'Hostile to the police'

'Fair election has been an illusion'

'Vote your pocketbook'

'A person who doesn't know what's going on'

the debate did not offer much real information

'The highest in the developed world'

It's reportedly not clear if anything was taken from the home

Moments after the end of the first presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, singer-songwriter Taylor Swift issued her endorsement.  “I will be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the 2024 Presidential Election,” Swift wrote in a post on Instagram Tuesday night. “I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader, and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos,” Swift added, signing the post “Childless Cat Lady.” The signature was a clear dig at Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, Trump’s running mate, who has drawn criticism for claiming that the Democratic Party is full of “childless cat ladies.” Swift is unmarried, has no children, and owns three cats. Swift’s endorsement of Harris comes as no surprise. The singer has made her political leanings clear, much to the disappointment of some of her fans. In fact, Swift may have clearer political views on some issues than the candidate she endorsed.  Asked why she has changed policy positions on issues such as fracking, a mandatory buy-back program for assault weapons, and decriminalizing crossing the border, Harris either could not—or would not—answer during Tuesday night’s ABC debate.  “I know you say that your values have not changed; so, then why have so many of your policy positions changed?” ABC’s Linsey Davis asked Harris.  “So, my values have not changed,” Harris began. “I’m going to discuss every one, at least every point that you’ve made,” she said, before going on to say she would not ban fracking, and then discussing her views on the economy, protecting the vulnerable, Social Security, and Medicare.  “My values have not changed,” Harris said again, without addressing her changes in policy on the border or assault weapons.  Trump spent much of the ABC debate on the defensive, appearing to take the bait in nearly every trap Harris laid for him, from his father’s success as a businessman to the size of his campaign rallies. It was not a boring evening, but it was also not the debate many conservative voters were hoping for. On today’s edition of “Problematic Women,” Reagan Reese, White House correspondent for The Daily Caller, joins the show for a postdebate recap of the night’s biggest wins, losses, and memorable moments.  The post Taylor Swift’s Endorsement of Harris and Other Big Debate Night Moments appeared first on The Daily Signal.

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Wednesday that ABC’s license should be revoked over its alleged bias in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris during Tuesday night’s presidential debate. Trump told the co-hosts of “Fox & Friends” that ABC News debate moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis were “dishonest” for not correcting Harris’ false statements about the Charlottesville riot in 2017, his support for in vitro fertilization, and The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. The former president said the two ABC debate moderators unfairly fact-checked him while allowing Harris to state false and misleading claims. “They’re dishonest and … I think ABC took a big hit last night,” Trump said. “I mean, to be honest, as a news organization, they have to be licensed to do it. They ought to take away their license for the way they did that.” [He explained his recent use of the word “bloodbath” to describe the eventual result of the Biden-Harris administration’s electric vehicle mandate on the auto industry.] “Everybody loved that term because as soon as they heard that word—it is kind of a vicious word,” Trump said. “But, referring to the economy … ‘bloodbath’ is the word I used, and it was fine in that context. They were trying to make it sound like it was a riot or something.” “IVF, I was a leader on IVF,” the former president said, referring to the debate topic of in vitro fertilization. “The IVF, which is in vitro fertilization, I was a leader on that. When I first heard about it, from the very beginning, I was one of the leaders on it and the Republican Party has been a leader on it.” Harris “was trying to say it was the opposite,” Trump said. “The whole thing about abortion, [Muir] said, it was incredible. I think he corrected me about six times, and each time I was right.” Trump Says ABC's License Should Be Yanked Over Debate Moderators' Performance pic.twitter.com/GRjWskZ7I3— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 11, 2024 ABC News’ two debate moderators appeared to repeatedly fact-check Trump while allowing Harris to get away with false claims. Davis, for example, immediately pushed back against the former president as he said some Democratic states allow for late-term abortions and for babies to be killed after a botched abortion. Harris also falsely said that Trump plans to sign a national abortion ban if it reached his desk, though the former president has repeatedly spoken in opposition to such legislation. Muir and Davis did not correct the vice president. The moderators allowed Harris to falsely claim that Trump stated there were “very fine people” on both sides of the riot in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. The liberal site Snopes rated the claim that the former president called neo-Nazis and white supremacists false in June, noting that he said those groups should be “condemned totally.” “[Harris] was using Charlottesville, and everybody, you take a look at [Fox News host] Laura Ingraham, she did it incredibly. [Ingraham] had it totally debunked; in fact, she gets angry when people hear about Charlottesville, when they use that,” Trump told “Fox & Friends.” “Because what they did is they stopped and they didn’t put the following sentence in. And when they put the last sentence in, when it’s all put together, what I said was absolutely perfect,” he said. “And ABC knew that, everybody knew that, frankly. I think they lost a lot of credibility.” The moderators did not fact-check Harris when she alleged that Trump “intends on implementing” The Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025, a conservative policy outline and personnel list to help serve the next Republican president. The Trump campaign has publicly disassociated itself from the initiative. Muir and Davis also fact-checked Trump when he claimed that Haitian migrants are eating pet cats and ducks in Springfield, Ohio, by stating that local police said they have not received any credible reports on the matter. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Trump Says ABC’s License Should Be Yanked Over Debate Moderators’ Performance appeared first on The Daily Signal.

One of the most fiercely contested battlegrounds in this fall’s presidential race won’t remove more than 4 million ineligible names from its voter rolls.  “Wisconsin’s population is a little less than 6 million, with 3.5 million active voters,” Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told The Daily Signal in a written statement. “So why do election officials refuse to clean up Wisconsin’s voter rolls and [instead] allow up to 4.1 million inactive voters to remain, with the potential for fraudulently using those names?” Although Johnson and some other lawmakers contend that unpruned voter rolls create election security holes, the Wisconsin Elections Commission contends that it ensures proper recordkeeping and prevents fraud.  A website of the Wisconsin Elections Commission called Badger Voters numbers “all voters” in the state at 7.7 million. That’s a total of 3.5 million active voters and 4.19 million inactive voters.  Voters listed as “inactive” aren’t eligible to vote in Wisconsin. Residents who haven’t voted for four years and failed to respond to repeated notices from election officials are moved to the inactive list.  But Wisconsin keeps the names on the voter rolls, in contrast to many other states that delete ineligible names. If ineligible names were just deleted, the Wisconsin Elections Commission contends, “There would be no registration history, no participation history, and most importantly, no history of why a record became ineligible.”   But lawmakers contend that keeping the ineligible names on the rolls creates vulnerabilities.  Earlier this year, the former deputy director of the Milwaukee County Election Commission was sentenced to one year of probation and a $3,000 fine after she was convicted of charges in October 2022 that she obtained three absentee ballots and used fake names and Social Security numbers, The Associated Press reported.  The criminal complaint said she used her work-issued computer to obtain three military absentee ballots using fake names and Social Security numbers. Claiming she was trying to make a point,  she sent the phony ballots to a Republican state representative. “In Milwaukee County, an election official created voters but the Wisconsin Elections Commission says they have to keep those names on their list as inactive for metadata with an explanation of why they are inactive,” state Rep. Scott Krug, chairman of the House Campaign and Elections Committee, told The Daily Signal. “They aren’t even real people, but the WEC won’t take anyone off the voter rolls.” Krug said state courts have sided with the election commission in the past. “There has been a conflict over this for a few years about whether we as legislators can order the ineligible names to be removed,” Krug said. “Courts have said we cannot force the removal and it is at the discretion of the WEC.” The Wisconsin Elections Commission referred The Daily Signal to its previous statements on the matter.  “There are two big reasons to retain the records of inactive, or ineligible, voters. First and foremost is that the law requires it. The retention of public records is essential to the maintenance of an open and transparent government,” the commission’s website says.  The commission says the second reason is that “to retain ineligible voter records is to safeguard against fraud.” “The retention of voter history does not make it any easier to commit election fraud. It is no more difficult or easy to change a voter record than it is to create one from scratch. Instead, the retention of historical data helps to safeguard against abuse of the system,” the Wisconsin Elections Commission contends. “If ineligible records were destroyed, the state of Wisconsin would have no voting history. There would be no registration history, no participation history, and most importantly, no history of why a record became ineligible.”   The Associated Press has noted that if a voter’s address has changed, “Wisconsin voters can register online, by mail, in person at their local clerk’s office, or at the polls on the day of an election.” The state has strong voter ID laws, which could counter these electron threats, noted Annette Olson, CEO of MacIver Institute, a Wisconsin think tank. “The Wisconsin Elections Commission will not remove any of those names,” Olson told The Daily Signal. “There are people who are made up that are still on the voter rolls. They are not real. … As long as the [election] clerks enforce the voter ID laws, we should be in good hands.” The post Sen. Ron Johnson: Why Won’t Wisconsin Clear 4 Million Ineligible Names From Voter Rolls? appeared first on The Daily Signal.