Last updated: December 13, 2017
Contact info, mailing address:.
143 S. 3rd Street Philadelphia, PA 19106
215-965-2305
21 pages • 42 minutes read
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Essay Analysis
Key Figures
Symbols & Motifs
Literary Devices
Important Quotes
Discussion Questions
In what ways is the Declaration of Independence a timeless document, and in what ways is it a product of a specific time and place? Is it primarily a historical document, or is it relevant to the modern era?
How does the Declaration of Independence define a tyrant? And how convincing is the argument the signers make that George III was a tyrant?
The Declaration of Independence does not establish any laws for the United States. But how do its ideas influence the Constitution or other documents that do establish laws?
By Thomas Jefferson
Notes on the State of Virginia
American Revolution
View Collection
Books on Justice & Injustice
Books on U.S. History
Nation & Nationalism
Politics & Government
Required Reading Lists
We will declare our economic independence from the failed elites who orchestrated american decline and from never-ending federal spending that inflated prices and left nation on brink of insolvency..
America is in a state of decline – militarily, culturally and economically – and the American dream is slipping away from our nation’s middle class.
Federal government policies – COVID-19 lockdowns, reckless borrowing, printing money and deficit spending – have escalated the costs of living so much that buying a home , purchasing a car or starting a family is too expensive for many Americans. Even being able to afford groceries has become more difficult.
Despite these challenges, entrenched Washington politicians in both parties and the elites who implemented the policies responsible for our malaise refuse to change course.
In Florida, we’ve fought back.
We led the charge to drag our nation out of pandemic lockdown, to protect freedom, to ensure the viability of small businesses and to preserve the education of our youth. We cut against the grain of elite opinion and faced massive blowback for bucking the system – but we stood our ground.
We fought for Floridians who were ignored by the elites, who didn’t have a voice and whose livelihoods hung in the balance. We were their voice, we were their fighter – and we won.
We will take that same spirit to Washington to fight for Americans across the nation.
Revitalizing economic freedom and opportunity today will require building an economy where the concerns of average citizens are elevated above those deemed “too big to fail.”
Our declaration of economic independence must focus our agenda on rebuilding the American dream for our middle class. We will diversify and expand our economy by rewarding hard work and empowering our citizens to control their own destinies.
We want to be a country that makes things, where a family can raise children on a single income, and where young people can develop the skills and values necessary to build a decent life and contribute to their communities.
We will declare our economic independence from the failed elites who orchestrated American decline and from the never-ending federal spending that has inflated prices and plunged our nation to the brink of insolvency.
The goal of our declaration of economic independence is simple: We win. They lose.
Biden tries to sell 'Bidenomics.' But Americans can't afford the president's agenda.
We will take back control of our economy from China and restore our economic sovereignty by reversing the ever-increasing trade deficit , banning imports of goods made from stolen intellectual property, end China’s preferential trade status and incentivize the repatriation of U.S. capital from China.
We will facilitate stronger economic growth, with a target of at least 3%.
We will do so by advancing an ambitious tax and regulatory reform agenda to unleash American production, increase productivity and growth, and support our families, workers and small businesses, all while lowering inflation.
President Joe Biden’s job-crippling and ideological regulations and executive orders will be reversed on Day One.
We will unleash our domestic energy sector, modernize and protect our power grid and advance American energy independence, thereby increasing our economic and national security, reducing inflation and fueling a manufacturing renaissance that will create jobs, revitalize our communities and improve our standard of living.
I will work not only to extend income tax cuts scheduled to expire in 2025 and to further simplify the tax code, but also seek a more competitive tax system that incentivizes long-term, domestic investment while purging special interest carveouts and loopholes.
I will use all available constitutional authority to restore accountability in the executive branch, move agencies out of Washington, D.C., and slash the bureaucratic state, restrict foreign lobbying and post-employment revolving doors by former government officials, and ban individual stock trading by members of Congress and executive branch officials.
We will end environmental, social and governance investing standards and incentivize investment in America's future. I don’t care if someone is trying to sell fossil fuels, firearms or French fries, there will be no ideological litmus test for getting a loan, establishing a bank account or running your business.
Where past and present coexist: White House furniture is America's living history
In addition to disbanding diversity, equity and inclusion programs, we will reform our education system and lower barriers to entry for working-class Americans, support school choice nationwide, protect parental rights, and steer funding toward programs and institutions that support the jobs of the future.
I will create a fair labor market by securing the border, enforcing our laws, eliminating chain migration and the diversity visa lottery, and limiting low-skill immigration.
I will rein in the Federal Reserve, fight against the reckless federal spending that has characterized recent years under both parties and oppose bailouts. There will be a new sheriff in town when it comes to spending, and I will not be afraid of using my veto pen or the bully pulpit.
Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store .
Our challenge is to reclaim this century for America. If we meet the moment, a brighter future will be on the horizon. We must be a society in which Americans who work hard and get the most of their God-given abilities are able to succeed, buy a home and raise a family.
In America, we have everything we need to succeed. The only question is whether we have the will to force Washington to once again work for the American people. My promise is that I will always fight for our citizens, our families, our future and our way of life – and I will never back down.
We will take back control of our destiny and ensure that our future is proud, independent and free.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is a candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page , on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter .
Michelle Goldberg
Opinion Columnist, reporting from Atlanta
The first person I met in the long line for Kamala Harris’s rally in Atlanta on Tuesday was Tomorrow Wright, a pre-K teacher who hadn’t been planning to vote when Joe Biden was still the Democratic candidate.
“Biden and Trump, I wasn’t with neither one of them,” she said, adding that Biden had disappointed her by not doing more to cancel student loan debt. But Harris had electrified her, and she’d queued at noon for a rally — her first ever — that wouldn’t start until evening, shading herself from the brutal southern sun under a pink umbrella.
Most of the other people I met at the Georgia State Convocation Center, where around 10,000 people packed the stadium for Harris, said they’d intended to vote for Biden. But with the energy on the ground moribund, many told me they couldn’t rouse themselves to do much more for him, like go to events or volunteer.
“I’ve campaigned since ’08, and I couldn’t go campaign,” said Tammy Clabby, a longtime Democratic activist who worked for Hillary Clinton in 2016. “How could I tell a young person to vote for Joe Biden when he couldn’t finish a sentence in that debate?” Harris’s ascension, however, changed everything. Clabby compared the vibe to Barack Obama’s first electrifying run.
It was an analogy I heard over and over at the ebullient rally, which often felt like a dance party, and not just when the Grammy-winning rapper Megan Thee Stallion was performing. All the Democrats’ fervent yearning for a fighter to take on Trump, their desperate hope for hope, has converged on a woman who until just weeks ago was regularly overlooked and underestimated.
Some conservatives, seeming discombobulated by their sudden change in political fortunes, appear to think that the explosion of Democratic enthusiasm for Kamala Harris is a media psy-op.
“Is it possible to completely manufacture a cultural phenomenon by taking a vapid, leftist San Francisco Democrat and turning her into something that she’s not through nonstop gaslighting?” Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida wrote on social media.
They should keep telling themselves that.
Serge Schmemann
Editorial Board Member
A rocket lands on a playing field on the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, killing 12 children and teenagers. Israel vows a “severe” response, and the United States and other Western leaders urge restraint. The response comes on Tuesday: a strike on a dense residential neighborhood in southern Beirut, which Israel says was targeted against the Hezbollah commander responsible for the rocket attack. The suspense is tangible: Is this it?
Is this the next war that has been a threat to Israel and its neighbors through all the nine months of the conflict with Hamas? A war that would be far deadlier than the one in Gaza, with the Israeli Defense Force pitted against the most heavily armed militia in the Middle East, one wielding a vast arsenal of attack drones, rockets and missiles far greater and more sophisticated than anything Hamas has?
This may not be the moment. Hezbollah, the political party and militia that controls southern Lebanon, has denied that Saturday’s attack was its doing, though that may be intended more to deny responsibility for killing members of the Druse community, a small offshoot of Shia Islam who have lived on the Golan Heights since before Israel seized the area 57 years ago, and who have tried to stay clear of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Neither Israel nor the United States doubt that Hezbollah was responsible, especially given that tit-for-tat rocket attacks have been constant since the Gaza war erupted last Oct. 7. Saturday’s missile was most likely intended for a nearby Israeli base, not the Druse youngsters. Still, a strike on a non-Jewish community in Israel also put pressure on Israel to show that it cares about the security of all its citizens. In the Middle East, nothing is ever simple or binary.
The intended target on Tuesday, Fuad Shukr, a senior Hezbollah official, was killed in the attack , according to the Israeli military, and there were reports that 35 people were wounded.
It’s not clear whether Israel’s strike on Beirut, if the response ends there for now, will provoke Hezbollah to escalate the duel. But even if none of the actors involved want an all-out war at this juncture, the conditions for one to erupt will remain. Hezbollah has vowed to continue popping rockets into northern Israel so long as the fighting continues in Gaza, leading to retaliatory Israeli strikes and to the evacuation of thousands of residents from both sides of the border — 60,000 Israelis and a far greater number of Lebanese.
According to Amos Harel, a defense analyst for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, writing recently in Foreign Affairs (before the latest exchange), there is a strong longing in Israel to deal with Hezbollah “once and for all.” And in the north, Harel wrote, Israel is far better prepared for a major clash than it was in the south. In the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, when confusion reigned along the Gaza border, three Israeli divisions were rapidly deployed to preclude Hezbollah from opening a second front.
For President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, whose reaction to a dangerous crisis will be closely scrutinized now that she is the probable Democratic candidate for president, preventing a dangerous new war, one that would reverberate across the Middle East, is a critical challenge.
Advertisement
Farah Stockman
The Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro wants the world to believe he won Sunday’s presidential election . But nobody should believe that until he releases precinct-level vote tallies and submits to an independent audit. That authorities have failed so far to do that “tells you everything you need to know about the election,” Geoff Ramsey, a specialist on Latin America at the Atlantic Council, told me.
Maduro has done everything in his power to tilt the election in his favor, from barring rivals to arresting their campaign staff members. But even that doesn’t seem to have been enough. Now he appears to be faking the numbers and declaring victory. It’s already being called the “ mother of all stolen elections .”
Luckily, the Venezuelan opposition anticipated that Maduro would try to rig the vote, and dispatched volunteers to collect precinct-level tally sheets from voting centers across the country. The opposition says it has collected some 70 percent of such tally sheets , enough data to prove that voters overwhelmingly rejected Maduro.
And why wouldn’t they vote him out? He has presided over the worst economic collapse of any country not at war . Since 2014, the country’s economy shrank by roughly three-quarters , and about 20 percent of citizens have left, thanks to Maduro’s corruption, mismanagement of the oil industry, and U.S. sanctions brought on by his policies. Who would vote for six more years of that?
Every country in the region has suffered from Venezuela’s collapse and would benefit from its recovery. Leaders around the world — and those who prop up the Maduro regime — should ask themselves how much more Venezuela can take and insist that Maduro come clean with the precinct-level results.
“There is a lot of consensus even among governments that have been traditionally friendly to Maduro —Mexico, Brazil, Colombia — that there has to be transparency around the results,” Francisco Rodríguez, a Venezuelan economist at the University of Denver, told me.
This is far from the first time that Maduro has been accused of rigging the vote. But the ability of the opposition to collect such compelling proof of it is a testament of the incredible bravery and surprising unity of the opposition under the leadership of Venezuela’s “Iron Lady,” María Corina Machado , an opposition front-runner who was barred from running.
Undaunted, Machado rallied behind Edmundo González Urrutia, a little-known former diplomat who was allowed on the ballot. Exit polls and opinion surveys suggest that he won in a landslide. Anger at Maduro’s attempts to claim victory has led to mass protests and even the toppling of a statue of Hugo Chávez . The Venezuelan people deserve better, and they know it.
Frank Bruni
Contributing Opinion Writer
“Border czar.”
If Donald Trump and his campaign staff could tattoo that epithet onto Kamala Harris’s forehead or dress her in a sandwich board bearing only that phrase, they would. So it’s not surprising to encounter it at the start of the first major ad that the Trump campaign has released since Harris became the de facto Democratic nominee.
“This is America’s border czar,” says an unseen narrator, in an ominous voice, as the words “Border Czar Kamala Harris” appear onscreen, just to hammer home the designation. They’re superimposed over video of Harris, in a kaleidoscopic blouse, dancing at an unspecified celebration. Message: She’s not just out to lunch. She’s out having a blast while the country implodes.
On a scale of 1 to someone screaming that Harris is an agent of the apocalypse, the ad rates about a 9. It’s as subtle as Trump. And like him, it doesn’t play fair — in tying illegal border crossings to terrorism and in assigning her ultimate responsibility for those crossings. She was charged not with fortifying the border but with the vaguer task of working with Central American countries to deter migration by identifying and alleviating its causes.
But the ad is smart, and it’s a clear signal of what will be a main theme, possibly the main theme, in Republicans’ attacks against Harris in particular and Democrats in general. Americans are much more concerned about illegal immigration than they were in the past, and polls show that they trust Trump more than they do Democrats to hold back the tide.
That’s a big reason that Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona is on Harris’s short list of potential running mates: He represents a border state and has spoken forcefully for greater border security. Harris must persuade voters that she’s concerned about and focused on that issue.
But Trump must take care, too. The ad — which is scheduled to appear in the six top battleground states — underscores that. The colors in Harris’s blouse, the lightheartedness of her dance moves, a carefully selected snippet of remarks she made to Lester Holt of NBC News: Those details and others combine to suggest that Harris is frivolous, different, even other, especially because there’s an image of Trump in the ad, too, and he’s striding purposefully in a suit and red tie outside what appears to be the White House.
Serious man. Silly (and dangerous) woman. That’s the contrast being drawn, and it could turn off many voters.
David Firestone
Deputy Editor, the Editorial Board
House Speaker Mike Johnson was probably right to describe President Biden’s Supreme Court reform proposals as “dead on arrival” in his chamber, but that’s just because Republicans don’t want anything to interfere with their 6-to-3 supermajority on the court. It wasn’t that long ago that many Republicans fully supported the most compelling of Biden’s ideas: term limits for justices.
In 2012, before he was a Republican senator from Missouri, Josh Hawley wrote an article saying that if justices knew they would not serve on the court for life, it would “foster a more circumspect attitude toward the court’s role.” The independence created by life terms, he wrote, breeds “an overconfidence in the justices’ capacity to get constitutional questions right.” (And he was in a position to know, as a former clerk for Chief Justice John Roberts.) Term limits were also supported by Senator Marco Rubio , and Senator Ted Cruz proposed putting justices up for election every eight years.
Now it’s Democrats who want to end lifetime appointments, having seen the six justices in the supermajority trample individual rights and do nothing about shameful ethical abuses within their ranks. But an 18-year maximum tenure for justices, as Biden and many others have proposed, shouldn’t be ping-ponged around by whatever faction is dissatisfied with the current court. It’s a good idea born of a mistake by the Constitution’s drafters, who weren’t able to foresee the problems caused by lifetime appointments.
For one thing, life spans were shorter then. Through the 1960s, the average term on the court was around 15 years; after 1970, it became about 26 years. The founders did not fully anticipate how a justice might become insulated from reality after serving on the court for many decades. They didn’t anticipate the potential for arrogance and corruption, as long-serving justices — like Clarence Thomas — would take lavish gifts from special interests without the possibility of penalty.
And they didn’t anticipate that a president like Donald Trump would outsource his appointment power to fierce ideological warrior groups like the Federalist Society, who scour law schools for the most conservative students, get them clerkships and then promote them at a young age for judicial openings, in hopes of keeping them on the bench for more than a quarter-century.
The United States remains the only major constitutional democracy without either term limits or a mandatory retirement age for judges on the highest court. Almost every American state, in fact, has some kind of term limit for high-court justices. Only Rhode Island has neither a term limit nor an age restriction.
Johnson says the system has worked fine for centuries, but it clearly has not. The time for change is long overdue. Biden deserves credit as the first president to join the call for an overhaul.
Jessica Grose
Opinion Writer
Hannah Neeleman , whose nom de internet is Ballerina Farm, was described as “the queen of the tradwives,” by Megan Agnew of The Times of London this month. Neeleman previously claimed to be “unfamiliar with the term,” which describes social media influencers who often promote traditional gender roles and present idealized domestic scenes.
I believe tradwives when they say they are happy living this way. But getting behind the images of Ballerina Farm confirmed what I already suspected: Being a tradwife is not appealing or aspirational for many modern women, despite how beautiful it looks in photographs.
Neeleman is an ex-Juilliard ballerina who is married to an heir to the JetBlue fortune, and the two live on a farm in Utah with their “8 littles” as she puts it in her Instagram bio . Ballerina Farm’s brand of tradwifery might best be described as internet pastoral: home-schooling children, making croissants, drinking turmeric lattes made from raw milk from the farm. The profile asks: Does Neeleman’s lifestyle represent “an empowering new model of womanhood — or a hammer blow for feminism?”
I would argue that all she represents is an old model of wealthy white womanhood, disseminated by new technology. This model valorizes the performance of motherhood if you act joyful all the time, are buoyed by an ocean of family money and can compete in a beauty pageant two weeks postpartum, as Neeleman did. But it has no material support for the human beings who have more complex feelings than a perfect facade allows.
Pitting tradwives against feminists is a trap . That makes it seem that feminists don’t care about families or hate stay-at-home parents or big families, which is false. Many feminists are stay-at-home parents, but tradwives are a separate category who tend to believe in cultural values like submitting to one’s husband.
Neeleman certainly defers to her husband, Daniel, about basically every major life decision she has made since they met in their early 20s. As Agnew notes: “Daniel wanted to live in the great Western wilds, so they did; he wanted to farm, so they do; he likes date nights once a week, so they go (they have a babysitter on those evenings); he didn’t want nannies in the house, so there aren’t any.”
Hannah Neeleman’s version of womanhood represents an age-old glorification of maternal suffering. Her family has the money to employ nannies and many people to do other household tasks, but she must go without additional child care because her husband doesn’t want her to have it. She sometimes falls so ill from exhaustion that she can’t get out of bed for a week.
While her social media feed makes her suffering appear glamorous, if you take off the pageant sequins, all that’s left is a vulnerable person, worn into the ground.
Thomas L. Friedman
Opinion Columnist
For a few days this last week I started to believe that Kamala Harris and the Democrats could come from behind and beat Donald Trump. But then I started to hear Democrats patting themselves on the back for coming up with a great new label for Trump Republicans. They are “weird.”
I cannot think of a sillier, more playground, more foolish and more counterproductive political taunt for Democrats to seize on than calling Trump and his supporters “weird.”
But weird seems to be the word of the week. As this newspaper reported, in a potential audition to be Harris’s running mate , Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota said over the weekend of Trump and his vice-presidential pick, Senator JD Vance of Ohio: “The fascists depend on us going back, but we’re not afraid of weird people. We’re a little bit creeped out, but we’re not afraid.” Just to make sure he got the point across, Walz added: “The nation found out what we’ve all known in Minnesota: These guys are just weird.”
As The Times reported, Harris, speaking at a weekend campaign event at a theater in the Berkshires, “leaned into a new Democratic attack on the former president and his running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, saying that some of the swipes the men had taken against her were ‘just plain weird.’” The Times added: “Pete Buttigieg, the secretary of transportation, said Mr. Trump was getting ‘older and stranger’ while Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, called Mr. Vance ‘weird’ and ‘erratic.’”
It is now a truism that if Democrats have any hope of carrying key swing states and overcoming Trump’s advantages in the Electoral College, they have to break through to white, working-class, non-college-educated men and women, who, if they have one thing in common, feel denigrated and humiliated by Democratic, liberal, college-educated elites. They hate the people who hate Trump more than they care about any Trump policies. Therefore, the dumbest message Democrats could seize on right now is to further humiliate them as “weird.”
“It is not only a flight from substance,” noted Prof. Michael J. Sandel of Harvard, the author of “The Tyranny of Merit: Can We Find the Common Good?” “It allows Trump to tell his supporters that establishment elites look down on them, marginalize them and view them as ‘outsiders’ — people who are ‘weird.’ It plays right into Trump’s appeal to his followers that he is taking the slings and arrows of elites for them. It is a distraction from the big argument that Democrats should be running on: How we can renew the dignity of work and the dignity of working men and women.”
I don’t know what is sufficient for Harris to win, but I sure know what is necessary: a message that is dignity affirming for working-class Americans, not dignity destroying. If this campaign is descending into name-calling, no one beats Trump in that arena.
Jonathan Alter
While Kamala Harris could easily make a surprise pick, I’m assuming the accuracy of reports that the short list consists of Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota.
My suggestion is that for the next 100 days, she should effectively choose all three.
At first glance, Kelly or Shapiro might seem to help more by joining the ticket. While Harris is now comfortably ahead in Minnesota, she’s behind or dead even in Arizona and Pennsylvania polls.
But this assessment doesn’t take into account what the V.P. nominee will actually do in the 14 weeks before the election: Lambaste Donald Trump, spearhead fund-raisers in big cities, back Democratic Senate candidates in close races and campaign in battleground states when Harris is elsewhere.
That’s not the best use of Kelly’s and Shapiro’s time. Kelly’s priority should be to help nail down Arizona, where he has great credibility on the border issue that threatens Harris. Likewise, Shapiro should stay put in Pennsylvania. By helping Harris reposition herself on fracking, Shapiro, who is surprisingly popular in rural Pennsylvania, can cut Trump’s margins there and help Democrats carry the state. And by not putting Shapiro on the ticket, Harris avoids splits in the party over the war in Gaza.
If Harris visits both Arizona and Pennsylvania once a week for two or three events, as she should, that’s a whopping 28 to 42 joint appearances in each state with these popular figures.
Walz, meanwhile, would spread his nimble Midwestern charm as the actual V.P. nominee. He has a résumé that looks as if it was designed in a lab: raised in a Nebraska town of 400; geography teacher and coach of football state champions; 24 years as a noncommissioned officer of the Army National Guard; moderate Democratic House member from a deeply red Minnesota district; highly effective governor with crowd-pleasing wins on cannabis, paid family leave and mandatory gun background checks, among others. He connects culturally in rural America, which would provide critical balance on a ticket headed by a member of the coastal cultural elite.
Walz last week launched the creative “they’re weird” talking point about the Trump/Vance ticket, now taken up by the whole Democratic Party, and there’s more where that came from. Vice-presidential nominees are meant to be attack dogs, a role that political consultants in Arizona and Pennsylvania say neither Kelly nor Shapiro is especially well equipped to play. Walz is already embracing that task with relish, a happy warrior who stays light and upbeat on TV.
Selecting Kelly, Shapiro or Gov. Roy Cooper of North Carolina would reassure moderate voters — a critical task for Harris as she faces a fierce assault for being too liberal. But there are other options for doing so. One good way to start: Harris should announce that Mitt Romney will be her secretary of defense or homeland security.
Patrick Healy
Deputy Opinion Editor
Every Monday morning on The Point, we kick off the week with a tipsheet on the latest in the presidential campaign. Here’s what we’re looking at this week:
For all the Democratic defections from President Biden and euphoria over Vice President Kamala Harris, there’s an important unanswered question about whether Harris can do something that Biden got very, very right in 2020: Be appealing to independent, undecided and swing voters with a centrist message emphasizing normalcy and uniting the country.
I think that message won Biden victory in the Electoral College. And a lot of Democrats are telling me two things right now: Harris will win the popular vote in November (thanks to strong margins in blue states), but it’s far from clear if she will win the Electoral College vote. She’s got to prove herself to those independent, undecided and swing voters in battleground states, or else she’s not going to win the presidency. And for all the record fund-raising and meme excitement, Harris hasn’t started indicating how she plans to do so.
Blue America is undoubtedly fired up and closing the enthusiasm gap fast against Donald Trump, and that’s a big deal — it’s what Democrats needed to do in Week 1 of the 15-week Harris presidential sprint. As we enter Week 2, I’ll be watching today for signs of a swing-voter message from two star governors and possible Harris running mates — Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan — who are jointly campaigning for Harris in the Philadelphia suburbs. And I’ll be keeping an eye on new Harris campaign ads and her next big event, in Atlanta on Tuesday.
So far, Harris has mostly been talking to friendly Democratic audiences. She is leaving it to surrogates to make her case in more challenging venues, as Pete Buttigieg did Sunday on Fox News , or speak most pointedly to swing voters and small-town Americans in purple and red areas, as Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota has.
Biden, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton won the presidency because they made real attempts — through policy ideas, speeches, campaign travel and, sometimes, criticism of their party or allies — to show that they had a measure of independence, thought for themselves and, yes, were looking out for all Americans, not just team blue. Both Bushes broke with some in the G.O.P. too (most notably on taxes and then immigration). Now that Harris has fired up the base faster than perhaps even she expected, what will she do to go beyond that base?
I’m really curious about what she says at her Atlanta event and where she plans to campaign in the days and weeks to come. And I’m also curious to see if she can really put Trump on the defensive over debating her ; she could reach a lot of those swing voters through debates, as well as prosecuting the case that Trump is unfit to lead the country again. Making a serious proposal to Trump that they meet for one debate a week starting in September would take this historic election to a new level.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence (hereafter called the "Declaration") is the hook that announces to the reader what the document will do. It argues that "when in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another," responsible people will explain why.
Therefore, the document marked the independence of the thirteen colonies of America, a condition which had caused revolutionary war. America celebrates its day of independence on 4 th July, the day when the congress approved the Declaration for Independence (Becker, 2008). With that background in mind, this essay shall give an analysis of the key issues closely linked to the United States ...
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…" (Hymowitz) How many times has the average American heard these words, spoken with beaming pride and earnest patriotism?
The Declaration of Independence was an important document in American history but it does not mean that it gained us our true freedom. It was a document that was written and signed on July 4th, 1776.
Declaration of Independence summary, facts, full text, and AP US History (APUSH) review. Founding document of the United States. July 4, 1776.
Declaration of Independence, in U.S. history, document that was approved by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, and that announced the separation of 13 North American British colonies from Great Britain. It explained why the Congress on July 2 "unanimously" by the votes of 12 colonies (with New York abstaining) had resolved that "these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be ...
In 1825, Thomas Jefferson reflected on the meaning and principles of the Declaration of Independence. In a letter to a friend, Jefferson explained that the document was an "expression of the American mind."
did not use the speci"c language of self-determination, even if it did speak of the necessity for peoples to assume a "separate and equal Station" among the "Powers of the Earth."
The above video from PBS Digital Studios on How to Argue provides an analysis of the art of persuasion and how to construct an argument. The focus on types of arguments begins at the 5:10 mark of the video.. In the first of this lesson's three activities, students will develop a list of complaints about the way they are being treated by parents, teachers, or other students.
Introduction. The Declaration of Independence, a foundational document in American history, serves as a beacon of freedom and democracy. This essay delves into the historical context surrounding the Declaration and explores how it was influenced by the political and social events of the time.
In Congress, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to ...
The Declaration of independence was a great successful document written by Thomas Jefferson a great idealist and a man from the age of enlightment, he was a great writer and was the one chosen to write the declaration of independence, he wrote it with a lot of thought about how people's emotions would be, how they would react, and how it would work all to their advantage, and with very ...
When the Declaration of Independence was in the process of being written, Jefferson and the men who revised the draft stated how "All men are created equal," and that they had "certain unalienable Rights, that among those are life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.
On June of 1776, the Declaration of Independence was born. Drawn up by Thomas Jefferson and based on the works of John Locke, the general purpose of the document was to clarify that governments have conditional, not absolute authority over the people; that human beings possess natural rights that can't be taken from them and government is created to protect those rights.
The Declaration of Independence | View the Declaration in the Gilder Lehrman Collection by clicking here and here. For additional primary resources click here and here. | View the Declaration in the Gilder Lehrman Collection by clicking here and here. For additional primary resources click here and here. Unit Objective This unit is part of Gilder Lehrman's series of Common Core State ...
The writing and signing of The Declaration of Independence were imperative moments in American History. It was written to announce that they were no longer under British rule, and to begin the formation of a new country.
Suggestions for essay topics to use when you're writing about The Declaration of Independence (1776).
The Declaration of Independence and the Promise of Liberty and Equality for All. In the aftermath of the Seven Years' War (1756-1763), the British government enacted a series of new laws, including new taxes, to be applied to its colonies in North America.
The Declaration of Independence's appeal to ethics is undisputable. In the opening paragraphs of the declaration, there is an ethical appeal for why the colonists needed separation from the colonizer.
Overview of Lesson Created in collaboration with the Philadelphia Writing Project and the National Writing Project, this lesson plan uses the Declaration of Independence as an example of a powerful written argument, and is based on this inquiry question: How can I harness the power of an argument to change the world?
Thanks for exploring this SuperSummary Study Guide of "The Declaration of Independence" by Thomas Jefferson. A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are two very important documents in the founding of our nation. This essay compares how these two documents are linked together, but also how they are clearly different.
I believe that the most powerful statement in the Declaration of Independence is the statement that says "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states."
Stanton believed that a public protest of women's right was the next step to get equality for women's legal position. By this belief, Stanton tried to make a draft of "Declaration of Right and Sentiments", which she modeled after the "Declaration of Independence".
Rebuilding the American dream for our middle class. Our declaration of economic independence must focus our agenda on rebuilding the American dream for our middle class. We will diversify and ...
The Supreme Court declared on Monday that former presidents have immunity for their official actions, upending the case against Donald J. Trump over his attempts to subvert his 2020 election loss.
I believe the Declaration of Independence would still be relevant to the Founding Fathers today. A violation I believe they could still apply states, for imposing taxes on us without our consent.
"The best way forward is to pass the torch to a new generation," the president said in a rare Oval Office address. And he told voters, "History is in your hands." Share full article ...
A rocket lands on a playing field on the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, killing 12 children and teenagers. Israel vows a "severe" response, and the United States and other Western leaders ...