is running to lead the united states, this is one point, another point is important that ukraine became the topic of this debate, in the previous debates, as you remember, it was not like that, it was not any such topic, i think that during this time things happened primarily related to value adjustments, because once again at the trump-biden debate, everyone was looking at biden's condition, not even at the content of what biden said. biden, from the point of view of content, had a pretty good debate, but everyone could see that he was not in the right physical condition, so there were questions, how far can this be continued in the future, and ukraine, which is not part of this election campaign at all, is important, it suddenly became such a litmus test, the very attitude to values, because kamela harris, she was not specific about ukraine, it is true, but she spoke about aid to ukraine precisely from the point of view of traditional american values, which are close to... for democrats and

republicans, by the way, she appealed to the polish population of pennsylvania, saying: think about it, if putin wins in ukraine, then he will not give poland a normal life afterwards. trump did not talk about all this at all, and he, by the way, continues to stubbornly insist on his position that he will force putin and zelensky to end the war. he said it again yesterday in his statement. that he is well acquainted with them, that he will instruct them to meet and end the war. how and on what terms, he also never explained, but this point of view, let's just end this war , regardless of who is the aggressor, who is the victim, who is guilty, who is innocent, there is none of this in kamela harris absolutely clearly placed the dots above and, donald trump does not have this, he simply has a desire to end the war, which spends money from the american budget, period, that is, this is such a pragmatism of worthlessness. and it's important that in principle,

if you characterize the position of donald trump in this debate, it is a pragmatism of worthlessness, but at the same time he was confused, at the same time he allowed himself to be funny, because here is this meme with cats and dogs, unexpectedly went viral on the internet so that everyone speaks not about the debate, just about that, and it's bad for trump because he looks like a grandpa watching tv, and then i'll say it again. every fool he looks at there is not a very good characterization, well , imagine what it's like if you're a young person, and you look at trump, at cativisoba, he just wants to look at some alien, some grandfather, something like that, from where you learned about it on tv, not on tiktok, on tv, i was watching tv, well, i think trump was not in the best shape, that's why he ha' at this debate. matic

was visible, he was energetic, but in such a person, this is the energy of a person who is 78 years old, well , this is his positive characteristic, because at such an age a person who is so eccentric, so energetic, it is good, but for what function, but we just see, indeed you are right in saying that those debates are preliminary. uh, which were before the official election campaign, they showed a tired biden and an energetic trump and an energetic trump, and now it's just trump is back, the same and situation, and what's more interesting, when i watched the debate, in fact, trump all the time had the impression that he was talking to biden, the impression that he was not facing kamal harris, but the impression that biden was standing in front of him that he entered, that he closed. that he does not see that it is harris, and that

biden is next in front of him, and this was probably one of his mistakes, although he really tried to keep himself in his hands, his technologists probably tied his hands and feet there, so that he does not rush there, as it was then, and as he does it now his election rounds, but less so, that is , he fell into the same... the same trap, the same trouble that he was basically preparing for biden, right? i agree, i totally agree with that, of course it is and he understands perfectly well, the fact that he no longer wants to see harry is a strong indicator that he realizes that he doesn't drag out such debates, why would he he went to them then, he had, by the way, before... before these

debates took place, there were actually a lot of reports that his headquarters, his party, members of his party, his... technologists, that they are very worried about these debates, and that they are, as they say, trying to restrain him as much as possible so that he does not, does not aggress, does not throw insults and so on, that is, in fact his entourage knew in advance, and you and i knew in advance that it would be like this, that it would not be otherwise, he had the option to refuse in general, to say no, to the others... he can refuse, and if he refused to debate with kamela at all garis, that meant he already believed he had lost them. uhu, he went to the debate with biden, because he knew that he would win them, to the debate with kamela harris, he does not go, because he knows that he will lose, he could not afford such a thing, because it was an obvious indicator

of weakness. now you can say: listen, she said everything that she wanted, i said that i wanted to talk to her there, this is a position that can be accepted, but simply refusing to debate, it was impossible. and by the way, you have to understand that this is a self-confident person, such people, especially those who have been presidents, they are sure that they will succeed and everything will work out for them. you can't to say to trump: "listen, you're going to lose the debate because of camila hylis." who i am, no way. i will come out and everyone will see. well, i have to tell you, andrii, that by and large, no big tragedy happened. we haven't seen a person in a debate where we can say, oh, that person can't. win the presidential election, maybe, maybe win the presidential election after this debate, that's actually my next question, because remember the debate between clinton and trump and trump, in 2016, that's actually what i

'm talking about, exactly the same debate, i remember, and there was actually also the audience after that debate and the pundits and the audience thought that trump... lost them, i don't remember the percentage points there, but they were almost identical to what we have there 60 to 40 was in favor of clinton, that is , can we now really believe that this debate did not affect anything in particular, that even despite the gap that is allegedly, and by the way, and by the way, after the debate this nationwide sociological measurement in... in the 16th year, he clearly spoke about the fact that in clinton was 6-7 percentage points more than trump, and the results of the national vote showed that he lost, but he still, relatively speaking, won the election, he won the election because he

dealt with these states, and that's an important lesson , by the way, as you remember, at that time, in general , everyone believed that trump was simply... that he was participating in the elections simply so that hilary clinton would become a comfortable president of the united states without any serious efforts. and only one clinton, as an experienced politician said: "trump can win the election." understand don't relax he will win the election if you relax. and everyone relaxed. including what seems to have been decisive during the campaign in these states. and now i hope that kamela harris' team, she will take this lesson, not the election, not the debate, i'm sorry, that decides this election cycle, but solely the election in these states, if you lose these states, you lose the presidency of the united states,

even if you have the majority of the votes of the voters, well, then they will speak again, but the majority of americans, they are for... camelo harris, so what? but this is the system, so you have to win in the system, not in the number of votes. trump has never in his life won an election by the number of votes in the united states of america, which did not prevent him from winning the 2016 election and being very close to winning in 2020. so, what is there to say, that is, as of now, the candidates' chances remain. 50 to 50, of course, 50 to 50, i would even say, well , maybe 51 to 49 from our point of view, but if you and i were donald trump supporters, we would tell you that 51 to 49 to in favor of trump, it is from which side to look at this process, if we return to the very

content of this debate, trump twice evaded from answering the presenters' questions about. whether he wants ukraine to win, well, he says that he wants the end of the war, the end of the war, why does he not talk about ukraine from the point of view of victory, but only speaks... from the point of view of the end of the war, because he believes that he has good relations with putin, he does not want to spoil them, he does not need ukraine to win, he needs putin and zelensky to come to an agreement about 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, this is the chinese position, we should not give vladimir putin the feeling that that he lost or was humiliated because he is our friend, even if the war ends, it must end in the minds of those who will not give putin the opportunity to feel offended in any way, the end of the war must be

a triumph for putin, yes, let it be triumph zelenskyi, but in no way the defeat of russia, that is why you will not hear the question of ukraine's victory in from trump, it destroys the very structure with which he hopes to end this war, it is not realistic, but he thinks so, but here is one more so interesting information related to the post-debate, kamala harris' headquarters actually launched commercials, de facto in support of ukraine. to be honest, in 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, it is designed to to attract voters who are natives, firstly, from ukraine, secondly. from eastern europe, as far as i understand, the first, the first from poland, because this, because this is pennsylvania, there

is a large polish community there, i am leading to this, poland, the czech republic, well, of course, that is , our part, our belt here, but at the same time we understand that the usa has a strong position among eastern europeans who live in or are from eastern europe. trump has a strong position among them, as in particular among some of our fellow citizens who live in the usa. on your opinion, but still ours by nationality, maybe not by citizenship, but maybe someone by citizenship, ukrainians, poles, czechs, slovaks, well, relatively speaking, here is our block, eastern european, they, will there be a response to.. . on such things, on such statements, and whether they will continue to vote

for trump and say something similar to him, they will be divided, 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 . grodom, i think it's 9 p.m hours, i.e. actually in a day. there will be this big conversation, i will also talk to him about it, so we will hear what he will answer to 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 diasporas in the united states in the states, in canada, and she is influential, but think about it, you take a polish voter from pennsylvania. so he has trump, who is against abortionists, but also

against migrants. and there is karis, who is pro- abortion, but pro-migrants and pro-aid of ukraine and against putin, he is a catholic, and he hears that the pope tells him to choose the lesser evil, and here it is actually the same in ukrainian to the question of what is the lesser evil, haris. which 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 take yourself, put this voter of polish origin in his place. how will you vote? well, maybe trump is not against all migrants, but for some reason i am like that, maybe this is a subjective point of view, but for some reason, i have the opinion that he is not against migrants there from poland, maybe from germany, but you can feel some kind of kinship with different. well , for some reason, for some reason i have this idea that he is, i don't know that he is, wait, if

you are from poland, you are not, you can just be a person who has different views on migration than trump, because you are a migrant yourself, of course, well, just again, you weigh all this, trump is against the migrant equivalent, 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 zealous catholic , am also against abortionists, or maybe i am a young person, and for me abortions are not so important, but what is important is that trump wants to come to an agreement with putin, that is, ... it depends on many circumstances, but it is a difficult choice, that is why we say that these are not determined voters, it is a difficult choice, both for a native of ukraine and for a native of poland, why is it so important that, say, the ukrainian organization of america work with the ukrainian organizations of poland, for their cooperation to increase, i called for this even before the beginning of the great war,

i... moreover, i met with the leaders of ukrainian organizations, polish organizations of america, and ukrainian organizations of america when i was in chicago, telling them exactly about this, that you will understand that we have some difficult issues between ukraine and poland there , in historical politics, in those things, in those things, but if putin destabilizes ukraine, poland may also feel very unstable, and what do i care. liked that all the heads of polish organizations in america, they did not even need additional clarification of this one 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, are ethnic poles, but they are americans from the point of view. and here i look, i think about these people, who will they vote for in this situation, well , in general, chicago is a traditionally democratic state, but they have this organization, one of their organizations in pennsylvania, for whom they can speak for their fellow pennsylvanians, well i think rather than kamala, because if that's how they view the world, then rather than kamala, and with that i understand that there may also be people among them who what kind of... such conservative political views that will say, you see, the pope told us to choose the lesser evil, maybe trump is the lesser evil, well, there is a problem, and again , there was no such problem with biden, because he was a catholic, the second catholic to hold the office 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... the history of the united states, a catholic who meets the pope, just like a catholic, will be the president of the united states, and kamelik garis has to 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, mostly polish, will vote, yes it can be, it's already there remember... 800 thousand polish voters, relatively speaking, how much was the gap in pansylvania, 40 or 50 votes, something like that, well, maybe 50 thousand, i don't remember, something there was very small, well and here the question is actually, the question of which group of voters will come to the elections and which will not come, which is more

mobilized, which is not mobilized, that is why even we when it was still may, june. we even said back then that, in fact, even then it was 50 to 50 and in fact then even no one could say that everything would be one hundred percent trump or one hundred or one hundred percent biden, well, we have what we actually have according to the current schedule, when the current vice president of the united states of america, kamela harris, another phenomenon, is taylor swift. by the way, yes, we have talked about this many times, that she is, will there be a moment when she supports taylor swift in this election campaign, she is a phenomenon in general, even if we ignore the election campaign, she is basically a phenomenon in american society , because americans perceive it as self-made woman, that is, a person who has made herself,

who has influence, who has impeccable. supposedly a reputation, and in fact, a person who has a huge audience, it is, if you look at the number of his followers, the number of listens on various platforms, it is millions and tens of millions of people, and it affects precisely the young audience, the truth is that now it always arises the question is how much she is able to mobilize this young audience so that they not only say, oh, how wonderful she is. said, subscribed, lady cat, how much she is able to force these people to agree that they should go to the elections. this is the number one question for me. i don't have any. the answer to this question, we will see, well , she supported kamela harris, and in your opinion, will it affect the election anyway, if she really convinces young people and that

vote will be affected, if not, it won't, well it will one more thing there, a representative of such a creative elite who supports kamelogai, the majority of the creative elite of america supports kamelois, you are absolutely right that the support of the trailer world is a lot worth, and donald trump is already saying: that she supported him, remember? yes, he said that she supported him, he even did some photoshop, i think, there, well, he generally likes to do all these photoshops, so to speak, which are on the border with fakes, collage, i would say, collages like that, and there are a lot of things that are not true, yes, well, maybe it is more important for trump to say that the teleworld is for him than the real world to support kamelo garis, that's what i think, but i think that it is important in any case. it the moment you've been waiting for, remember, everyone said taylor sweet's support would be such a hidden weapon for democracy. it seems to me that what is more unexpected is the fact that camel

harris supported dzikcheny, the former vice president of the united states, the vice president of the time of george w. bush, a man who has always been the personification of conservative republican values, a man about whom even left-wing directors have made films like millet of conservative republican values, who was so demonized by these people, i, like andriy yermak, you can draw such a parallel, i think, because in reality dikcheni 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 made all the principled decisions. everyone said: oh, cheney, oh, he has such an influence, he has such an influence on this bush, oh, if it wasn't for cheney, well, that is, he is such a demon

of american democracy, and when a person from such a camp supports, supports camelo harris, then if andriy yarmak left now and supported petro poroshenko, you know, we all vote for poroshenko, but why, why no one? took such a step because i think that trump does not correspond to his value system, well, first of all, his daughter, as you know, she was simply destroyed politically by trump, but he was never in a perfect relationship with his own daughter, so -secondly, i think it is clear, it is also visible from these debates, that trump is not guided by values, that trump is guided solely by his own interest, that trump does not correspond to this vision of the republican party at all. which is in the head gechen, well, in principle, you have to agree, even at this convention where donald trump was nominated by the presidents of the united states, there was no former president of the united

states, no vice presidents, neither mike pence nor dick cheney, which is also interesting, because trump has largely changed the political values ​​of the republican party, that's what i think about when we talk about debates, i look at these debates as the debates of a person who leans. on values, this is kamala garis, as a person who does not rely on values, this is donald trump, everything we talk about him, charisma, economic achievement, energy, not energy, it's all about something else, when we talk about harris, we say that she adheres to one or another values ​​there, somewhere balancing , somewhere is trying to please someone, traditionally the electorate of democracy, to get some and get others, but these are views, here it is completely different. this is the ego, but i would certainly vote for kamela harris in this election, if i were an american, just as i would have voted for biden in 2016, the 20th year.

in 16 for clint but i don't think it would have been any different in the previous election and even so i would have voted for mckinney and romney that's the trick i would have voted for reagan not carter i ...sorry, for reagan and not for who was the candidate at the time alter, well yes carter, of course for reagan not carter, i would have voted for ford not for carter, despite the whole story with altergate, i always liked ford more than carter, then i would vote for mccain, not for obama, for george bush sr., and that's it, that's it. yes look, i'm all the time, all the time, maybe except for bill clinton, you have to think about it, i

would vote exclusively for republicans. in the ears of junior zabush junior yes of course ugh ugh i would vote there were times when i wouldn't have voted i would have voted for lyndon johnson over barley goldorter but i would have voted for richard nixon over john f. kennedy, you see, i would have voted for dwight isenhower, he was a republican, but not for him, who was there, i was already for... i was his democratic opponent, that is, there were some rare situations in the american history of the 20th century, when i would vote for democracy, for roosevelt, that is, for johnson, and probably for clinton, but it would be personal sympathy, it would be an emotion, such emotions for barack obama, i will say, i don't have and i think that both mccain and romney

are much more serious strategic thinking politicians for me than barack obama, although i recognize the personality of barack obama, he is a great personality from the political point of view, what are you saying, so am i i understand why he was there twice president of the united states, i don't have any questions, i'm just talking about myself, so what, so why am i telling you about this in such detail, something the republicans have done that makes my three me three times in a row vote for candidates from another party, and not for the candidates i would like to see in office. president, i would say i would not like to see hilary clinton as president of the united states, i would just vote for her so that there would be no trump. i would vote for biden, sure, but i don't know if i would would i vote for kamelo garis if there was another republican candidate, such as some conventional mitch mcconnell or nikki haley? well, if you ask me, who does camelo harris or nicky haley want so much? well, i find nikki haley

absolutely acceptable too. candidates, so when they nominate trump, they show me that they have abandoned their values, i am a person of values, why should i agree in principle with their abandonment of values, why should i accept and legitimize it, i don't want to, and i think , that the way you laid out your own emotions, they are in a large number of americans, that's why the dignitaries are also surprised, how it happened like this, how this big party that i was building turned into some... club of trump's children and his relatives, well, i couldn't be the same, well, here you go , that is, there is no legacy, there is no continuity, trump has practically completely torn the legacy of bush, and the elder from the youth, and the legacy of reagan, and the legacy of barry goldwarter, and the legacy of nixon as a foreign policy strategist, all of this

absolutely, although he can... nixon and i talking too much because nixon is too big the accountant was also more of a pragmatist than an official person, and we can still see the results of his pragmatism, they are negative, so by and large it's such a complicated story for me, and i think it's a complicated story for dzikacheny. here is the answer to your question. if we are still talking about the united states of america, this is the last topic, volodymyr. zelensky announced his trip to the usa, when it will be, we do not know yet, i understand, for the session of the general assembly, well, apparently he said that it will be in september, that is, as far as i understand, it the end of september, the dates need to be specified, but less, but on this trip, at this meeting with the leaders of the united states of america and other countries, zelenskyy

is going to present... a plan for victory, and he is also going to present this plan for victory to kamali haris, joseph biden and trump, in this context, how to build ukraine's relations with trump himself. we see that, in principle, the ukrainian leadership is trying to maneuver like this, without knowing who. will still win. 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 will happen in this regard. president zelenskyi has already said that he will first show it to biden, then to kamel harris and donald trump, and then they will show it to the people. if there is some document that can be shown to people, then it is not a plan, because.