primarily reactive role, highlights a disconnect between the Cold-Warrior rhetoric of Biden and the 21st-Century reality on the ground. 

Also noteworthy, given that Biden is using rhetoric taken from the 1980s, is that he first ran for the Presidency in 1988, almost 40 years ago, and just as a leopard cannot change his spots, the President may not be able to extricate himself from the geopolitics of epochs past. 

Biden: “Putin is a war criminal.” He wants to re-establish the Soviet empire. Putin won’t stop at Ukraine and will go after NATO countries. We have added new NATO members. #CNNDebate

— Jackson Richman (@jacksonrichman) June 28, 2024

Biden also stated that, in his opinion, “Putin is a war criminal.”

The post Biden Claims Putin Wants a “Soviet Empire” appeared first on The American Conservative.

Sad Ending: Jill Biden Helps Dementia Joe Off Stage After Debate (Video)

This was the saddest moment of the evening: Jill Biden came over to husband Joe at the end of the debate. As President Trump walked away unaided, Jill took Joe by the hand and slowly led him as he stiffly took the few steps from the podium to the edge of the stage where she then helped Joe down the four or five stairs in front so he could talk with the CNN debate moderators, Dana Bash and Jake Tapper.

Video clips posted by Greg Price.

OMFG

Jill Biden had to lead Joe Biden off the debate stage. pic.twitter.com/lgzC9ZSt4K

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 28, 2024

Close up version shows Joe Biden clearly having trouble taking the first step. He swings a stiff leg down as Jill holds tight:

Zoomed in video of Jill Biden leading Joe off the debate stage.

This is insane. pic.twitter.com/QJhkfetdWz

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 28, 2024

The Biden campaign told reporters midway through the debate that Joe had been suffering from a cold the past few days. It was reported that while he was secluded the past week for debate prep at Camp David that Joe went through sessions where he stood for ninety-minutes to get him in shape for the debate.

NEW: Two sources familiar with the situation say “President Biden has a cold.”

— Kelly O’Donnell (@KellyO) June 28, 2024

Thursday morning, the Trump campaign posted a video warning that Joe’s frail condition could lead to Kamala Harris succeeding him in office:

Trump Campaign Releases New Ad — “Who Is Laughing Now” pic.twitter.com/eDnSJVUH6S

— Team Trump (Text TRUMP to 88022) (@TeamTrump) June 27, 2024

Former Biden White House press secretary Jen Psaki told MSNBC after the debate that a winning campaign does not send the vice president out to do spin right after the debate:

JEN PSAKI: “You don’t send the Vice President of the United States out if you won the debate, typically.”

Said while the MSNBC chyron notes that Kamala Harris is coming up… pic.twitter.com/VSBm8lZiHD

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) June 28, 2024

Harris also did debate cleanup on CNN, “It was a slow start.”

More from VP Kamala Harris on Biden’s debate performance:

Anderson Cooper: Obviously you can’t honestly say, I mean, can you say that you are not concerned at all having watched the President’s performance tonight?

Harris: “It was a slow start. That’s obvious to everyone –…

— Susan Crabtree (@susancrabtree) June 28, 2024

The post Sad Ending: Jill Biden Helps Dementia Joe Off Stage After Debate (Video) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Biden Challenges Trump’s Tariff Plan

On Thursday, President Joe Biden and the former President Donald Trump engaged in their first presidential debate. 

Trump advocated for his plan to implement a 10 percent tariff on all imports from abroad. He maintained that this move will not drive prices higher, but will actually stop other countries from “ripping us off.”

Biden became defensive after the discussion of the proposal, saying that the proposed tariffs would increase cost of living for Americans across the board. 

Trump in turn called Biden a “Manchurian candidate” for China and pointed out that Biden kept Trump’s China tariffs in place. Biden notably also increased tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

Trump: “He gets money from China. He’s a Manchurian candidate.”

😂😂 pic.twitter.com/198JRT5hnG

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 28, 2024

The post Biden Challenges Trump’s Tariff Plan appeared first on The American Conservative.

“Biden Has a Cold”: Campaign Tells Reporters Midway Through Disastrous Debate Biden Has Been Sick for Days

The Biden campaign put word out to reporters midway through Thursday night’s presidential debate in Atlanta that Joe Biden has been sick with a cold for the past several days. Biden started the debate looking dazed, with his voice shot and telling an inexplicable blatant lie that no U.S. troops died around the world during his presidency.

Biden spent the past week in seclusion at the presidential retreat Camp David, Maryland where he underwent debate prep with a team of sixteen aides who had him practice standing for ninety-minute sessions. No pictures or video was released by team Biden while he was hidden from the press and public. The first time Biden was seen was when he flew Marine One from Camp David to Joint Base Andrews just outside the nation’s capital Thursday afternoon to board Air Force One for the flight to Atlanta.

Biden looked healthy then and later when he mingled with supporters in Atlanta (awful to think he gave his cold to all those people):

President Biden departs Joint Base Andrews en route to Atlanta for the first 2024 presidential debate tonight pic.twitter.com/Anrpoq1JwN

— JM Rieger (@RiegerReport) June 27, 2024

An electrified crowd erupts into chants of “four more years” as President Biden greets supporters in Atlanta ahead of tonight’s debate pic.twitter.com/HDOUi5BvJb

— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) June 27, 2024

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) might want to see his doctor:

Here in Atlanta welcoming President @JoeBiden as he arrives for the debate. I’ll be live tweeting from CNN debate center so follow along.

See you all soon from the debate! pic.twitter.com/ISvkYEeq5p

— Robert Garcia (@RobertGarcia) June 27, 2024

NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell posted at 9:50 p.m. EDT, midway though the ninety-minute debate, “NEW: Two sources familiar with the situation say “President Biden has a cold.””

NEW: Two sources familiar with the situation say “President Biden has a cold.”

— Kelly O’Donnell (@KellyO) June 28, 2024

CBS News followed at 9:57 p.m., “A source familiar with the President’s debate prep confirms that Biden has had a cold for the past few days (via @nancycordes)”

A source familiar with the President’s debate prep confirms that Biden has had a cold for the past few days (via @nancycordes)

— aaron navarro (@aaronlarnavarro) June 28, 2024

The Trump campaign responded, “Trump campaign senior advisor responds to reporting that President Biden has a cold. “How convenient. He spent last ten days on vacation.””

Trump campaign senior advisor responds to reporting that President Biden has a cold.

“How convenient. He spent last ten days on vacation.”

— Rachel Scott (@rachelvscott) June 28, 2024

A National Review writer noted colds could be fatal for a man in Biden’s condition, “Kelly O’Donnell reports that President Biden’s team is telling journalists that Biden “has a cold,” which certainly makes sense given how shot his voice sounds. The problem, of course, is that Biden looks like the next cold he catches could well send him to the boneyard.”

.@EsotericCD: Kelly O’Donnell reports that President Biden’s team is telling journalists that Biden “has a cold,” which certainly makes sense given how shot his voice sounds.

The problem, of course, is that Biden looks like the next cold he catches could well send him to the…

— National Review (@NRO) June 28, 2024

The post “Biden Has a Cold”: Campaign Tells Reporters Midway Through Disastrous Debate Biden Has Been Sick for Days appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Trump’s Odds of Winning Election Surges to New High on PredictIt Market in First HOUR of Debate

Former President Donald Trump’s odds of winning the 2024 election surged to a record high on the PredictIt betting market during the first hour of the presidential debate.

PredictIt is a large online political prediction market, often called a “stock market for politics.”

The odds of Trump winning the election increased by over 10 percent before 10 p.m. EST; the debate began at 9 p.m.

BREAKING: The odds of Donald Trump winning the 2024 Presidential Election surge to a new high of 63%.

Since the debate started, odds of Trump winning the election have surged by over 10%.

Odds of President Biden winning a second term have fallen from 48% to 37%.

Markets… pic.twitter.com/Y08GWO8oZu

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) June 28, 2024

The Kobeissi Letter, an industry-leading newsletter on global capital markets, reported during the debate:

BREAKING: The odds of Donald Trump winning the 2024 Presidential Election surge to a new high of 63%.

Since the debate started, odds of Trump winning the election have surged by over 10%.

Odds of President Biden winning a second term have fallen from 48% to 37%.

Markets believe Donald Trump will be our next president.

Bloomberg explained in 2022 that to skirt the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, bets on PredictIt are limited to $850. However, the platform often runs multiple variations of the same question, so users can have much more riding on a single outcome.

“The site’s markets are mostly suggested by the traders themselves, some of whom are current or former campaign staffers who might be well positioned to answer questions such as ‘How many tweets will Donald Trump post from Nov. 20 to 27?’ or ‘When will Anthony Scaramucci’s role as White House communications director end?’” the report explained.

PredictIt co-founder John Phillips told the paper that the prevalence of politicos helps explain why the site so often gets it right.

“Prediction markets function as well as they do and are as accurate as they are … because these markets, like any markets, attract people with superior information,” he said on a podcast in 2016. “In the financial stock market, it’s called inside information.”

The post Trump’s Odds of Winning Election Surges to New High on PredictIt Market in First HOUR of Debate appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.