How Many People Do You Know Waiting To Decide Who To Vote For Based On Word From 50 Cent?

Unexpected endorsements are still coming in for Kamala. Yesterday, Billy Graham’s granddaughter, Jerushah Duford, told CNN viewers why she’s not voting for the guy whose actions violate Christian values. And former U.S. Senator Gordon Humphrey and state Attorney General, both New Hampshire conservative Republicans told WMUR why Trump is the wrong choice for them. Humphrey: “He’s dangerous to our safety, dangerous to peace, dangerous to democracy and freedom. I voted for Republicans for more than 50 years. I can’t vote for Trump, as a father, as a grandfather, as a veteran, as a former U.S. senator… There's something wrong with Donald Trump up here. I’m not a psychiatrist, but I have been around a few decades, and I know something amiss when I see it.”

There’s some confusion now if Trump offered 50 Cent $3 million to endorse him or to perform at the Madison Square Garden Nazi Rally— or if had had to do both for the money. He did neither. Although he’s often associated with Michigan because of his long relationship with Eminem, 50 Cent, like Trump, is from Queens… though a different neighborhood. He had turned down half a million dollars to support Trump 2016. In 2020 he endorsed Trump and withdrew his endorsement a week later and endorsed Biden, tweeting “Fuck Donald Trump, I never liked him.”

Not as well-known or influential, Gary Reed was executive director of the Michigan Republican Party from 1992 to 1995 and he just announced he’s voting for Kamala. He was one of the nearly 300,000 Michigan Nikki Haley voters and he thinks many of them won’t be voting for Trump next week. In his, he only mentions Kamala to say he’s voting for her— barely another word about her. His decision wasn’t based on anything to do with her although, presumably, he sees Trump as worse than she is. He’s voting for her to save the Republican Party and turn it around to a time he remember it being the party that “embraced values like fiscal discipline and a strong foreign policy,” which, he contends, Trump and Vance don’t. Rather than promoting trade with the rest of the world, they embrace protectionism and across-the-board tariffs that will make working families pay more for everyday goods…Trump has no fiscal discipline. He added $8 trillion to the debt during his first term. Every time he gives a campaign speech he promises a new handout to a different group. I don’t agree with all of Harris’ economic policies, but she is more fiscally disciplined than Trump. Trump and Vance thrive on xenophobia and blaming immigrants for all of our problems, rather than coming up with sensible, conservative solutions to serious issues like rising housing costs… Rather than promote a strong Reaganesque foreign policy, Trump and Vance admire dictators and want to abandon Ukraine and our NATO allies.” 

He recognizes that “Trump and his allies have done grave damage to the Republican Party— both in Michigan and nationally.  If we ever want our Republican Party back, it has to start with Donald Trump losing on Nov. 5.  That’s why I’m voting for Kamala Harris.”

My guess is that he has no sway over any Michigan voters and that, basically, no one knows who he is or that he once held an obscure office in the GOP. Recent Michigan congressmen Fred Upton, Dave Trott and Joe Schwarz may have a tiny bit more sway… a tiny bit. The theory is that all these Republicans voting for Kamala could create a context for Republican voters to feel “permission” to go with their guts and decide defeat Trump. The polls don’t seem to be bearing that out. Biden beat Trump in Michigan 2,804,040 (50.62%) to 2,649,862 (47.84%)— a 2.78 margin. I haven’t seen Kamala do that well in the Michigan polling averages since September. Of late her and Trump are within a fraction of a point of each other, although she has been consistently ahead.

Yesterday, former Republican NeverTrumper Jonathan Last made a more proactive case for Kamala than Gary Reed did, although for him too, it’s all about Trump-hatred. “I want to head off arguments ,” he wrote, “that if she loses it was somehow her fault. That she did something wrong, or didn’t do something important. Because here is the rock-bottom fact: No reasonable observer could have asked her to run a better campaign. Kamala Harris became the presumptive Democratic nominee a hundred days ago. In that time she:

• Unified the Democratic party.

• Reversed Biden’s polling deficit and took the lead over Trump.

• Organized a successful convention.

• Created a policy framework for her prospective administration.

• Pivoted to the center on nearly every issue: From domestic energy production, to gun reform, to immigration.

• Absolutely schlonged Trump in their debate.

• Performed somewhere between adequately and exceptionally in every single media interview.

• Spent time with several non-traditional media outlets.

• Gave almost unfailingly good speeches in front of giant crowds.

• Performed heroic levels outreach to Republicans and swing voters by appearing on Fox News and campaigning with the likes of Liz Cheney— while explicitly inviting and welcoming Republican voters into her coalition.

[N]ot only has Harris run the best possible campaign, but Trump has run an entirely mask-off campaign. He has told America who he is and what he wants.

He wants to round up immigrants and put them in camps.

He wants to deploy the military against domestic groups he disfavors.

He wants to eradicate the “vermin” who are “poisoning the blood” of the country.

He wants to put crazy people like RFK and Elon Musk in charge of large swaths of the federal government.

He wants to fire Jack Smith and make the criminal charges against himself go away.

He wants to force Ukraine to negotiate a ceasefire in terms favorable to Russia.

Believe me: If Trump wins, it isn’t going to be because Kamala Harris gave a bad answer to a question on The View.

It will be because some large percentage of the American public looked at these two candidates and decided that they wanted Trump.

Attempts to blame Harris or find an alternate reason for why voters didn’t consciously choose an authoritarian strongman will be an exercise in reality avoidance. It will be an attempt to avoid grappling with who, and what, our country is.

In a sense, the 2024 election has been an exercise in creating rationalizations in order to avoid reality.

The pattern was simple: People would come up with a rationalization for why 47 percent of the country wanted Trump. Said rationalization would be demolished. Someone would come up with a new rationalization.

• The only reason people supported Trump was inflation.

  • Then inflation came down, and people kept supporting Trump.

• The only reason people supported Trump was high interest rates.

  • Then rates got cut, and people kept supporting Trump.

• The only reason people supported Trump was crime.

  • Then we had two years with the steepest drops in crime rates in history, and people kept supporting Trump. 

• The only reason people supported Trump was Biden’s age— they were deeply concerned about his mental ability to do the job.

  • Then the Democratic nomination went to a nimble and vigorous Kamala Harris; Trump became the addled geriatric in the race; and people kept supporting Trump.