Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped “wars with France,” after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to “close the deal.”
…
Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.
Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.
If you could have bothered to read a few lines more, there’s an entire 76-page PDF attached outlining plans and goals.
Now I’m not asking you to read the whole thing, but you’re being disingenuous.
How much of it is more fluff like this?
If you’d like to single out the policies you think are meaningful, I’ll happily pick through that chapter. But if the first two paragraphs are empty pablum, I’m not wasting my time with the next fifty.
Aren’t you a big fan of “theory”?
Exceedingly verbose publications should be right up your alley 🤷
“The introduction isn’t an in depth policy explanation.”
Fuck off.
Great idea. Have a good day.