16th year and be very close to winning in 2020. so what does this say? that is , as of now, the chances of the candidates remain as 50 to 50. of course, 50 to 50, i would even say, well, maybe from our point of view, 51 to 49, but if you and i were supporters of donald trump, we would tell you that 51 by 49 in favor of trump. which way to look at this process? if we return to the very content of this debate, trump twice avoided answering the presenters' questions about whether he wanted ukraine to win. he says he wants the war to end. the end of the war. why does he not talk about ukraine from the point of view of victory, but only from the point of view of the end of the war. because he believes that he has a good relationship with putin, he does not want to spoil it. he does not need victory. country, he needs

putin and zelensky to agree on peace and for both to be satisfied, if someone wins, then someone loses, he has a position, i say again, if you look at this vance plan, it is not separate from the chinese one, it is chinese position, we should not give vladimir putin the feeling that he has lost or been humiliated, because he is our friend, even if the war ends, it must end on terms that will not give putin the opportunity to feel offended in any way, finished... must be a triumph for putin, so let it be a triumph for zelensky, but in no way a defeat for russia, so you will not hear the question of the victory of ukraine from trump, it destroys the very structure with which he hopes to end this war, she thinks it's unrealistic, but he thinks so, and yet one such interesting piece of information that concerns the post already debate, the headquarters of kamala haris actually... in commercials, de facto in

support of ukraine. to be honest, for all this time i do not remember that there was such a direct, so to speak, campaign. and, in particular, according to analysts, this advertisement is designed to attract voters who are natives, firstly, from ukraine, secondly, from eastern europe in general, as far as i understand, firstly, firstly from poland. i will bring it to this point, poland, the czech republic, well, of course, that is , our part, this is our belt. but at the same time we understand that there are quite powerful positions among eastern europeans who live or are from eastern europe in the usa, there is a strong position trump has a strong position among them, as in particular among some of our fellow citizens who live in... the usa on your

opinion, after all, ours by nationality, maybe not for citizenship, but maybe someone for citizenship, ukrainians, poles, czechs, slovaks, well, relatively speaking, here is our block, eastern european, they, will there be a response to the on such things, on such statements, and will they still... continue to vote for trump and his like, so to speak? they, they will separate, by the way, we will talk about this in detail tomorrow in the political club program with the president of the world congress of ukrainians, pavlo grod, just as it seems to me at 9 p.m., that is, in fact, in a day there will be this big conversation, i will also talk about it with him , so we will hear that he... will answer

precisely this question about the role of residents from the countries of central europe and ukraine, because there is a coalition of eastern, central european, eastern european diaspora, that is in the united states, in canada, and she is influential, but think about it, you take a polish voter from pennsylvania, and he has trump, who is against abortion, but also against migrants. and there is karis, who is in favor of abortions, but for migrants and for helping ukraine and against putin, he is a catholic, and he hears what the pope tells him, he chooses the least evil, and here, in fact, the same is true of the ukrainian issue, which is the least evil? haris, who does not specify support for ukraine, but trump is also ready to support it, as he says that he will come to an agreement with putin, here you are will take put yourself in the place of this

voter of polish origin, how would you vote? well, maybe trump is not against all migrants, but for some reason i have this, maybe it's a subjective point of view, but i have it. why, for some reason, the idea that he is not against migrants there from poland, maybe from germany, but you can feel some kind of kinship with different migrants, for some reason, for some reason, i have this idea that what he is, i don't know, wait, if you from poland, you can't just be a person who has different views on migration, than trump, because you are a migrant yourself, of course, but again, you weigh all this, trump against migrants. against people like me, but on the other hand, i sympathize with these people, or maybe i don't, trump wants to negotiate with putin, it's dangerous for poland, but on the other hand, he is against abortionists, and i, as a devout catholic, am also against abortionists, or maybe i'm a young person and for me

abortion is not that important, but what is important is that trump wants to negotiate with putin, that is , it depends on many circumstances, but it is a difficult choice, that's why we say that it is not designated voters. this is a difficult choice for both a native of ukraine and a native of poland. why is it so important for, say, ukrainian organizations in america to work with ukrainian organizations in poland to strengthen their cooperation? i called for this even before the beginning of the great war, and moreover, i met with the heads of ukrainian organizations, polish organizations in america and... ukrainian organizations in america when i was in chicago, telling them about this very thing, that you will understand that we have some difficult issues between ukraine and poland, in historical politics, in those things, in those things, but if putin destabilizes ukraine,

poland can also feel very unstable, and what i liked is that all the heads of polish organizations in america, they didn't even need to... further clarification of this i had problems with them, i thought that i would be fine with them, i was then the co-chairman of the ukrainian-polish cooperation forum, and i thought that it would be much more difficult for me to talk with them than with polish politicians, it was much easier for me to talk with them , that is, it turned out that these people, of course, they are ethnic poles, but they are americans from the point of view of values, and i look, i think about these people, who will they vote for in this situation in... in chicago, in general, a traditional democratic state, but they have this organization, one of their organizations in pennsylvania, for whom they can speak to their fellow pennsylvanians, well, i think faster than a camel, because if that's how they view the world, it's faster than a camel, and with that i

understand that among they can also be people what kind of conservative political views that will say, you see, the pope told us to choose the least of... maybe trump is the least of the evils, but there are problems here, and again, there was no such problem with biden, because he was a catholic, the second catholic in the post of president of the united states, you see, biden didn't have to appeal to the poles in pennsylvania, the poles in pennsylvania thought, listen, for the second time in the history of the united states , a catholic who meets the pope precisely as a catholic. will be president of the united states and kamelik garis has to find an approach to them, that's the difference, that's why i said, you know, biden can win the election, because in states like pennsylvania, where everything is decided by a few dozen votes, that's how

the catholic community will vote, mostly polish, so it can be, you remember there, 800,000 polish voters, relatively speaking, how much was the gap in pennsylvania, 40 or 50 votes, something like that, well, maybe 50,000, i don't remember, something was very small there, but here is the real question moreover, the question of which group of voters will come to the elections and which will not come, which is more mobilized and which is not mobilized, so even we when it was still may, june, we even said then that, in fact, even then there were 50 50 and... in fact, even then no one could say that everything would be 100% trump or one hundred or one hundred percent biden, but we have what we actually have according to the current schedule, when the current vice president of the united states

of america is running for office , kamela harris. another phenomenon, this taylor swift, by the way, yes, we 've talked about it many times, that she's going to have a moment when she's supporting camelo. in american society, because americans perceive her as the code for self-made woman, that is, a person who has made herself, who has influence, who has an impeccable reputation, yes, and in fact, a person who has a huge audience, that is, if you look on the number of her followers, on the number of listens on various platforms, it's... millions and tens of millions of people, and she has an impact specifically on a young audience, though

now the question always arises, to what extent is she able to mobilize this young audience, so that they not only say: oh, how beautifully she said there, subscribe, lady cat, how well is she able to get these people to agree that they need to go to the polls? this is the number one question for me, there is no answer to this question, we will see, well, she supported kamela harris, and in your opinion, or? it's not for the elections, after all, if she really convinces young people and that vote will be affected, if she doesn't convince, it won't, well, it will there is another one there, a representative of such a creative elite who supports kamelogys, more of the creative elite of america supports camelus, you are absolutely right that the support of taylor is worth a lot to the world, and donald trump has already said that she supported him, remember, yes he said that she supported him, he even did some photoshop. it seems to me that, well, in general, he likes to do all these photoshops, so to speak, which are on the border with

fakes, kalash, i would say, these are such collages, and there are a lot of things that do not correspond in reality, yes, well, it may be important to simply tell trump that for him the tv world is better than the real taylor world to support kamelo garis, i am thinking about it, but i think that this is an important moment in any case, this is the moment that was awaited, remember you see, everyone said taylor's support would be such a hidden weapon in the world. democracy, it seems to me that what is more unexpected is the fact that kamal garis supported dziccheini, the former vice president of the united states, the vice president under george w. bush, a man who always was the epitome of conservative republican values, a man who was even made into movies by left-wing filmmakers as the epitome of conservative republican values, who was so demonized by these people. i, like andriy yermak, can draw such a parallel, i think, because in reality

dzikcheny never had even a tenth of the power attributed to him by journalists, and the real leader of the united states all the time remained george bush, jr., who passed all the principled decision, everyone said, oh chen, oh, he has such an influence, he has such an effect on this bush influences, oh, if only it wasn't. pocheini, well , that is, this is such a demon of american democracy, and when a person from such a camp supports, supports kamelo garis, then it is if andriy yarmak came out now and supported petro poroshenko, you know, we all vote for poroshenko, and why, why did dickcheini do such a thing step because i think that trump doesn't fit his value system, well... first of all, his daughter, you know, she's just been destroyed politically by trump, but he 's never had a perfect relationship with his own

daughter, so... second, i think he is i see, this is also evident from these debates, that trump is not guided by values, that trump is guided solely by his own interest, that trump does not at all correspond to this vision of the republican party, which is in the head, well, in principle, you will agree, even at this convention, at which donal. before trump , the presidents of the united states were nominated, there was no former president of the united states, there were no vice presidents, neither mike pence, nor dikacheni, this is also an interesting moment, because trump largely changed the political values ​​of the republican party, that's what i think about when we talk about the debates, i look at these debates as a values-based person's debate, which is kamala harris, as a non -values-based person, which is donald trump, everything we're talking about we say it, khariz. economic achievements, energy is not energy, it's all about something

else, when we talk about garis, we say that she adheres to one or another values, somewhere she balances, somewhere she tries to please someone from the traditional electorate of democracy, to get some and get others, but it's views, already here it's completely different, it's ego, but i would certainly vote for kamela harris in... this election, if i were an american, the way i would normally vote in 2016 in the 20th year for biden, in the 16th for clinton , but i do not think that i will be in the previous elections. it would have been different and the same, i would have voted for mckinney and romney, that's the trick, i would have voted for reagan and not for carter, i'm sorry for reagan and not for whoever was the candidate alter, well, carter, of course, for reagan and not for carter, i would vote for ford and not for

carter, despite the whole story with ottergate. i was always dominated more than carter, i would then vote for mccain, not for obama, for george bush sr., well and such, that is, it turns out, i look at it like this, that i am all the time, all the time, maybe with the exception of the white clinton , you have to think about it, i would vote exclusively for republicans, and the ears of the younger, for the ears of the younger, of course, ugh. ugh, i would vote, there were times when i wouldn't vote, i would vote for lyndon johnson over barley goldorter, but i would have voted for richard nixon over jfk, you know? i would vote for dwight esenhower, he was also a republican, but not for him, who was there,

i already forgot his democratic opponent, that is, there were some rare situations in american history. in the 20th century, when i would have voted for democracy, for roosevelt, for johnson, and probably for clinton, but it would have been personal sympathy, it would have been an emotion, i don't have such emotions for barack obama, let's say, and i think that both mccain and romney are much more serious and thoughtful for me strategic thinking politicians than barack obama, although i recognize the personality of barack obama, it is a great personality. from a political point of view, what can i say, and i understand why he was president of the united states twice, i have no questions, i'm just talking about myself, so what, so why am i telling you about it in such detail, something the republicans have done what forces my three me three times in a row to vote for candidates from another party, and not for the candidates that i would like to see for

president, i would say i would not to see hilary clinton as president of the united states, i would just vote for her without trump. i'd vote for biden, for sure, but i don't know if i'd vote for camelo harris if there was another republican candidate, some conventional mitch mcconnell, or nikki haley, but if i were asked who would camelo harris want or nikki haley? well, i think nikki haley is also an acceptable candidate, so when they nominate trump, they show me that they have abandoned their values, i am a person of values. why do i have to principles to agree with their rejection of values? why should i accept and legitimize it? i don't want to and i think that the way you described your own emotions, they are present in a large number of americans, which is why digcheny also wonders how it happened. how is it that this big party that i built turned into some kind of club of trump's children and

his relatives, well, i couldn't be like that, well , you, that is, no... there is no legacy, there is no continuity, trump has practically completely torn up bush's legacy from the senior from the youth and reagan's legacy, and barry goldwarter's legacy, and nixon's legacy as a foreign policy strategist, that's all absolutely, although i may be saying too much, because nixon was also, by and large, more of a pragmatist. with an official person, and we still see the results of his pragmatism, they are negative, so by and large it is such a difficult story for me, and i think a difficult story for dzikacheny. here is the answer to your question. if we are still talking about the united states of america, here is the last topic. volodymyr

zelensky announced his trip to the usa. when it will be, for now we are. well, he probably said that it will be in september, that is, as far as i understand, it is the end of september, the dates need to be specified, but less so, on this trip, at this meeting with the leaders of the united states of america and other countries, zelensky is going to present a winning plan, and he is also going to present this winning plan to kamala harris. to joseph biden and trump, in this context, how to build ukraine now. their relations with including the same trump. we see that, in principle, the ukrainian leadership is trying to maneuver like this, not

knowing who will win after all. and is it really correct to present a plan that, in principle, will most likely not be implemented yet? well, first of all, i don't know what to do in this plan. president zelenskyi has already said that he will first show it to biden, then later. kamel harris and donald trump, and then they will show it to the people. if there is a document that can be shown to people, then it is not a plan, because any plans make sense only when they are seen only for official use. so, this is just a certain set of proposals that should help ukraine preserve its sovereignty and restore territorial integrity. intentions in principle, i believe that in the very maintenance of contacts. there is nothing wrong with both candidates, i.e. zelensky foresees both the possibility of kamela garis's victory and the possibility of donald trump's victory, therefore he is very careful about

his statements about trump, says that trump understands him, i think that this is not so, i i am sure that if trump is elected president of the united states, we will sneeze at zelensky, but it is like that, it is also not necessarily the case, because there may already be other forces that will be silent on trump, not zelensky, the forces supporting ukraine, as well among republicans, trump was too big'. to lash out at zelenskyi as well as at poroshenko when he was president, but he had to reckon with the forces of support for ukraine, in the congress, in society, and i really hope that this will be the case, but if we talk about a real plan, then i, if i would be there a diplomat, of course, a document that would be submitted to the winner of the presidential elections, there would be logic in this, that is, here... there are elections for the president of the united states, one or another candidate wins them, and i, as the president of ukraine, to this candidate, who takes

over from the new old administration, represents his victory plan, you don't need to show it to everyone, you only need to show it to one person, the new president of the united states, well, president zelensky decided to leave. in another way, i do not think that from a political one from the point of view, from the point of view of this infatuation with presentation, you see that the president has a love for presentations, for speeches, for speeches, for public presence, this is connected with his real acting profession, and if he can believe that if he goes to the united states, then he has to do something spectacular that will make his trip memorable, this is cinematic logic, so imagine that we have a script... we live in the logic of this script, and you ask the producer, and that will make my trip memorable, well not a trip my, my appearance in the frame, here i

appear in the frame of the series at the 15th minute, i am the star of the series volodymyr zelenskyi, the take is called arrival to new york, bang, let's go, what should i do to remember, i can't just go through, maybe it will be nice for me somehow. can i hit some russian spy, well, it's all interesting when you're an actor, but you're the president, you can't do that, you know, because it doesn't matter if you're going to smoke or beat someone, something other than the president, because you you play the role of the president, so you have a plan for victory, i came to of the united states with a new plan, and then it is discussed, i proposed it to the president, i proposed it to trump, i proposed it to camila garis, we are discussing it, the very fact of my action. well, this love for such, i would say, public steps, it could lead to the presentation of such a document, it cannot be, there may not be anything

concrete, if you analyze the anatomy of how the president works in general, how he works environment, they work in the logic of the series, they perceive politics, politics in particular, fortunately they do not perceive war in the same way as series, well, if you understand that you are not dealing with politicians, but with people who are filming this big series, president volodymyr zelenskyi, on the bank, then everything becomes absolutely clear and transparent and you can calculate, by the way, it is dangerous, so that it is not only me, if you work in the federal security service of the russian federation, or in the foreign intelligence service, in principle you do not need information, you can count every step if you understand this logic of the series, but the problem is that for no, no problems, happiness in because vladimir putin also lives in logic, only a different series, as i have already told someone. it seems in our previous broadcast, a very old soviet series, and this one, so cringe, you can say so, of an old soviet series, and this, i would say, a new post-soviet series.

you see, i once said in the 19th year that this is a competition between the kvn and the kkdb, and now it is a struggle between the 17 localities of the spring and the servant of the people, it’s just that these two films are playing at the same time and from one film we are being shot at, killed, in the other movies live saturated the lives of people's favorites, and so these two, these studios are making these two films, we... unfortunately are in the mass in this situation, but on the other hand, it is better that there should be a film like servant of the people, and not a film like 17 , because such a film allows society to fight for its interests, for its country, the interests of the head of state are inseparable from the interests of the country in which he is located, because if there is no country, there will be no place to film, we have another small topic , this is... erdogan, er,

brics, and support for the return of crimea, that is erdogan is once again trying to sit down on two chairs, no, he is not trying, he is sitting, he is sitting, and he has been sitting on these two chairs for a long time, in fact, we have already talked on previous broadcasts about the fact that turkey has submitted an application to join the brics , and on the other hand , we saw that there is a statement by erdogan that he supports our territorial integrity. country and that he believes that crimea should de facto return to ukraine, where yure, he is ukrainian anyway. and one more news, if we are talking about turkey, then we know very well that vladimir putin was going to fly somewhere in some perspective and did not fly to turkey again, did not fly again, why, because turkey erdogan did not fulfill his conditions, in particular, one of the conditions was that... putin

will be accompanied by fighters of the air force of the russian federation, this was refused, of course, the argument was that allegedly ukraine could shoot down putin's plane or create some diversion, right? and the argument of the turkish side was that the anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense of this country can consider stay of the russian vynisha. russian strategic and tactical aviation in the sky as enemy equipment that can simply be shot down is also such cynicism, so that one plane cannot be distinguished from another against the air much, that is, you see how in reality everyone tries to sit on two chairs, as you evaluate these maneuvers of erdoğan and still, who is turkey supporting in this case, or himself.

no, i think that they are interested in the fate of ukraine, because they are interested in what will happen to crimea, not only from the foreign policy point of view, but also from from an internal political point of view, because there is greatness there, and they would like it to be real, for crimea to still belong to ukraine, of course, the crimea being part of ukraine is a guarantee of the national rights of the crimean tatar people, the crimea being part of russia is the absence of this guarantee, by the way, has been known since the time, relatively speaking, of kychuk kazingers. peace, that russia is simply carrying out genocide in crimea, it didn't start in 2014, it started in 1700, well, we remember the actual genocide of the crimean tatar people, their resettlement back in the 40s, that’s right, but it started from catherine’s times, not from stalin’s, not from putin’s, it happens all the time, so they believe that ukraine, according to the norms of a democratic state there, with a different demographic, well think

about it. well, anyway , 30 million people live in ukraine, russia has 130 million. russia can replace the population in crimea, increase it, what is it doing? yes, blurring the role of the crimean tatar people. ukraine cannot do this objectively and it is not interested in it, let alone consciously do. russia is interested in this and is doing it consciously. if you put yourself in erdogan's place, you will understand that it is beneficial for you to have crimea as ukrainian. even without any emotions. just pure cold calculation. along with that you want to keep. relations with russia because it is economically beneficial for you, tourists, profits from helping russia circumvent sanctions, and with that you have to balance here not to fall out with the west, so you explain this relationship with russia by the fact that you want to be an intermediary brics does not bother me much in this situation at all, andrei, i have already said that i believe that brics is not a russian, but a chinese bastard and...