The effort to trick Trump into making race the central issue and Trump's countervailing trickery.

This gets a little complicated, but let's begin where I began this morning, reading Shawn McCreesh, at the NYT (I've added the boldface):

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."

"Steven Cheung, was asked" — who asked him? It seems that the anti-Trump side is trying to force Trump and his spokespeople to say Kamala Harris was a "DEI hire." It seems that Harris supporters want race to be an issue, and ABC’s Rachel Scott made that happen at Trump's appearance at the National Association of Black Journalists Convention.

Let's look at the transcript in some detail and see how Scott achieved her goal. I'm using the automatic transcript generated at this YouTube video of the event, and I've corrected and punctuated it based on the video:

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.

"Three years ago... JD Vance... suggested in a TV interview that some Democrats including Vice President Harris are 'a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable.'"

"Those 2021 comments are resurfacing on social media now.... [M]any... are embracing and owning the 'childless cat lady' label as a point of pride.... 'There’s a movement,” declared Nikki Barnes, a previous member of the Democratic National Committee from Florida, accompanied by a 'Childless cat ladies for Harris 2024' image quickly amassing nearly 2 million views. On TikTok, people are snapping up 'Cat ladies for Harris 2024' stickers."

From "‘Childless cat ladies,’ Jennifer Aniston, and Swifties take on JD Vance/Celebrities including Jennifer Aniston and Whoopi Goldberg cite many reasons women don’t have kids. Others are embracing being a childless cat lady like Taylor Swift" (WaPo).

It's clever to take an insult and turn it around like that. I'm trying to think of other examples of that. There's "nasty woman." And "suffragette."

Another reaction to Vance's "childless cat ladies" is that not everyone who is childless is childless by choice:

“I truly can’t believe this is coming from a potential VP of The United States,” actress Jennifer Aniston wrote Wednesday.... “Mr. Vance, I pray that your daughter is fortunate enough to bear children of her own one day.... I hope she will not need to turn to IVF as a second option. Because you are trying to take that away from her, too.”