In these days of high anxiety I get a lot people asking, “So who do you think will win?” To which I first say, “I don’t know. No one does.” But then, if they’re truly interested, I add, “Given a straight popular vote, Harris should win by at least four million. But with the Electoral College, where the choices of 150 million people are left in the hands of 70,000 – 80,000 oddballs who don’t ever pay much attention to this stuff, this could go either way.”

If I think they’re really interested I throw in the conventional wisdom that Democrats always need something like 2.1% more popular vote than Republicans just to make up for the built-in disadvantages the Electoral College. And then, if their eyes haven’t completely glazed over and they’ve wandered back to check on some not-too vital football game, I offer the fairly scientific opinion that this election is a matter of “Boys v Girls”.

Poll after poll shows a startling gap in enthusiasm, with men preferring Trump by 20% or more over Harris and women in some cases supporting Harris by closer to 30% over Trump. Some of this can be attributed to nothing more complicated than standard-issue gender identification, with the added understanding that many men, no matter who the candidates, will never vote for a woman. “Too emotional”, y’know.

But in 2024, studies continue to show that men, particularly younger, so-called “blue collar” men are steadily falling behind their female counterparts in terms of education and earning levels. Currently, over 60% of college degrees are being earned by women, a dramatic shift from even 20 years ago. The explanations for this are murkier. But one worth considering is that more men than women failed to react effectively to the great shift from a physical labor-to-information econmy. Put another way, men have held to the view that they were entitled to good-paying, low-education jobs. Work that required nothing more of them than muscle and the willingness to put in eight hours a day.

In my mind I add a couple other dimensions to this very real trend. One, an anecodote admittedly, is a line from a book by retired CIA director Michael Hayden. In his view, after analyzing data from post-election surveys in 2016 he concluded that the most reliable indicator of a Trump voter was someone still living within 25 miles of where they grew up. Whether far rural Kansas or Staten Island, New York.

A more recent data point shows the wide-and-getting-wider gulf between more and less-educated voters, with the former migrating towards Democrats and the latter toward (Trump-era) Republicans.

And to this you say, “This is supposed to surprise me?”

And I get that. But the “within 25 miles” business is interesting, especially when you see these Trump rallies so ften set in rural-to-far-exurban areas. No doubt there are a few hedge fund/private equity bros in those MAGA crowds, cheering on a looming era of carnivorous deregulation. But the — fair — guess is that the seething, beating heart of these gatherings are men, mainly, who have never ventured far from where they grew up.

And why? Because they liked small town, rural life and fresh air too much to think of leaving in pursuit of a higher (economic) standard of living? Or because life in or closer to a large city was simply too scary and intimidating a prospect to them? Being as places like big “liberal” cities are full of people and cultures too alien and uncomfortable for them to understand … or so they’re told by the perpetually reaffirming sources they trust most?

Now obviously there are a significant number of women at MAGA rallies. No group of any kind is monolithic. But as an old movie critic, I can tell you plenty of women tag along with their boyfriends/husbands to see lunk-head, ultra-macho “action” films like “Rambo” and “Death Wish” back in the day or disposable junk like “Hard Kill” today. Those gals, loyal by tradition, “support” their men, come what may whatever they think.

The point here is that where a profound shift has taken firm hold among women in terms of making an an effort to gain more education, adapt to the modern world and achieve professional-level standards of living, men are backsliding. Instead of getting more training after the factory or mine closes and maybe moving to where work pays more, they remain in place, close to what is familiar, working minimum-wage jobs … and growing ever more bitter toward “the elites” and/or “government” for failing them, as though they were entitled by race and gender to the same comfortable life the recall their fathers having.

So ,,, in my mind this election will come down to which of these groups, angry, self-pitying men or ambitious, self-motivated women gets up off their butts and votes.

.

I strongly suspect that 20, 30, 50 years from now last night’s debate will be remembered best for … cats. For a 79 year-old American presidential candidate angrily asserting that he saw something “on TV” … about something on Facebook ... where someone was talking about something someone’s daughter somewhere heard … from a friend … that might have happened; namely that “migrant” darkies in Ohio are eating other people’s dogs and cats.

Jeeezus … .

Whatever else can be said conclusively about the face-off between Trump and Kamala Harris, including the indisputable facts that she was prepared, poised and looked presidential while he was, as usual, glum, angry and frequently incoherent, its that Trump’s act never plays well outside the thick MAGA bubble. By the time the 90 minutes were up and Trump had done his usual dystopian riffing, a lot of people other than just smug elitists like me, feet up on the ottoman, sipping a beverage, had to look around and ask, “What the hell country is he talking about?”. The United States? Today? A country in “tremendous decline”, in an absolutely miserable condition, “Venezuela on steroids”, overrun by “millions of hardened criminals”, with prices up “70-80-90-%” and “nuclear war” being the next sound we hear?

Good god, man. Seek help. Take the meds Melania is pushing on you. (Ok Donny, be careful with that. Have someone else test them first, maybe Eric, because with you and that pre-nup you gotta be careful.) But good lord, talk about hysterical. Just what everyone wants in a commander-in-chief.

We all know that his fear and horror shtick plays with the sad, low information goobers and goob-ettes following his rallies around the country. But out in public? in the real world? In front of millions of people who, correctly, think a guy ranting about “migrants” eating your cat is probably having a stroke? It just sounds … you know … weird.

By the time ABC cut to a commercial at the one hour mark, the vote was in. Harris cleaned Trump’s clock. With remarkable ease. Another example of what being a good student, preparing for the job at hand and having a full understanding of who exactly your opponent is can do for you.

I have no idea what this smackdown will do for “undecided” voters. But Democratic strategists have to have revitalized confidence that Trump has no other act to work with. He’s got nothing but same very old, very tired, very weird shtick. Period. There is no policy to jab back with. Asked about the nine years he’s been promising an alternative to Obamacare, “in the coming weeks” he said what? That he has, “a concept of a plan”? What in god’s name does that even mean?

It’s no wonder Harris challenged him to another debate before last night’s match. The man remains the preposterous, incompetent fool he’s always been. Out in a farm field with flags a-flyin’ and red hats a-bobbin’ the crowd is thrilled to believe Democrats are killing babies after birth. But in front of cameras beaming him back to people who can read and know the world isn’t flat, that Ted Nugent isn’t the greatest patriot and musical act of our era and that they aren’t barricading their front doors against a zombie horde of Haitian cat eaters … he sounds 101% batshit.

I plead with some Nobel-winning behavioral scientist/social psychologist to explain to me how 70 million people living in the United States in the 21st century can believe anything he says, including the part about eating cats.

As we all knock back our meds in preparation this week’s debate we’re well aware that “we” in general agree on next to nothing. But maybe … maybe … we can all accept that asking the two candidates, both incumbents in a way, to clarify/explain things they’ve said and done in and out of The White House is fair play.

I’ve seen several lists of possible questions CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash could ask. Allow me to add a few more.

For Trump:

“In recent campaign appearances you have talked at great length about the life and death choice of either being electrocuted by a sinking electric boat or eaten by a shark. Millions of Americans share this same concern. What is your final decision on this matter and what then is your advice, as Commander in Chief, to concerned residents of Hays, Kansas?”

“During your presidency you promised legislation jump-starting ‘Infrastructure Week’ with a laser-like focus on your part to improve America’s roads, bridges, ports and such while also creating millions of high-paying blue collar jobs. By one count you promised ‘Infrastructure Week’ no less than 41 times. Unfortunately we can’t find a date when any such legislation was ever introduced or when you signed it in to law. Please provide our audience with those dates.”

“In February of 2020, a month before COVID hit with full impact in the United States you told reporter Bob Woodward that the virus was “really deadly stuff” while at the same time telling the public there was nothing to worry about You said that it was just “a couple people coming in from China” and that it would disappear by Easter. After that a million Americans died. Do you understand what “deadly” means? Can you define it for us? And as a bonus question, did you ever have ultra violet light and/or bleach inserted up your rectum?”

“In addition to being convicted of 34 felonies for election and business fraud you have also been judged a ‘rapist’ for assaulting E. Jean Carroll. You have lost two defamation cases related to this matter and are on the hook for over $83 million in damages. Yet you still insist you never met Carroll and that she is making this all up. Please tell us here and now sir, whether you still think Ms. Carroll is a liar?”

“Do you still routinely cheat at golf?”

“You recently proposed eliminating the federal income tax and replacing it with a 10% tariff on everything imported into America. This would mean, for example, at everything at WalMart would cost 10% more. Who, in your mind, bears the cost of tariffs? Mexico? Woke blue cities? Sneering liberal elites? E. Jean Carroll? Also, would this tariff apply to the Trump ties, gold sneakers and other items you are currently selling?”

“You have had at least five in person conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but have refused to release any information much less recordings or transcripts of those meetings. You did hough once say that, “I could care less”, if such transcripts were released. Nevertheless, House Republicans quashed a subpoena to force the American translator for your private two-hour Helsinki meeting to disclose what was discussed. Can you promise us that that translator/note taker is now free to reveal what you and Mr. Putin discussed? Okay, why not?”

“According to an analysis of your own tax records no one person in the United States lost more money from 1985 to 1994 than you. Over $1 billion. Casinos under your guidance went bankrupt. Casinos, sir. Then, during your presidency the federal deficit ballooned more than under all but two presidents, George W. Bush and Abraham Lincoln, both of whom were forced to finance wars. Considering this and the fact that no New York City banker has been willing to give you a loan for over 25 years can you point to anyone other than yourself or say, Stephen Miller, who thinks you know two shits about how to run a lemonade stand much less the American economy?”

Finally, for President Biden:

“Why are you so old?”