Can Trump deliver the knockout punch?
Let me be honest up front. Every one of my predictions about Mr. Trump have turned out to be wrong. In other words, I did not think that he’d be the nominee and he is. He has also come back several times in this campaign after self-inflicted wounds, like the flight with the Khan family or the arguments over Miss Universe.
Nevertheless, Trump comes into debate #3 as the underdog with some amazing opportunities to knock out Mrs. Clinton:
1) Our old friend “quid pro quo” has made his appearance in the campaign. We don’t know for sure but it smells like it. My good guess is that Chris Wallace will bring this up and Trump should be ready to talk about it. He can say something like “quid pro quo” is just a fancy Latin term for “something for something” or I give you this and you give me that.
2) There is more and more evidence that the FBI overlooked wrongdoing by Mrs. Clinton, specially in light of the previous point as The Federalist reported:
Did Kennedy — a man who owes his high position to the Clintons — engage in this conversation on his own? Was he asked to do it? For months, law enforcement had attempted to contact him, and he ignored their inquiries. Why, according to FBI documents, did Kennedy only reach out to make this request?
What’s even more curious is that FBI Director James Comey didn’t consider this event — or, for that matter, the litany of other actions Clinton’s lackeys took to protect her — as a sign that there was, at the very least, an intent to influence the investigation.
This is, of course, just the latest revelation in the Hillary email scandal. It’s worth remembering that the illegal email setup was only inadvertently discovered through a congressional investigation into Benghazi. The server itself existed to evade transparency.
3) Media bias is real. My friend Barry Casselman called it a “A Media Coup D’Etat?“, the post that Newt Gingrich has mentioned a couple of times on Fox and ABC News. There is another story of journalists “showering” Clinton with cash. This is what Trump should be talking about. Voters are fair and this kind of one-sided coverage smells bad, specially at a time when the public has such a low opinion of the media.
Add ObamaCare, more troops to Iraq, the U.S. economy, lousy job creation and other tangible issues that the voters want to hear about.
So it’s up to Trump. He can win this thing but only if he talks about issues and stops talking about vote fraud in Philadelphia. Of course, that there is vote fraud in the inner cities, but it will matter little if Mr Trump wins the votes between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Memo to Mr Trump: You can win this thing if you can tell us about your plans for voters and expose the corruption that Mrs. Clinton represents.