[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Itse

There's a lot of ways to spin it. I just listened to the NYT podcast The Daily, which really was another masterclass at subtle spin doctoring.

Basically their storyline is that, yes Harris won etc. but the way they frame it is: "She basically avoided answering any substantive questions about her own policy backflips, about her association with Biden, she went on offense and managed to catch Trump in a trap in pretty much every question, in basically every answer she embedded something in there, a sentence or a line that unravelled Trump and got him on an angry tear."

"When you look at the debate overall, he was fine for the first 15 minutes, he was angry and unravelling for the middle 40 at least, and sort of got his footing back at the end. There will be a lot of analysis saying how catastrophic it was...

"Really, they’ll Use that word?" (In a surprised voice)

"...I don't see it quite like that, I see it as a huge missed opportunity for Trump, this was his chance to define Kamala Harris... So it was a huge missed opportunity for Trump..."

"She passed that minimum test that she needed to present herself as a plausible (seriously they kept saying that's a thing she needs to prove, wtf NYT?) president" while he just "missed the opportunity to define her as a radical leftist, as someone who owns every (strong emphasis on that word) of the Biden record that you don't like." And that's where they end the analysis.

*slow clap* That is frankly brilliant work. Admit the defeat, but frame the win as "she managed to trap him with words, it was a minimum win for her, for him it was a missed opportunity for a potential win, and oh she's a radical leftist and is responsible for everything hate." (But we didn't say that exactly).

And this is how Trump is still in the race.

Sure, I guess. Media just keeping the race open for ratings.

Kamala went on the offense like she should have and hit Trump where it hurts, his ego. Why does Kamala say anything substantive if Trump doesn't?