Let’s begin with Paul Krugman at The New York Times who takes on Donald Trump’s “lying game”:
Here’s what we can be fairly sure will happen in Monday’s presidential debate: Donald Trump will lie repeatedly and grotesquely, on a variety of subjects. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton might say a couple of untrue things. Or she might not.
Here’s what we don’t know: Will the moderators step in when Mr. Trump delivers one of his well-known, often reiterated falsehoods? If he claims, yet again, to have opposed the Iraq war from the beginning — which he didn’t — will he be called on it? If he claims to have renounced birtherism years ago, will the moderators note that he was still at it just a few months ago? (In fact, he already seems to be walking back his admission last week that President Obama was indeed born in America.) If he says one more time that America is the world’s most highly taxed country — which it isn’t — will anyone other than Mrs. Clinton say that it isn’t? And will media coverage after the debate convey the asymmetry of what went down
Here’s Aaron Kall’s analysis at USA Today:
[The] tactics that worked so well for him in the primaries will be difficult to replicate in his trio of upcoming debates against Clinton. The race is neck-and-neck, so Trump won’t be able to brag about his major polling advantage. Nor is Trump self-funding. Although he has given more than $60 million to his campaign, he established a joint fundraising pact with the Republican National Committee in May. They collected a combined $90 million in August, and the campaign has about $100 million remaining in the bank. And despite his longstanding disdain for super PACs, Trump officially endorsed one in July.
Trump will also find it difficult to repeat his attacks on moderators. The Commission on Presidential Debates chose NBC’s Lester Holt, ABC’s Martha Raddatz, CNN's Anderson Cooper and Fox News’ Chris Wallace, bypassing media personalities with a perceived bias against Trump or a history of tangling with him. Given the intense criticism of NBC's Matt Lauer after the Commander-in-Chief Forum, the moderators will likely over-correct and be even tougher on the candidates. The gravitas of the moderators combined with Trump’s implicit endorsement of their selection will make it difficult for Trump to attack them during the debates. He can’t credibly make fun of the NBC Nightly News ratings if Holt asks him about his tax returns.
Russell Berman at The Atlantic:
The two contenders are diametrically opposed in just about every way, from their visions of the country, to the policies they propose, to the way they comport themselves on stage. Trump is the improviser, a charismatic salesman whose penchant for jokes, insults, and bluster served him surprisingly well in the Republican primaries. Clinton is the epitome of practiced caution, a candidate with a well-known comfort for policy and preparation who rarely deviates from her script.
Glenn Kessler at The Washington Post even does a pre-debate cheat sheet:
Presidential candidates rarely come to the debates with fresh facts. Instead, they rely on claims that have been scattered in their stump speeches for many months — claims that The Fact Checker has already put to the Pinocchio Test. So here’s a quick guide to old favorites viewers will likely hear during the presidential debates that start on Sept. 26.
The list is longer for Trump because, frankly, he has been exceptionally fact-challenged in this campaign. His average Pinocchio rating is 3.4, which is extraordinary; the highest average rating in the 2012 campaign was Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who earned 3.08. Clinton has an average Pinocchio rating of 2.2, which is slightly higher than President Obama and slightly lower than Mitt Romney in 2012.
Debate moderators, please clip and save.
Turning to policy, Alexander Burns and Farah Stockman at The New York Times analyze Donald Trump’s statements on crime:
Branding himself the “law-and-order candidate,” Donald J. Trump has vowed to carry out a crackdown on crime and terrorism that would benefit white Americans and racial minorities alike.
But an examination of Mr. Trump’s recommendations for policing, terrorism and immigration enforcement reveals a series of policies that civil rights activists and national security veterans fear could have the effect of treating minorities with suspicion and singling them out for heavier government scrutiny. [...]
Mr. Trump’s policy prescriptions have stirred concern among some experts in national security and law enforcement, including prominent Republicans who warn that Mr. Trump’s agenda could undermine public safety by generating a backlash in communities that the police and intelligence officials rely upon for cooperation.
Eugene Robinson correctly calls out the hypocrisy among gun fetishists who aren’t making any noise about the death of black men lawfully carrying weapons who have been the victims of police misconduct:
If all they saw was a man with a gun who got out of a car and back in, what illegal activity did they observe? Why did they “approach the subject” instead of going about their business? Did they have any reason to suspect it was an illegal gun? Are all men carrying guns believed to be carrying guns illegally, or just black men?
Our gun laws should be changed. Until then, however, they must be enforced equally. Does the NRA disagree?
The NRA, not surprisingly, has been silent on Trump’s remarks to stop, frisk and take away people’s guns:
But spokespersons for the National Rifle Association, (which has endorsed Trump for president), the National Association for Gun Rights and the Second Amendment Foundation did not answer multiple requests for comment in response to Trump’s remarks.
Their silence was not new: Many of the same people arguing for more access to firearms don’t stand by that support when it comes to fellow citizens of color.
On a final note, Gideon Resnick and Ben Collins report how a billionaire is funding obnoxious, vile, anti-Hillary memes online:
A Silicon Valley titan is putting money behind an unofficial Donald Trump group dedicated to “shitposting” and circulating internet memes maligning Hillary Clinton.
Oculus founder Palmer Luckey financially backed a pro-Trump political organization called Nimble America, a self-described “social welfare 501(c)4 non-profit” in support of the Republican nominee. [...]
“We conquered Reddit and drive narrative on social media, conquered the [mainstream media], now it’s time to get our most delicious memes in front of Americans whether they like it or not,” a representative for the group wrote in an introductory post on Reddit.