HMM:

FACT CHECK: There was no dancing, Beyonce didn’t perform, and Kamala went all schoolmarm on protesters.

ICYMI:

ROGER KIMBALL: Kamala Harris is the worst candidate for president in American history.

Whose fault was it?

That of course is going to be the overwhelming question Democrats will be asking themselves after Kamala Harris loses on November 5.

It is worth stressing that a question can also be an accusation. Cicero reminded us of this in his first oration against Catiline, which opens with more than half a dozen questions spat out like bullets from a Gatling gun. Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? “How long, Catiline, will you go on exhausting our patience?” Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? “And how long will that madness of yours mock us?”

The biased circus concession that we call much of the media has an interest in drawing out the festivities surrounding an election. So in the case of Trump vs Harris, the answer to Cicero’s questions is “as long as possible”.

“The race is neck and neck, it’s just so close, it could break either way.” But by mid-October, everyone knew that the race was not close. Harris finally sat for a few interviews – with 60 Minutes, with Bret Baier, for example. They were catastrophes one and all. It did not help that CBS later edited Harris’s response to make her sound more coherent and then refused to release the unedited transcript of the exchange.

Harris held a “town hall” where she was supposed to answer audience questions off the cuff. But some alert spectator noted that Harris at least appeared to be reading answers off a teleprompter. More embarrassment.

Read the whole thing.

On the flip side, if elected, Trump will really have his work cut out for him, if he wants to become the most authoritarian president in American history:

WELL: Clinton Does It Again: Humiliates Kamala in Front of Crowd, And There’s Nothing She Can Do to Stop Him.

So here’s my theory on what’s happening. With Kamala looking likely to lose already, the Clinton forces are turning on the Obama machine. Ever since he beat Hillary in 2008, the two have been in an uneasy truce. But the knives were always waiting to come out. If Obama’s standard-bearer — and that’s what Kamala is — doesn’t just lose, but goes down in a Dukakis-level defeat, then she, and Obama, will be marginalized within the party — as was Dukakis, who became virtually a pariah.

That’s why Clinton is getting in digs at her, and it’s why Democratic institutions that are under Clinton influence, like the LAT and the WaPo, aren’t endorsing her. It’s all about making sure her loss is humiliating.

Will the Clintons be able to take advantage of this? Maybe, maybe not. But at least they’ll have revenge.

MATT TAIBBI: Note On The Washington Post’s Non-Endorsement: The media ship be sinking.

Around this time last night I read the Levitsky/Ziblatt New York Times editorial about the “Fifth Choice” for stopping Trump, which read like a clarion call to ignore coming bad election news. On the heels of weeks of other catastrophizing editorials, it came as a shock.

Now word comes about stunning industry news of another sort. The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post have declined to endorse either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, which in the case of the Bezos Post especially reads like a decision to surrender to coming bad election news. The Post has been the tip of the anti-Trump spear for years, and with the Times led the movement to openly politicize journalism via its insufferably self-congratulating “Democracy Dies in Darkness” campaign, so bowing out of the open advocacy game with publisher William Lewis promising a return to the paper’s “roots” is beyond surprising. Editor-at-large Robert Kagan, who penned last year’s million-word “Calling All Hinckleys” editorial comparing Trump to Julius Caesar, resigned in protest, presumably to spend more time snuggling with spouse Victoria Nuland.

The 16,000 or so comments under the Lewis editorial so far reveal two things. Post readers prefer the more traditionally British double-L spelling of “cancelled.” Also, many readers noticed with chagrin the contrast with the Times piece. . . .

I’ve heard so many crazy things in the last weeks about behind-the-scenes maneuvering in Washington that it’s been tough to know what to believe, but it’s clear we’re headed for some kind of historic confrontation. I have trouble believing institutional America will really reverse course after eight years of dystopian lunacy, but Bezos and the Post just changed something, probably over the passionate objections of 98% of staff. Whatever’s going on, it sure isn’t boring.

I have a theory of what’s going on. More on that in a later post.