mtutiger

Tariq doesn't care, so it's NBD

Any comment Tigeraholic?

The obsession these guys have with identity politics is almost pathological

Agreeing with what?

Maybe he speaks for a few, but the laughter in the crowd of NABJ members to the responses I heard speaks louder.

Meanwhile...

I don't know if he's a crazy Trumper or not. I don't particularly care. Do you think Tariq speaks for the entire community?

Do you feel that you know how all the black people feel?

This campaign has a weird obsession with identity politics. Strange ****

I would add that the previously scheduled debate that Trump has backed out of was set to take place on ABC.... and that in the course of this interview, he attacked Scott's colleague George Stephanopoulos, who was set to host the debate. Calls into question whether that debate will happen....

He's gotten a relative free pass from the press in this election cycle... The comments at the top where he attacked Rachel Scott and ABC were really striking.

The video... Worse than the quote itself imo

Yikes

NC being in play is no longer a myth

Beyond the weird angle, I do wonder whether Trump's age starts to become more of an issue going forward.... it was easy for him to duck those concerns with Biden in the race, but he now has an opponent who is much younger and more vigorous than he is. And who will likely outwork him on the campaign trail. He also just sounds like **** whenever he talks.... I saw a few clips of his appearance in Minnesota this weekend and a clip of him being interviewed by Laura Ingraham yesterday and he sounded like a drunk who was slurring his words. I know people will say that he's always sounded crazy, but he never used to come across like this in 2016 or 2020. We assume nothing matters with the guy, but IDK, I don't think the contrast in this current race does him any favors.

I agree, the focus on how Kamala Harris laughs and talks is definitely weird.

The other part is that, for the most part, I haven't been seeing people say the word "weird" for the sake of saying the word.... they are saying it in direct reference to statements and policy positions that, to any normal person, are weird. I will say this, if JD Vance wasn't the VP nominee, I think it would be less effective.... but he has a whole host of strange positions and statements and if this is the means to vet those positions / statements and potentially tie them to Trump, they absolutely need to be doing it and not being paralyzed by fear of hypotheticals.

Josh Shapiro is so exotic to blue-dog marginal voters that he has a 61% approval rating in a 50/50 state with a middle portion that resembles Alabama. Which is to say, he's not exotic at all to blue-dog marginal voters, relative to the other options at least. Just don't agree on this one.

I don't know that it is clear what exactly Harris' Israel policy would be... Although one thing I do think is clear is that Israel's PM probably would be standing on firmer ground with the American public if he didn't spend the last 9 months poking it's greatest ally in the eye over and over again, while doing backdoor diplomacy with a former POTUS running for office once again. Israel isn't in a good spot here, but to a degree, its a spot they are in because of their own actions. They shouldn't be let off the hook for that when assessing the situation

Look, the body of evidence is there... you see it in how hard Fox is pushing back, how hard Fox is trying (and apparently failing) to get JD to clean up some of his remarks, and in observing the comments from the candidate's own campaign. I just think people are seeing this as a false choice where using the word "weird" is the entire campaign.... it really isn't. The clips from Kamala's rally tonight suggest there's a lot of substance to the message that their campaign is trying to present. But if your opponent has a weakness, by all means, they should keep going at it and make it a theme. Sitting back and being passive is much worse.

Gonna push back on this one a little bit as, in a lot of cases, it is being used to highlight comments like Vance's "childless cat ladies" comment, which is weird, exclusionary and, if you really sit and think about it, is a "deplorables" level comment in its own right. Dems shouldn't be scared of highlighting that, even in ways that seem unorthodox to how they normally address these things. Now, at some point, you have to pair the word with tangible examples of weird policies that the Trump/Vance ticket has been tied to or else it will fade away. But it's clear to me just by looking at the reaction from the Trump side that they don't see this as a positive. At all. It's the most off of their game I have seen them since coming down the escalator (maybe even more than Access Hollywood, which Trump just powered through at the subsequent debate)

lol

That's, uhh, a nice car ya got there pfife... Shame if, uhh, something happened to it

Not just with Twitter but also with TikTok, I wonder if going from Joe to Kamala messed with algorithms....