Comment on GOP Deploys Cash to Crack Democrats’ Blue Wall in Senate

Wall Street Journal: “Vance might have the heavier lift during their only planned face-off. That is partly because former President Donald Trump was widely viewed as losing his Sept. 10 debate against Vice President Kamala Harris in what for now was their only scheduled meeting.” “The senator also faces a greater challenge because several polls have shown him with the lowest favorability rating of the four candidates on the two presidential tickets.” “If Vance can significantly trip up Walz, that would be helpful for the GOP in trying to change a narrative that in recent weeks has shown Harris with a slight polling lead—often within the margin of error—over Trump.” Washington Post: Vance and Walz face contrasting pressures in much-anticipated debate. CNN: What Walz’s and Vance’s past debates may reveal about Tuesday’s high-stakes matchup.

“Americans’ reliance on government support is soaring, driven by programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “That support is especially critical in economically stressed communities throughout the U. S., many of which lean Republican and are concentrated in swing states crucial in deciding the presidential election.

“A group aligned with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is planning to pour tens of millions of dollars into an effort to crack Democrats’ ‘blue wall’ with less than six weeks left to go before Election Day,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “In working to flip seats currently held by Democrats, the Senate Leadership Fund plans to spend $67.5 million on TV, radio and digital ad reservations in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.” “The super PAC, run by close McConnell allies, will add $28 million in outside spending to Republicans’ effort to unseat Sen.

Nate Cohn: “While a relatively quiet political environment makes us more confident in the state of the race, there are still no guarantees.” “If the polls are off as they were two or four years ago, the outcome might be very different than the polls suggest today. Either candidate could win decisively.” “With this much uncertainty, the polls don’t suggest that either candidate is a clear favorite.

From the New York Times editorial board: “This unequivocal, dispiriting truth — Donald Trump is not fit to be president — should be enough for any voter who cares about the health of our country and the stability of our democracy to deny him re-election.”

Politico: “Trump’s return would present an even greater threat than it did last time, given the fact that the world has even fewer years to course-correct before the planet’s warming reaches tipping points that would erode quality of life for billions of people.”