Trump complains that the media is giving Harris a “free ride.” The evidence he cites is that she looks too good on the cover of Time magazine.... But the Time cover is a pretty accurate representation of Harris.... [I]t might be a freehand “drawing,” as Trump put it, [but] the photo credit says, “Photo-illustration by Neil Jamieson....”...
Next, Trump claims Harris looks like Melania on the cover.... But aside from the fact that they are both human women in their 50s, Harris and Trump’s features aren’t very similar....
Trump complimented Harris, saying, “She’s a beautiful woman, so we’ll leave it at that, right?”...
The short article doesn't answer the question in its title. Hartmann wraps up by calling Trump "weird." Why not offer the easiest explanation? Trump loves beautiful women, and he expresses that love openly, even when talking about his political opponent.
Posts
60 comments:
'Hartmann wraps up by calling Trump "weird."'
NPC
Despite what the media say, they know the voters love Melania. In an effort to make Kamala likable the magazine portrayed her looking like Melania. Kamala is attempting (and the media assists her) to look Trump like in every way possible. Maybe that was Trump’s point.
Hartmann wraps up by calling Trump "weird."
"Order #1: March...!"
"Weird" seems to be the word of the day for Democrats.
The only thing relevant about Time Magazine is its cover that people only see online. Nobody buys it or reads anything inside. It's a ridiculous shell of what it once was. The cover is nothing more than liberal propaganda "art".
Currently, the effort to repaint, and redefine Kamala is nothing more that "polishing a turd."
I thought it was the word of last week; I think this writer is late to the party.
The magazine made her look like Melania? Huh?
The recreation of Kamala Harris over the last month is a bigger propaganda effort than "Triumph of the Will."
"The evidence he cites is that she looks too good on the cover of Time magazine"
Just ignore the lack of interest in interviewing her. The lockstep adoption of "weird" and "joy" and "America's dad". Ignore the media's lack of interest in her flip flopping. Yeah, there's no evidence.
Inga, it’s a drawing, not a photo.
I disagree that's it's a faithful representation of her. I showed it to my husband - he said she looked American Indian (is that what we say now? Aboriginal American, anyway). I thought she looked "more Black" than usual - I hesitate to use that language and I'll try to analyze my own perception in the next paragraphs.
Here is her headshot from Britannica. She is certainly is very beautiful. Take note of her head position and the shape of her nose.
Here is the Time cover.
And here is the Time cover of Obama that the Harris cover is so reminiscent of. Note the head position and shape of the nose.
I don't think the artist (ahem) fundamentally transformed Harris's image. But the up-tilted head does emphasize the shape of her nose, which appears to me to be the most stereotypically African-American feature she has (when she is viewed on the level, as in the first image, the width of the nostril area, already only slightly greater than stereotypically European-white, is deemphasized). I think, though, that the artist did the up-tilted head (and the style of the image overall) to bring the Obama Hope and Change image to mind, rather than to make her look as if she's looking to the future. Because she doesn't look joyful - she looks Obama-esque.
So I guess my gut feeling about this image's making her look "more Black" is, upon closer examination, a sense that she looks more like the first Black president than she actually does. And I think that's deliberate.
Old Weird America. No longer a Democrat thing. But we all knew that.
Is Obama weird? "President Obama assessed the beauty of California's attorney general Kamala Harris, calling her "the best looking attorney general," during remarks at a fundraiser in Atherton, California."
Drawing or photo, or photo illustration, I doubt the magazine tried to make her look like Melania. She looks nothing like Melania.
"So I guess my gut feeling about this image's making her look "more Black" is, upon closer examination, a sense that she looks more like the first Black president than she actually does. And I think that's deliberate."
As long as they can get people thinking about her race and not about her ability, they've done their job.
Inga: certainly doesn’t look like Kamala. And the head position is very much Melania’s
Here’s the cover and Melanie side by side:
https://balleralert.com/profiles/blogs/trump-claims-kamala-harris-looks-just-like-melania-on-time-magazine-cover/
Trump dodged a bullet. He's on a freeroll.
"So I guess my gut feeling about this image's making her look "more Black" is, upon closer examination, a sense that she looks more like the first Black president than she actually does. And I think that's deliberate."
She looks nothing like Bill Clinton.
It is a good likeness of Kamala and whatever way the head is held she looks nothing like Melania.
Weird that Democrats who claim to value women as autonomous individuals, deserving of being respected and valued for their capacities and achievements, have instantly gone apeshit over Harris. (aka "Mass formation psychosis a term that was used on the Joe Rogan podcast by medical researcher, Robert Malone, M.D. He used it to describe what was happening in the United States and elsewhere in terms of people's overwhelming acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination.")
IMO this sudden overwhelming enthusiasm for Harris is mostly because of her looks. It's not like she's got the brilliant eloquence of Obama or genius level policy proposals
Ironically, my first thought of the Time cover picture was that Harris looked like one of those Native American, or in old-speak, Indian, drawings.
"Inga, it’s a drawing, not a photo."
No, it's a "photo illustration," and if you click through, you can see the original photo that was subjected to some manipulation to make it look like a drawing. But the image is straight out of one photograph and she looks exactly the same.
Reminds me of the time he looked at a photo of E. Jean Carroll and thought it was Marla. Maybe he sees more similarities than most people see.
For the sake of accuracy here is the exact quote: "'Mass formation psychosis' is a term that was used on the Joe Rogan podcast by a formerly respected medical researcher, Robert Malone, M.D. He used it to describe what was happening in the United States and elsewhere in terms of people’s overwhelming acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination." There is something funny about reading this article from 2022 debunking Malone when so much of the debunking has now been debunked.
Well, Melania isn't Black, aka Kamala's flavor of the week.
A young E Jean Carrol looked slightly like Marla did when she was young.
I think he sees types of beauty or "looks," as you say, similarities. For instance both Kamala and Melania have long wavy brown hair, good facial bone structure, strong eyes, good chins, and lips.
I'm sorry to create such a hassle with the links to the images - not sure how to get around that. The two Time covers are not in fact all that similar in style, but I was instantly reminded of the Obama cover when I saw the Harris one, so apparently there's something subliminal going on for me (or else just the use of red and line drawing and up-tilted head was enough).
On the other hand, Trump has been featured, in image and in couple of cases just in words, 35 times on the cover of Time. Here is an article in Time that purports to contextualize each one. There is one, only one, that looks neutral to me - from summer 2019. All the rest are negative. No hagiography for you!
Heh.
“ Reminds me of the time he looked at a photo of E. Jean Carroll and thought it was Marla. Maybe he sees more similarities than most people see.”
In 1957 when I was 3, I was sure the SunMaid raisin lady was my mother (who was extraordinarily beautiful in 1957.)
My daughter, who is a true natural beauty and at 22 wears a bit of tinted lip balm and maybe a light brush of mascara as her only makeup, once went to a wedding where the bride offered us the opportunity to have our hair and makeup done along with the wedding party. My daughter, in the wedding pictures, is no longer a natural beauty, but instead could walk away with a beauty pageant. The makeup artist emphasized her Slavic features, in particular - you could cut glass with her cheekbones.
She is almost unrecognizable as herself, but if you created a similar line drawing out of those wedding photographs, you could certainly say it looked exactly like the photographs.
In other words, the resemblance of that drawing to a photograph does not necessarily equal the resemblance of that drawing to the Kamala Harris the appearance of whom we have all known for years.
I also got my hair and makeup done at that wedding. I also was beautiful and practically unrecognizable. But I know it was I!
So in order for her to grace the cover of their magazine, she sat down for an interview, right?
Right?
From Yahoo News “Harris declined to be interviewed for the article, which featured a striking front-page image of the vice president sketched in black and white while surrounded by supporters holding up signs bearing her name next to the words “Her moment.”
Althouse says: "Why not offer the easiest explanation? Trump loves beautiful women, and he expresses that love openly, even when talking about his political opponent."
That's not the LEAST what Trump is saying. What Trump is saying is that Melania is beautiful IN REAL LIFE. Whereas, the only way you can make Kamala Harris "beautiful" is to "illustrate" her. Melania didn't get where she is by sleeping around with frankly some really low-class men. Melania is naturally beautiful. You don't need to draw her in order to elicit her beauty.
Kamala is a fake creation of the media. Whereas Melania is real and his.
That's what Trump is saying.
A man would understand this. It's easy to see why a woman cannot.
A common trait of alleged reporters on the left is how ridiculous and trite they demonstrate themselves to be.
I was thinking he was providing appeal material...
LOL. Trump's off handed flattery of Harris has the left arguing that Kamala loks way different and is not as beautiful as Melania
Stick her image out there, have her laugh and giggle. It's high time. She wants it.
Compliments are perceived in the ear of the beholder.
I can’t find the image the “photo-illustration” (as Time describes it) is based on. Time Magazine gives the underlying photo credit to Andrew Harnik. I’ve googled him and there are (as far as I can find) no photos that look like the photo-illustration.There is a photo that FOX News compares to the cover illustration but that photo is by a different photographer. As I’ve studied the illustration and actual photos of Harris, (in my opinion) the image is pure invention by the photo-illustrator.
the guy is delusional its very simple DOWN WITH WILLIE BROWN ,he got the records and the trumpeters buy it?
It’s in the blogpost, Althouse linked to it, just go look at it. Scroll down, you’ll see the photo.
Inga, I saw that one. But the eyes, the structure of the face (in my opinion) are more similar to the photo of Melania in that same article than they are to Kamala. And frankly, it isn’t a good likeness of either of them.
She's got high cheek bones and the same general hair style. There's some resemblance, but I wouldn't call it striking. They both have an impassive expression. Melania's expression is more suitable for the runway than for Mt. Rushmore, however. The illustrator has made Kamala look dignified and visionary. I don't think anyone prior to just recently has ever been impressed with Kamala's gravitas but there it is on the cover of Time for all to see. We are not worthy of such a leader. But for all her somber thoughts, she is, nonetheless, capable of communicating great joy. Perhaps in a subsequent cover, the Time people can feature the great joy that lies just below the surface. She's cracked me up on any number of occasions.
Ann Althouse said...
"...if you click through, you can see the original photo that was subjected to some manipulation to make it look like a drawing. But the image is straight out of one photograph and she looks exactly the same."
Except there is no !JOY! in the original photo. The photo image looks like a lifeless mask, so artistic touch was required to insert !JOY!. The difference is in the eyes. Eyes in the original photo look like empty dark slits, but in the "photo illustration" bright sparks were inserted where hollow darkness has dwelt.
Wow you are right. The drawing widened Kamala's face out a lot and widened her nose bridge substantially. The Time drawing squared her face quite a bit.
I don't think the drawing is flattering. I think they were trying to make her look more masculine.
The comparisons with Melania are a stretch. The drawing makes her look a little more like Melania than usual but that is starting a mile apart and going 100 feet.
nice 4D chess move by Trump psych-out
Melania never made covver = now Kamala cover inextricable with Melania
Why not offer the easiest explanation?
This is why:
the media is giving Harris a “free ride.
Hartmann wraps up by calling Trump "weird." Why not offer the easiest explanation? Trump loves beautiful women, and he expresses that love openly, even when talking about his political opponent.
From there, we go to Ann's explanation of an altered photo of Kamala, Inga's comment about Trump mistaking a younger Jeanie Carroll for wife Marla, and Meade telling his Davy Crockett-like memories of when he was only three.
Nowhere do we find mention of the solipsistic state where Donald only lives inside his mind, which means that his representing a love for beautiful women only hides his inability to interact with anyone. "Metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other realities, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, having no independent existence."~Wiki
That interview was hilarious. Trump was kidding around. It was a sophisticated, effective barb. He used self-deprication to suggest he might get in trouble for saying it. He also tried to make Musk less anxious. He praised the men and woman who were his body team; the doctors who saved two of the three badly injured people, and the sharpshooter who killed the gunman. He offerered a fascinating perspective of that day. The whole interaction humanized him.
All in the midst of hammering home some very interesting points about his platform, backed by facts. His instincts, intellect, wit, and ability to mitigate Musk's discomfort while making his policy points heard were as good as anything Clinton could deliver, and Bill Clinton was a masterful pollitical speaker. Speaking to, not down to your audience.
This is a man ready for a presidential race.
Jamie, thanks for the links. Obama has a windmill, a roadmap, the words "breaking news" subtly written on his face, and he's staring away from a gaudy rendering of a dollar sign. I guess he bought that Hamptons house with windmills and good intentions. Then there's the heavy-handed Soviet Realism style. Kamala has tiny, faceless people waving larger "Kamala" signs crawling all over her blouse and behind one ear. The people are lilliputans. The people are swarming ants. You can't unsee it once you see it.
I find the obligatory 'weird' mention in everything published about Trump and Vance from the Dems tiresome now.
I took Trump's point to be that the Time cover was a very flattering image of Kamala, trying to make her more attractive (like Melania), to distract us from the fact that she's a hideous and nasty human being. Ask the people who have worked for her.
DJT looks at politics like a casing director for Hollywood. And he first looks for any classic beauty in actors’ faces and demeanor. Simple enough. Just because they have previously played bad guys or bad girls doesn’t mean they cannot be cast as good guys or good gals in subsequent films.
So that’s Trump’s method of analysis. But he would be better off to keep his authentic mouth shut.
There is a fascinating article at UnHerd about how Kamala's appeal is not anything aesthetic for men, but as a BOT (Bride of the State) for what JD Vance accurately called cat women. The startling revelation of the article is that, if it were not for the cat women, Trump would win in a landslide.
https://unherd.com/2024/08/the-march-of-kamalas-brides/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3
It's sorta cute/sad that the Dems think "weird" is some kind of slam dunk, like "fascist".
Kamala the Visionairheady
As others have noted, Trump is (in my reading) not saying that Kamala resembles Melania particularly. He’s saying that they’ve idealized Kamala so thoroughly in this cover image that she looks far better than she otherwise could. Not saying he’s right or wrong—but he is in fact not praising Kamala’s beauty, and his closing remark is meant wryly: “Let’s say no more on that subject.”
The cover looks native American to me. Just going with a black and white image rather than a color drawing, painting or photo makes Harris look less black (and less South Asian). The face seems rounder than Kamala's, perhaps because of the tilt of the head which emphasizes the neck and foreshortens the head. The face doesn't look much like Melania's at all, though the hairstyle does resemble some of Melania's hairdos a little.
Obama's "Person of the Year" cover owes a lot to Shepard Fairley's "Hope" posters. It doesn't look like this election is going to have an iconic image -- or maybe the photo of Trump at Butler, PA was the image.
Post a Comment