Trump’s campaign seemed to have been holding onto some hope that their candidate would refrain from attacking his opponent based on race and gender. It was just last week that Trump’s spokesman, Steven Cheung, was asked at a rally if Republicans ought to be labeling Kamala Harris a "D.E.I. candidate." Cheung said then that "from the campaign’s standpoint, we haven’t done that." Asked if such attacks were "off-limits," Cheung replied: "I don’t know if it’s off-limits, but it’s not something that we’ve done. So, it is not even on our radar." Now, it is certainly on their radar. It was ABC’s Rachel Scott asking the former president if he believed Harris was a "D.E.I. hire" that set him off on his long tangent in which he questioned her ethnicity. Prodded again as to whether he considered Harris a "D.E.I. hire," Trump concluded: "I really don’t know. Could be, could be. There are some."
SCOTT: "Republicans on Capitol Hill have labeled vice president Kamala Harris, who is the first black and Asian-American woman to serve as vice president be on a major party ticket, as a DEI hire. Is that acceptable language to you, and will you tell those Republicans and those supporters to stop it?"TRUMP: "How do you how do you define DEI? Go ahead...."SCOTT: "Diversity Equity Inclusion."TRUMP: "Okay, yeah, go ahead. Is that, what, your definition?"
Scott limited herself to saying what the letters stand for.
Listening to the event live yesterday, I thought Trump was going to turn the interview on Scott and force her to concede that Biden did in fact promise to pick a black woman as VP, that Harris was chosen from his short list of black female candidates, and that Democrats tout DEI as a good thing. But Scott seems to have realized that it was best to keep it short and give Trump the opportunity to deliver a sound bite.SCOTT: "Yeah, uh."TRUMP: "Give me a definition then. Would you give me a definition? Give me a definition."SCOTT: "Sir, I'm asking you a question, very direct question."
She's the interviewer. She's asking the questions.
TRUMP: "You have to define it. Define it for me if you would."
He's sticking to his define-your-term approach. It could be a stalemate, but Scott advances it by restating the question without using the term:
SCOTT: "I just defined it, sir. Do you believe that vice president Kamala Harris is only on the ticket because she is a black woman?"TRUMP: "Well, I can say, no."
He answered the question! He said no. Issue avoided. But Trump has a new idea. It's a wacky lateral move. Why? To catch Scott off guard? To make weird news? To tell an intriguing half-truth, just waft it out there, this trial balloon?:
TRUMP: "I think it's maybe a little bit different. So, uh, I've known her a long time indirectly, not directly very much, and she was always of Indian heritage and she was only promoting Indian heritage. I didn't know she was black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black, and now she wants to be known as black. So I don't know. Is she Indian or is she black?"
Here he goes, trying the interviewer/interviewee switcheroo again. Scott keeps it short:
SCOTT: "She has always identified as a black woman...."TRUMP: "I respect either one, but she obviously doesn't, because she was Indian all the way, and then all of a sudden she made a turn, and she went, she became a black person."
SCOTT: "Just to be clear sir do you believe —"
I think Scott was trying not to get side-tracked but to return to her last stated question ("Do you believe that vice president Kamala Harris is only on the ticket because she is a black woman?"). Trump continues with his wild lateral move:
TRUMP: "I think somebody should look into that too when you... continue in a very hostile nasty tone."
He's making race an issue, but it's a different race issue than the one Scott is fishing for. And he added some grousing about Scott's "nasty tone." (I'll resist expounding on the recent political use of the words "nasty" and "tone.")
Scott, not waylaid, refocuses on her question:
SCOTT: "It's a direct question sir: Do you believe that vice president Kamala Harris is a DEI hire as some-"
TRUMP: "I don't know. I mean, I really don't know. Could be. Could be. There are some, and there are plenty. I know this lady right over there, Harris, is a fantastic person who just interviewed me at length, and we had a great interview, I think.....
And Harris — that is, Harris Faulkner, of FOX News — jumps in and takes over with her own race-oriented question. We're "divided along the lines of race," etc. The big sound-bite part of the discussion is over, and what the hell happened?
Trump tried to resist making race the central issue. He used several techniques: 1. tedious examination of the term "DEI," 2. equivocation about the racial basis of Kamala Harris's success, 3. a surprising and shocking new issue. He seems to just instinctively try one thing after another, just nervily taking the chance that one or the other might work, that it will at least make it hard for the interviewer to keep her bearings, and, if all else fails, it will certainly be interesting and entertaining. The fans will love it, and the haters will get so mad.... who knows what they'll say? We'll see and I'll riff on that later.
Rachel Scott too got what she set out to get.
And, ironically, we're all a little stupider now.
पोस्ट्स
१२६ टिप्पण्या:
Joe Biden himself said that he was planning on picking "someone of color, and/or a different gender" in his own words, so Trump is repeating what the progressives beloved delusional selected president said in his own words.... Progressives trying to pin Racist Joe Bidens words on Trump are lying assholes.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/joe-biden-potential-vp-pick/index.html
And, of course, he used the technique of directly answering the question, just not in the way the interviewer would have preferred.
" so Trump is repeating what the progressives beloved delusional selected president said in his own words"
Read the post, parsing the actual language. He avoided saying that and did other things.
That's why I wrote: "Listening to the event live yesterday, I thought Trump was going to turn the interview on Scott and force her to concede that Biden did in fact promise to pick a black woman as VP, that Harris was chosen from his short list of black female candidates, and that Democrats tout DEI as a good thing."
Because he DIDN'T do that.
"And, of course, he used the technique of directly answering the question, just not in the way the interviewer would have preferred."
You've got a funny idea of what "directly" means.
You can't fight a biased media who is an arm of the radical Progressive agenda. They lie, and spew disinformation daily, bombarding Americans with bullshit. You have to parse through the shit filled streets to find the truth anymore, because our media is a joke.
This campaign should be about policies; not race, gender, skin color or personalities.
Trump is such a buffoon.
If he bothered to do any serious preparation at all he could have easily answered this question.
But he didn't because he's a buffoon.
And he's going to lose because he's a buffoon.
One thing I appreciate about Trump is that when he is in front of a predominantly black audience his literal way of speaking doesn't change. He doesn't try to get all urban black and/or use incorrect grammar. Hillary did it...comically poorly. Obama and Harris do it and, although their efforts sound a little more authentic, it's still an affectation.
"And, ironically, we're all a little stupider now."
Who's we, and why? I learned that I can't handle the media half as well as President Trump, and I realized that the Rats really have to get a new candidate before Kumala Brahmin gets exposed as the fake she is.
Nice quote from Gutfeld last night - Trump is the same guy in any room he's in.
Topic was Kamala code-switching into black dialect for black audiences.
What I like (or LOVE) about Trump is an utter fearless nature to go where others fear, either literally or metaphorically. I mean, could you see Mitt Romney at this event? Or even Ted Cruz?
We (Republicans) are not calling Kamala Harris a DEI hire.
Joe Biden called Kamala Harris a DEI hire.
Quote: "To me, the values of DEI are literally — and this is not kidding — the core strengths of America. That’s why I’m proud to have the most diverse administration in history that taps into the full talents of our country. And it starts at the top with the Vice President."
He said this proudly. On PBS. On video.
https://x.com/jeff_poor/status/1816187139949805887
Are there any male members of the NABJ? Thank heaven for Harris Faulkner, but they used to have a token Republican on The View panels, too, until they went 100% woke.
Diversity is a liberal woke of art and a progressive contagion that reduces individuals to color, sex, age, viability, etc blocs.
We (Republicans) are not calling Kamala Harris an Indian.
Kamala Harris HERSELF called herself an Indian. In an interview with the most famous Indian in America - The Office writer Mindy Kaling.
Kaling: "We're going to make dosa ... because you're Indian. And I don't think very many people know that.
"Yes. Yes. I am an Indian." - Kamala Harris
She said this. On video. Laughing hysterically. One might almost say cackling.
Here is the video:
https://youtu.be/xz7rNOAFkgE?si=7-34ackmps7DYxWT
is DEI a Good Thing? If so.. Isn't a DEI hire a Goot Thing?? i'm confused
Whatever. His response was ham-handed enough that media were able to rush out with the headline "Trump Attacks Harris's RACE!"
Which is all they wanted.
Can you imagine Kamala Harris sitting down and being interviewed by Mollie Hemingway, Gerard Baker, and Guy Benson? Impossible. She would never do it because couldn't survive it. I'd love to see her go long form with Megyn Kelly.
Now imagine her with Putin, Erdogan, or Xi. Trump's Hannibal Lector jokes would start to come into play. What is Trump thinking with those "I'll have you for dinner" asides?
I said yesterday and reiterate today, this little flap will not harm him and probably will help a little. But it would have helped more if he had said simply, “Those are Joe Biden’s words, not mine.”
DEI is a corrupt democrat idea.
Is Harris a DEI hire - you betcha. So what? The left should be happy -they invented DEI.
I should clarify: Kamala Harris is Indian ... not like an Elizabeth Warren Indian ... like the ones with the dots.
She is not black. Neither she, nor Rachel Dolezol, can suddenly "identify" as black and have us take that seriously.
The corrupt leftwing media are a gotcha-getter machine for the corrupt democrat party.
Remember when Obama used to tout his white heritage?
Me neither.
Ann Althouse said...
"And, of course, he used the technique of directly answering the question, just not in the way the interviewer would have preferred."
You've got a funny idea of what "directly" means.
SCOTT: "I just defined it, sir. Do you believe that vice president Kamala Harris is only on the ticket because she is a black woman?"
TRUMP: "Well, I can say, no."
He answered the question! He said no. Issue avoided.
THERE IT IS, a direct answer (acknowledged by Ann "He answered the question! He said no.").
The direct response is not (as Ann indicated) an avoidance of the issue.
Trump asked for clarification of the question, i.e. a definition, which was not provided. Instead of providing the requested clarification/definition, Scott offered a different but more specific question. Scott's use of the clarifier "only", made the response ("no") an easy one.
In Kamala's own words.
Wild Chicken said: "media were able to rush out with the headline "Trump Attacks Harris's RACE!"
We all should be wondering if this will trick the black people into voting for Kamala Harris.
Are black people stupid? The Democrats and the media certainly seem to think so. They seem to think they can trick black people by fronting a fake black person. One that Joe Biden called a "DEI" hire.
Amadeus 48 said...
Now imagine her with Putin, Erdogan, or Xi.
No need to imagine how she'd be with Putin. As I posted yesterday
Harris warns Russia of unprecedented sanctions if it invades Ukraine (Feb 19, 2022)
On 24 February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine in a major escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian War, which started in 2014.
I can see a line of attack that Trump’s campaign can use if they are clever about it. Harris is trying to have it both ways. He’s been going Crazy Kamala, but this sets up a Kamala Chameleon play. Let’s see if they amplify this in the coming days.
Gerda Sprinchorn said...If he bothered to do any serious preparation at all he could have easily answered this question.
There's something about Trump to frustrate everyone. For his supporters, it's missing golden moments like this. All he had to do is say, "Joe Biden promised to pick a black woman as his running mate. Do you believe Joe Biden meant what he said?"
But he didn't. Instead he spoke in circles and said basically nothing.
She WAS clearly, obvious to everyone alive in 2020, a DEI hire.
The Democrats, and Joe Biden in particular stated that he was looking at multiple (a) women, and at least (b) four Black women as potential VPs.
They made it clear they were looking for a vagina. And not just any vagina, but a vagina of color, if possible. Such was their declared standard in 2020.
And now? Now you cannot say that? Bull. Say it. Say it regularly. Explain it. Say it again repeatedly.
Did you see the women on that panel? They are the very portrait of privilege. Upper middle-class blacks, and usually women are the ones who reap vast benefits from DEI. Naturally, they’re going to object to any slight aimed right at their hearts. If you check the background of these three women, I guarantee you you will find professional parents. It’s Time the Republicans bring up the matter of class and gender in the black community. Lower class, black men live the reality of the black matriarchy. It’s time to drive a wedge between the haves and the have nots. of course, this will never get done. Politics is the art of creating a hallucinatory reality. And the left, which lives in delusion has the upper hand. After all, their policies are all about making their fantasies come true whether it be no oil or competent DEI hires or Butchering, children or men into women or women into men, etc., etc. etc.
"She has always identified as a black woman"
Has she? Many old reports featuring her Indian heritage foremost.
She has two parents. Why say you are a "black woman" when you are Tamil-Jamaican?
Yes she was the final prompt for putin yo engage in the full invasion of ukraine she was involve in the kabul capitulation her step daughter fundraises for hamas what else is she good for
As Temujin notes, anybody not asleep during Biden's search for a VP knew what the primary qualifications were from the names being mentioned, much like it's pretty clear that the Democrats think they need to identity-group balance their ticket this time around, too.
It was also obvious they wanted to find anybody BUT Kamala Harris before they were forced to take her.
I'm not so sure it matters what Trump says or how he says it. The media will twist and distort anything they can to paint him in a bad light. CNN and MSNBC were in a complete frenzy last night. Their panels feigned indignation while at the same time you could tell they were just giddy with delight.
Her performance has punctuated the point.
The regime picks the worst objectively
We're familiar with "pretendians" like Elizabeth Warren (a.k.a. Pocahontas). It's interesting that Kamala is something like an opposite pretendian.
Zaslow should have fired more people as for conde msnbc is a lost cause
DEI is the left's baby. Shouldn't they be proud of Kamala's DEI hire status?
Kamala can be whatever she needs to be to move her career forward.
What do YOU need? That's what she can be.
"just win, baby" - Al Davis
"I'm addressing the white elephant in the room."
I agree with Sebastian:
“She has two parents. Why say you are a "black woman" when you are Tamil-Jamaican?“.
And I’ll add why say you are an Asian-Indian woman? Harris has purposefully been racially fluid, depending on the circumstance. Being fluid on this front (and others) is not a helpful tactic if you want to be a uniter. So I guess she doesn’t want to do that.
Many politicians are shape shifters, with Biden being a great example. Obama spent a lot of his early years as Barry Soetoro. Reagan, a product of the Hollywood machine, was an FDR liberal and a union president. Trump, however, is always Trump.
Kamala Harris, with an Indian mother and a Jamaican father, was different things at different times. Her black identity firmed up when it became politically advantageous, undoubtedly coached by Willy Brown, one of the genius politicians of the 20th century.
Well, as stupefying as that exchange was, at least they didn't get into hair. I mean, I doubt anyone has ever asked to touch Kamala's hair.
Seriously though, I imagine Trump's goal here was to peal a significant percentage of Black men away from Kamala. Take a look at the DEI component of any Fortune 500 company, or University: it skews heavily Black Female. Black men are left behind in numbers, most purely relegated to a few tokens. And, of course, this is apparent in the 70% Black out of wedlock birth rate: Black women having children view Black men as an unnecessary burden on their salaried income. Trump's message to Black men: Kamala ain't your friend, she wants nothing to do with you (look who she married).
The implication of the question is that it's bad or shameful to be a DEI hire. ("Will you tell them to stop calling her a DEI hire?")
But I'm 100% sure the questioner supports the concept of DEI hires and if anything would like to see more of them. As many as possible.
So the agenda we are supposed to follow is:
1. Make lots of DEI hires.
2. As soon as they are hired pretend that they were not DEI hires, and fiercely scold anyone who brings it up as a possibility.
The Left always wants to live in an adolescent fantasy world where reality can be altered by uttering a magic word or two.
Easier than working.
Is she of the Obama Kenyan elite or Kenyan deplorables? The Indian elite or peasant?
Class matters. Diverse Lives Matter. That said, Baby Lives Matter, too. #BabyLivesMatter (BLM)
I’ve not seen one news report that reported his actual answer to the question, “No.” Every article or hit uses the gotcha question and a varied mix of his counter-questioning or the Indian side track. The media is deathly afraid of accurately reporting the direct answer, which the reporter allegedly doggedly pursued.
In the last post from yesterday I wrote in detail how the authenticity question dogs Harris in the male half of the black community. So I think Trump took the Indian diversion knowing that the dishonest media would skip over his answer to promote his (perhaps feigned) bewilderment that she’s black now.
How many times have we seen the hot take excite the DNC-Media talking heads but their repetition of an edited Trump statement have a completely different effect on the general public? Too many to count. The insiders only know how bubble dwellers will react and are shocked when normies have different reactions. “Unexpectedly” as Insty says (and Drago uses effectively).
And the crowd was LOLing.....
Maybe this wasn't brilliant political jujitsu on Trump's part but you can see a possible path.
Harris will have difficulty running on the Harris-Biden economic record, and it's been clear from lots of polls that kitchen table issues are ones that voters find most pressing this year. Taking a cue from the Democrats and the working class post yesterday, it's been a long time since the Democrats could press what Ruy Teixeira likes to call an 'abundance agenda' that would appeal to working class voters of all races.
It's been clear that the primary focus of the Biden, and now Harris, campaign was largely based on 'threat to democracy' and Trump's supposed racism. Biden has never backed down from his claimed reason for entering the 2020 race being the Charlottesville Hoax. The questions thrown at Trump were pretty clearly selected to further these issues. I have no doubt that Harris doesn't view trading barbs over racial identity as a distraction but one that she and her campaign think they can win on.
However, as Ann does note, by avoiding the usual GOP pander of trying to outbid the Democrats for racial spoils, Trump went straight on to talk about the 'code-switching' that post-DLC Democrats do and spoke directly to the way that code-switching has an impact on the economic well-being of minority groups, in the form of wage pressure from illegal immigration. I don't expect the regime media to highlight this at all but it is out there.
What's also out there is forcing Harris to defend her previous chosen identification with another ethnic group.
DEI/DIE/IED... a progressive path (PP) - no pun intended - forward.
Trump is significantly ahead of a Harris in most issues. Every comment he makes should revolve around the incompetence of the Biden-Harris administration.
Interviewer: Mr. Trump, do you think Harris was a DEI hire?
Trump: I have not really considered that. My focus is on the young people who can’t afford a house because of the Biden-Harris inflation. (Unless the question is in PA then he can talk about “California” Kamala’s desire to destroy the lives of people working in fracking.)
Beginning with letting Uday and Qusay select his running mate Trump has stepped on one rake after another.
Play to your strengths (the issues), don’t do a daily reminder of why people despise you.
Also, Biden’s infirmity and Harris’ participation in the coverup of it should be a major issue.
If you stigmatize people for being on the receiving end of affirmative action, then you are contributing to a system of white privilege. You can either accept the blame for that or you can try to shift the blame onto those who created the affirmative action and made you do it.
Whether you accept the blame or not, you will be blamed. If you blame those who created the affirmative action, they will, of course, blame you.
Some recycled comments that elucidate this point:
Trump knows exactly what his black supporters are saying about her: she runs on helping black people, including a few specific women in prison that are a cause for many, but after “using” those names in two campaigns Harris has never not once mentioned their names outside of campaign events or lifted a finger to free them. She hasn’t even publicized the alleged injustices that put those black women in prison.
Of course the Leftists here are unaware of the inauthenticity Harris is viewed by “her” community, because the Democrat Media won’t report on things that reflect poorly on their anointed candidate. But Trump has heard and what seems like a rake-step to the ignorant is a clearly calibrated statement expressing bewilderment at Kamala’s sudden blackness.
Most black women, like the “journalists” he was interrogated by yesterday, will stick with the D party, but black men are leading the exodus from the commie plantation. They bear the brunt of the incarceration and they despise fake allies who have put record numbers of them behind bars but claim to be their champion every few years when they need black votes.
Your hive is not the real world, leftists. And it is tremendously overrepresented in the “Mainstream” media consumed by a small and ever-shrinking portion of the general population.
Trump knows he's not going to win the black vote, he'll try, but he knows he won't win it. At most he'll get 5 to 10% of this demographic's vote. But, if he can also get 5 to 10% to not vote for Kamala, that's a big win for him.
I think Trump was trying to avoid circling the drain like that (ie, my previous comment). He was looking for a way out, and he created a distraction, the issue of race as a matter of self-identification (done out of self-interest).
DEI - Anybody want the Kamala Harris of a medical school performing surgery on them? The Kamala Harris is pilot training fly your 737?
I think the Trump team knew going in that this was going to be an attempt to set Trump up with a bunch of gotcha questions. Trump deflected and gave them something, but it's not red, raw meat that they could use to gin up outrage over. I saw some CNN a couple of hours afterwards and only the News Barbies seemed upset by any of this.
I'm sure Trump has engaged in plenty of affirmative action in his businesses. It was part of "The Apprentice." I think he has a pretty liberal view of the matter but is trying to change the subject.
Or do you think "The Apprentice" showed a meritocracy?
If you stigmatize people for being on the receiving end of affirmative action, then you are contributing to a system of white privilege.
There's a difference between being admitted into a University of a more qualified applicant than being the affirmative action hire for President of the United States.
If this is where we are at as a nation, that fall of the American empire is not far away.
Hint: a lot of black men use X and are not shy about expressing their opinions about Kamala. Seek and ye shall find.
Trump isn’t making race the issue, he’s making DEI the issue. Someone intelligent enough to merit an endowed chair should be able to see that.
I think he has a pretty liberal view of the matter but is trying to change the subject.
EVERYONE knows Kamala was Biden's VP pick ONLY because of her race and gender. That is the definition of DEI.
Mark Kelly will be Kamala's pick for VP ONLY because of race and gender. That is the definition of DEI.
Mark Kelly can go down in history as first White Guy DEI hire. Congratulations Gollum. You must be so proud.
One screen, two shows: the interviewers thought they were on Meet the Press.
Trump knew he was on Showtime at the Apollo.
JSM
Temujin said...
She WAS clearly, obvious to everyone alive in 2020, a DEI hire.
The Democrats, and Joe Biden in particular stated that he was looking at multiple (a) women, and at least (b) four Black women as potential VPs.
They made it clear they were looking for a vagina. And not just any vagina, but a vagina of color, if possible. Such was their declared standard in 2020.
And now? Now you cannot say that? Bull. Say it. Say it regularly. Explain it. Say it again repeatedly.
8/1/24, 7:29 AM
*****100% THIS!!***** They want you to cower down and be shamed for even thinking it, when THEY were the ones running on it.
How many working class white people throughout America have been passed over for a job, or had their kid not get accepted to a University when less qualified applicants were accepted?
Probably a shitload.
For John Deere and Harley-Davidson customers, they will show their disdain by abandoning brand loyalty.
They will vote for Trump.
"There's a difference between being admitted into a University of a more qualified applicant than being the affirmative action hire for President of the United States."
We're all voting and can vote for her if she suits us. What does it matter whether others have boosted her here and there? That doesn't count in her favor, so don't count that. Count what should count and move forward. What has she done that demonstrates the requisite knowledge, skill, and leadership? The sooner we get to that the better! Taking about race and affirmative action could distract us all the way to the election. I'm afraid we will remain mired in these generalities and emotional matters and won't get to the substance of testing her on her actual merit.
Women are always DEI hires in jobs requiring structural analysis. They run on feelings. Look at Althouse. "If you do this, women will think ..." threats. You must obey our feelings or no sex for you.
There are great women surgeons, but what does that job specifically not require?
Women can be very smart but their inclination puts their interest where feelings matter.
Kamala doesn't seem to be in the smart bunch. Smarter than most whites perhaps but that's not a high bar.
Biden’s infirmity and Harris’ participation in the coverup of it should be a major issue.
Absolutely true. To me it's the biggest issue, followed closely by the perpetual policy failures, refusal to change course but rather doubling down on those failures, and insistence that we're not seeing and never actually saw what we all just saw - of which the cover-up is one example. But in this thread we have to talk about Trump and Harris and race and DEI... I just can't anymore.
I think the way that he answered disallows an easy catergorization, and instead kind of forces anyone who's listening to his answer to moot the question to themselves, and answer it. She was a DEI hire by definition: Joe said he was hiring a black woman. It was noted extensively at the time. That is what people will remember when they ask themselves the question. If he'd said 'yes' or 'no' it would have been a different process.
All the women STEM tracks when I was in college were chem pre-meds.
I would say that, if you have to pretend that Trump is playing nine-dimensional chess in order to justify his words, you’re probably ignoring some plain truths.
ABC’s Rachel Scott looked visibly frustrated and upset after having her script flipped on her. I suspect she doesn’t see her performance as a success.
Maybe he should just stay in the basement and have all his statements canned and pre-recorded.
The easy answer would have been, "that's what Joe Biden said, but I oppose her not because of who she is, but because of what she says she'll do." Instead, Trump went to the exact same place as Biden did when he said "then you ain't Black." It's convincing to no one when a white person tries to define who's Black. It's like an atheist trying to say who's a good Christian and who's not.
If he doesn't show up ---> racist. If he shows up ---> racist. It doesn't really matter what he said. He could have hit it out of the park and they would just pick at something else...
I'm an atheist and I say a good Christian is somebody who thinks the best of others instead of the worst. Augustine's position.
Nobody cared that Obama was the least Black person Dems could have nominated. This shit won't work on Kamala either.
Harris' entire career has been her being promoted upwards without any actual merit whatsoever. What makes Trump's attack on this effective is that Harris was a child of privilege. Harris' childhood circumstances were more affluent than pretty much every single person my and Harris' age that I have ever known in my lifetime- I literally can think of only one person my age (I am two years younger than Harris) that grew up in a wealthier family than Harris did.
Kamala says she'll end price gouging. That's economic stupidity of the highest order, a complete absence of structural thinking in favor of feelings.
Want to be really entertained on the matter? Econtalk's Mike Munger on price gouging long ago, before the feminized the channel and were into economic's strong point, preverse consequence.
Munger on Price Gouging (youtube)
Trump is incredible. At his age and right after almost getting killed, he's doing hostile interviews and giving as good as he gets.
The typical Mitt Romney-Jeb Bush-Nikki Haley Republican candidate would never have done the interview, and if they did would've turned it into a pander-fest and after crying and weeping over America's "sins" would've tried to convince the blacks that Corporate tax cuts would be great for Black folks.
And i disgree about DEI. What does it mean? Just spelling out the initials, isnt defining it. If some hack journo wants to ask about it, Define it. And don't dodge.
Anyway, Harris is now offically black. Hope all the Hindus who were thinking of voting for her got the message.
Speaking of Ruy Teixeira, just out this AM
The Harris Coalition Is *Not* the Second Coming of the Obama Coalition.
I'm sure this was written before the NABJ explosion but I'd suggest people read his analysis of the poll numbers running from 2008 all the way to 2020 before jumping to the conclusion this was a Trump own-goal.
Blogger AlbertAnonymous said...
Maybe he should just stay in the basement and have all his statements canned and pre-recorded.
8/1/24, 8:51 AM
—————-
Not bad advice.
If the election is a referendum on Trump Harris wins.
If the election is a referendum on Trump Harris wins.
If the election is a referendum on the issues Trump wins.
Is this a distraction from discussion of the real issues? Perhaps, although one could argue that the impact of DEI is a genuine issue. But, if it is a distraction, the press is perpetuating the distraction with questions like these, particularly given the hostile emotional nature of the questions.
The MSM/DNC underestimation of Donald Trump's ability to pontificate, bullshit and banter back and forth on the fly in real time continues. The whole time they were trying to set up Trump to say sound bites that they could take out of contacts in order to slam his views as racist and misogynistic.
The interesting thing was they seem to focus more on white women's issues how much time did they spend on JD Vance? He danced around those gotcha questions and made the woman in the blue dress look foolish, biased and even slightly a little hysterical.
Of course none of it matters because few watched the full 35 minutes or whatever it was. Cut short due to technical difficulties.
House of felt the woman in blue was channeling, Harris and was going after Donald as if she were a prosecutor herself. I'm asking the questions here...
This was live action debate prep. In my opinion advantage Trump.
Politics has always been elbow-throwing rough-and-tumble. But the last few elections, particularly this one, are very internet-poisoned. A lot of what the Right does now is basically shitposting and trolling. Never treat a troll as a good-faith interlocutor.
Q: do Indians think she is indian? or consider it positive that she calls herslef black?
But, if it is a distraction, the press is perpetuating the distraction with questions like these, particularly given the hostile emotional nature of the questions.
@Justabill, never overlook the power of “we love him for the enemies he has made.”
Cut short due to technical difficulties.
=========
issues with airing the interview or issues with auditoreum
Rich: the only real Poison I see in this election is the MFR who tried to blow Donald Trump's head off. Study your history politics is always been nasty and violent. The bullying the trolling the line the inflammatory language on the Internet is just so much inconsequential noise.
Back in the day when kids ran wild and hydrated with hose water, we were told that sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me.
Never treat a troll as a good-faith interlocutor.
Thanks, Rich. We sure won’t.
(Jeez, talk about a lack of self-awareness.)
"I'm afraid we will remain mired in these generalities and emotional matters and won't get to the substance of testing her on her actual merit."
Actual merit? Who, on the left, wants to do any testing on *that*?
Bueller? Bueller?
" but let's begin where I began this morning, reading Shawn McCreesh, at the NYT"
I think I see the problem.
I watched the whole 34 minutes last night. I really appreciated it how he went on the attack against that woman who seemed to be in charge. Especially pointing out that he was not late, that ABC had equipment problems, the he and kh were treated differently and that he didn't even merit a good evening or hello.
A couple other things
1 why 3 women? Are there no black male journalists?
2 was it coincidence that of the the only one that had serious problems with their mic/earpiece was also the only one who seems to be somewhat fair? ABC did not have spare gear they could have swapped out?
3 president trump was supposed to have a full hour. Due to ABC incompetence they were 30 minutes late starting. Instead of running long to give him his time, they cut him short.
Was this planned? Perhaps a compromise between the najb woman president who didn't want him "platformed" at all and those who did. "equipment failure" made an excuse to cut his time.
The president of nabj quit over the fact that he was invited at all.
John Henry
If Trump is a racist then why did he select a running mate whose wife is too dark to be accepted by Trump supporters?
Biden in a video refers to Harris as an example of DEI at the highest levels of government. Cue the campaign ad.
Althouse: " I'm afraid we will remain mired in these generalities and emotional matters and won't get to the substance of testing her on her actual merit."
Isn't that the whole point of Identity Politics and Critical Theory? "Substance" and "actual merit" are white privilege. In considering the disproportionate Black prison population, the substance--whether they actually commit violent offenses at a higher rate than other racial groups-- is off limits. Similarly, any measure of merit such as SATs that Blacks perform at a lower rate is ipso facto racist.
If you stigmatize people for being on the receiving end of affirmative action, then you are contributing to a system of white privilege.
Hmmm. Perhaps the learned Professor can explain what she means by “white privilege”? Is it the “privilege” of putting in extra time and effort to make up for the lack of effort by the DEI hires? This will no doubt come as a shock to someone who spent her career in academia, but everyone in any enterprise knows who is pulling their fair share of the workload. If you aren’t carrying your fair share, whether you’re only there because of connections, DEI, or you’re a hiring error, everyone knows — and respects you accordingly. And conversely, doing a conscientious job earns real respect.
Whether you accept the blame or not, you will be blamed. If you blame those who created the affirmative action, they will, of course, blame you.
[Shrug] if one is going to be blamed no matter what, then the obvious, optimal response is to ignore the blamecasters.
A big part of Trump's appeal is his fearlessness in saying things that he knows he'll take flak for, and that normal politicians would never say. It doesn't necessarily matter if he's right or wrong; either way, it reinforces the larger message that he's a fighter who won't kowtow to the conventional, elitist mindset. That's the first takeaway.
The second is that, in this case, Trump is making a point about racial politics for which the left really has no good answer. The point is this: How important can a politician's race actually be if someone can decide whether or not to claim a particular racial identity, and can even change it later if they so desire? Sure, Kamala has both black and Indian parentage, and therefore can technically claim to be of either race (or both). But what does the ability to check a box really signify? The leftists are trying to assert Kamala's decision to check the box called "Black" as an actual credential. Trump is pointing out the inanity of that way of thinking and is using the example of Kamala to make the point.
The idea that Kamala's supposed blackness a real thing that actually tells us something about how effective she'd be as president deserves a serious takedown. It should be taken about as seriously as when Justice Sotomayor embraced her identity as a "wise Latina," or when old-timey pols like Biden pretend to be Irish on St. Patrick's Day. Trump succeeded in getting people THINKING about these things, despite the media's attempt to focus the narrative on something else.
You've got a funny idea of what "directly" means.
In your own words, "He answered the question! He said no."
Admittedly, he then went off on the black/Indian thing, but he did directly answer the question.
Althouse: "won't get to the substance of testing her on her actual merit."
Funny (seriously, IYKWIM). Anyway, since that test would be very brief, let's just get back to the emotional generalities.
"If the election is a referendum on Trump Harris wins"
It will be be referendum on Trump.
Therefore:
QED.
If you stigmatize people for being on the receiving end of affirmative action, then you are contributing to a system of white privilege.
That may be true if you assume someone got a job due to DEI status, but in this case (a) it was widely announced, both before and after she was picked for the VP slot, that only a woman of color would be considered, and (b) she has a long track record, both before and after she was picked for the VP slot, of being incompetent, incomprehensible, and entirely unliked and unchosen by the electorate. At some point, you have to live up to the job you were hired to do or accept the criticism.
What about you, Ann?
30 years ago when UW hired you, did they pick you because you were the best of all applicant? By whatever metric of "best" is appropriate.
Or were you hired because you were the best of the women applicants. That may or may not make you the best of all applicants, of course.
More importantly how can you, or any woman (including my daughter & granddaughter) or black or anyone else who might fall into the dei/aa web know if you are the best? Or even you are good?
It feels, to me, insulting to bring this up. I apologize if anyone feels insulted. Not my intention. My intention is to point out the horrible, corrosive, nature of aa/DEI.
John Henry
Speaking of Kamala's black heritage, I thought we (especially the left) were cancelling descendants of slave owners?
Or do you think "The Apprentice" showed a meritocracy?
Trump was casting a television show, the merits on which he did so revolved around personalities, charisma, etc. All "reality" shows do extensive and time consuming reviews of how a potential contestant will come off on television and very little on whether they have the skills the show actually involves. Actual business acumen on the part of the contestants was not really much of a part of it.
So, here's part of something I just came across on X:
"Trump changed the narrative today. You can't change the narrative without controversy. You can't change the narrative without saying or doing something that the media is forced to refute or their narrative collapses.
"They had to switch from promoting Harris to defending her."
It appears that this person agrees with our host.
Side question: does anybody know why the above punctuation convention - when quoting more than one paragraph, the closing quotation marks only come at the end of the FINAL paragraph, but each NEW paragraph DOES get a set of opening quotation marks - exists?
A lot to consider here, and Trump deftly handled it. Before an engaged black audience, it is not a good idea nor very polite to observe that Biden or anyone else said out loud they were practicing affirmative action. He dodged that. Of course he knows Biden said so, but HE can't say it.
The asking questions back was done very well. I don't think we are dumber for it.
I think we are more free and aware for someone finally fighting back against the obvious fact that Biden and liberals can talk about it; beneficiaries can talk about it, but the rest of us are racist no matter what we say about it. That was a pretty amazing moment of exposing the taboo truths and selective silencing of dissent regarding DEI, done with sophistication yet sensitivity to the audience.
A Christopher Hitchens might have been able pull it off, but who else could do that? Moynihan once wrote a book about what happened to him after he dared to even try to offer policy analysis of the collapse of the black family in 1965 -- as a liberal, and as an author of the war on poverty policy that he was criticizing for unexpected consequences. It's called Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding. Great read.
I think Trump just picked some of his pals for The Apprentice and the producers likely picked the rest. He has always run in naturally diverse circles.
Sorry. The book was released in 1970. The policy was passed in 1964 and implemented -- disastrously -- in 1965. So you see how quickly policy can ruin and divide us.
It is notable that the black journalist chose to use the term "DEI hire." Her question was more like a challenge. She was saying, "I dare you to come in here, in front of all these black professionals and say she is nothing but a DEI hire." Her choosing that term shows the emotions attached to it and DEI, for herself and likely most of the people in the room. To them DEI is a negative thing now. It now means unqualified or barely qualified now. This is good news for folks that are hoping for a society that is or at least strives to be more meritocratic.
I think Donald Trump's pivot is actually pretty canny. I don't think he had the response written out and focus tested ahead of time but I would be that he has been kicking around the idea before. Because of American history there is a very strong sense of black identity in America. By black I mean descendants of former slaves in America. Among those folks I think there can be a little unease and perhaps even resentment of other black folks, and by other black folks I mean people who are of some sort of Sub-Saharan African heritage but not of former slaves in America heritage. I think the first group doesn't like the second group trying to latch on to a history and experience that that their families didn't go through.
@Jamie, in regards to quotation form, I've usually seen that usage when the sections quoted are not contiguous and are full sentences so using ellipses doesn't really apply.
LLR-democratical Rich: "If Trump is a racist then why did he select a running mate whose wife is too dark to be accepted by Trump supporters?"
LOL
Move over gadfly, you've got company at the far end of the bench!
I guess we can blame the Sacramento Bee for all the confusion.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article124327739.html
Watch Kamala Harris sworn in as first Indian-American senator
Just like the "Obama was born in Kenya" rumor started through published commentary from Obama himself, the "Kamala is Indian" arose because of Kamala's actions earlier in her career.
It's like a "Libs of TikTok" situation, where someone on the right is responsible for harms caused by words spoken by someone on the left.
It's funny - I think most comments here are reasonably intelligent - so I'm surprised no one brought this up.
When Trump was being attacked so harshly by the ladies and I think one time the audience either booed or mocked him (though later laughed with him) I was thinking he was getting flustered by the people who hated him (at the beginning - he loosened up later). And I thought he's not going to change anyone's mind in the audience.
When I realized - this is not the audience. Not the lady journalists. Not the audience attending.
His audience is all the black men in USA. That is who he's talking too. So when he says Kamala was always Indian. When did she turn black? He's talking to all the black men in USA who say "Yeah. She's NOT one of us." When they grill him on black jobs and he says black jobs are just jobs, they are thinking "yeah. He's not pandering to me. He's treating me like a responsible adult."
Very early in I realized this and tried to think of him having a conversation at a park with a black man drinking beers and if you think all of his answers were to just regular black folk in the country all of his answers make sense. They don't all have to vote for him but if he gets 20% instead of the normal 10% the election is over.
Every answer was "what do I need to tell the black population to seal the deal with them?" He was brilliant.
The Vault Dweller said...
It is notable that the black journalist chose to use the term "DEI hire." Her question was more like a challenge. She was saying, "I dare you to come in here, in front of all these black professionals and say she is nothing but a DEI hire." Her choosing that term shows the emotions attached to it and DEI, for herself and likely most of the people in the room. To them DEI is a negative thing now. It now means unqualified or barely qualified now. This is good news for folks that are hoping for a society that is or at least strives to be more meritocratic.
I think Donald Trump's pivot is actually pretty canny. I don't think he had the response written out and focus tested ahead of time but I would be that he has been kicking around the idea before. Because of American history there is a very strong sense of black identity in America. By black I mean descendants of former slaves in America. Among those folks I think there can be a little unease and perhaps even resentment of other black folks, and by other black folks I mean people who are of some sort of Sub-Saharan African heritage but not of former slaves in America heritage. I think the first group doesn't like the second group trying to latch on to a history and experience that that their families didn't go through.
8/1/24, 1:49 PM
Yes that's EXACTLY my point! Trump was not talking to those ladies. He was talking to ALL the black people in USA brought here in chains, resentful that this new upstart Indian who never was part of the struggle, now takes their heritage when it is suddenly politically useful. He's trying to divide them from her.
My wife mentioned she watched Hannity before she fell asleep last night in the mixed company of strangers. They chimed in that they never watch Fox News... any channel but. They've made up their minds on their sources. Whatever is dished to them they gobble.
Trump will gain nothing 'convincing' the habitual non thinkers, (i.e. gadfly).
Althouse dissects and analyzes, and that requires more work than many will invest.
Trump goes for the alternative. That requires work. Vastly different audience requirement.
tommyesq said...
“Speaking of Kamala's black heritage, I thought we (especially the left) were cancelling descendants of slave owners?”
If Kamala’s slave owning ancestor had been an American, he would have ranked second in US history in number of slaves owned with 1,120. By just 10 slaves. And third place was some 300-400 behind.
A lot of what the Right does now is basically shitposting and trolling. Never treat a troll as a good-faith interlocutor.
I admit, I've never ever seen a bigger case of projection than what you put out on a daily basis. It's incredible.
"He seems to just instinctively try one thing after another, just nervily taking the chance that one or the other might work, that it will at least make it hard for the interviewer to keep her bearings"
The reason why Trump has to do this is because Party interrogators refuse to accept Trump's direct answers, and instead ignore his answer and repeat the question, never accepting any Trump answer as adequate. Let's jump in the wayback machine to the campaign of 2020 and recall the Party interrogators attacking Trump with this very same tactic over the issue of Trump disavowing The Proud Boys/white supremacists. Surely you all must recall the moment when during a televised interview with CBS?ABC, one of those outfits when the interviewer was ignoring and repeating the question until Trump finally said in exasperation "I do disavow them! I just did, I just said it, I disavow white supremacy. What do you want me to say?" And the bint replied, "I want you to disavow white supremacy." And Trump just shrugged at the lunacy.
The reason he has to keep repeating himself is because his interrogators are using this communist Party torture tactic against him.
Keith, that was the point I made as well, but I haven’t scanned the earlier comments to see if it stayed put or got swallowed by the Blogger Borg. Black men were absolutely the target and really only progressive black women and AWFLs are triggered by this.
Male lifetime member of NABJ agrees Trump outshined his rude hosts:
https://twitchy.com/brettt/2024/08/01/tariq-nasheed-weighs-in-on-trump-at-the-nabj-conference-n2399138
Now let's see Kamala speak at a Conservative Women for America forum.
Oh, wait.
What would happen is that they would be very kind and respectful of her, stand up and clap, thank her for coming, compliment her lovely pantsuit, and then feed her amazing crustless tea sandwiches and lemon bars.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा