INEVITABLE: Hitler tunes in to video of Trump’s MSG rally:

WHERE WE ARE:

ROGER KIMBALL: Trump calls for America’s New Golden Age at Madison Square Garden: What we saw at his Sunday rally was the opposite of divisive.

No one with an open mind — you can even scratch the adjective — no sentient sapiens period can have witnessed Donald Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally without a frisson of awe. Even the most tireless Trump supporter must be a little jaded with Trump’s rallies by now. Just as in 2016, they have been building to a crescendo in both size and frequency. And even avid politicos might be forgiven for thinking they had been there, done that.

But Sunday’s rally at Madison Square Garden was something different. Perhaps other rallies were as large. We’re told that the MSG event boasted a capacity crowd of nearly 20,000 with more than 70,000 lined up to view the festivities on screens set up outside. I gather Trump’s second Butler, Pennsylvania, rally broke 100,000, as perhaps did a few others.

But it wasn’t just the size of Sunday’s rally that made it special. It was also the location, the vibrancy of the speakers and that ineffable, electric feeling that follows closely on impending victory. The Democrats have tried fitfully to claim that Trump is “exhausted” and perhaps not up to the task of being president. Meanwhile, Harris abruptly departed a rally in Detroit after only six minutes while Trump’s daily regime would fell a man half his age.

Madison Square Garden is situated is the belly of the deep-blue beast. How many decades has it been since a Republican won New York in a presidential race? (The answer is four: Reagan won New York in 1984.) Then why was Trump expending precious resources in the state? Why did he hold a rally in the Bronx this summer, on Long Island a month ago? Because the times they are a-changin’. . . .

Will Trump take New York? I am assured that that is unlikely. I note, however, that many of the wise people who say that told me it was impossible only a couple of months ago. Reality does count for something, and the reality is that Trump speaks to a core constituency not only in New York but also across the country. Call it the constituency of normality, the non-trans, pro-capitalist, pro-American demographic that understands that men cannot be women, that you cannot have a country without a secure border and that big government is essentially at odds with individual liberty and general prosperity.

I say that “Trump speaks” to this population, but the red-pilled former Democrat investor Bill Ackman was right when he noted that he now supports Trump not just because of the man himself but also because of his “team” versus Team Harris. In the left corner we have Kamala Harris, “Tampon Tim” Walz, Liz Cheney and assorted other neocons and globalists. In the right corner we have Trump, his running mate J.D. Vance, Elon Musk, RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, Vivek Ramaswamy and assorted former Democrats like Bill Ackman. Which is more impressive? Which is more likely to save the country? Take your time.

Among my favorite moments in Sunday’s rally was J.D. Vance’s naughty suggestion that Kamala Harris’s new slogan ought to be “Nothing comes to mind,” after her response when a friendly newscaster asked her how her policy positions differed from those of Joe Biden. “Nothing comes to mind,” she said, a phrase that Trump deployed with stiletto-like efficacy in a brief video montage during his speech.

A second favorite moment came in Tucker Carlson’s talk when he noted that: 1) Republicans were going to win and 2) the people would be forearmed against Dem claims that Kamala, a supremely unpopular candidate whom no one voted for had really won by garnering 88 million votes (or whatever). The Dems put that over in 2020 at the height of Covid. That ship has sailed.

People are tired of the bullshit. And the bullying.

“IS THE NEW YORK TIMES A LIBERAL NEWSPAPER? OF COURSE IT IS:” Ben Shapiro Does an Epic Reverse Uno on ‘The NY Times’ and Exposes Their Lame October Surprise.

Tucker Carlson also received an identical request from the same Timesperson:

So the L.A. Times, the WaPo and now the New York Times have all decided to commit ritual seppuku in the last two weeks of the election? I hope it was worth it for all concerned.

(Classical reference in headline.)

OPEN THREAD: Monday, Monday.

TONIGHT ON THIS WEEK’S EPISODE OF HBO’S VEEP:

THE NEW SPACE RACE: DIPLOMACY ROLLS ON. Chile and Cyprus sign the Artemis Accords. “The two countries bring to 47 the number of nations that have signed the Artemis Accords since 2020. Four of those countries have signed in October.”

JEFF BEZOS IN THE WASHINGTON POST: The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media.

In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from and just as important as the first.

Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.

Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, “I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.” None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision, and it’s the right one. Eugene Meyer, publisher of The Washington Post from 1933 to 1946, thought the same, and he was right.

Good for him, though the way to restore credibility is to be credible — which you do by being honest — and not by taking shots at “unresearched podcasts.” The Post’s journalistic record in recent years, and the records of its newspaper brethren, do not justify a high-horse position. You want to be trusted? Stop lying, and stop covering up for Democrats and Democratic administrations.