I doubt her entire fanbase is based of some kind of white player is dominating a black sport angle, but it's also very naive to assume there isn't an element of that involved. How much is up for debate, but it's certainly a part of it.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Every time a celebrity/political endorsement type thing comes up I think about Seth Rogan telling Paul Ryan to eat s*** to his face in front of his kids and his reason being "if Paul Ryan's kids like an artist, there's a good chance that artist hates their dad and they should know that and why."
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
There is definitely a group of people using her as a wierd reverse racism’ and anti straight icon. I can’t say it’s sizable but it is a portion of her fan base.
Pretty much every youtube clip of her is full of comments about how she's fouled all the time by nasty black players, and the refs are on "their" side.
It's a small portion of her fanbase, I'm sure. And probably not even basketball fans. But they did latch onto her.
It was dumb because she is a colege educated young woman,playing a sport with a lot of minorities, whose BF is an outspoken liberal and whose college roomate was gay.
Virtually every single boycott/cancellation on either side has started in some form or another through social media campaigns and grievances.
Disregarding those communities as "not what the real world thinks" is just absurdly naive.
It seems nearly impossible to use that as a gauge.
It seems that it is definitely fair to say that there are some MAGA/racist types using Clark as a symbol for their message.
I don't know if that mean's that means that a large percentage of fans that are going to Fever games and watching on TV are Trumpers. It seems Clark is probably completely fine losing that type as fans anyway and doubt it hurts her or the team's bottom line. And it was just a like anyway!
You can find plenty of so called Taylor Swift fans acting all outraged online and saying they are selling their tickets, ripping up their merch. I don't think anyone would argue that that is her base.
It seemed pretty obvious that Bud Light and Nascar would be hurt by claims of going too "woke". I doubt that Caitlin Clark is the same situation though.
Social media can start things, sure. You can't judge the fanbase until you see if it actually takes away from the fans who actually are spending their money and time to watch them.
I guess this all assumes that judging a fanbase is a useful way to spend our time
Are there really a lot of MAGA WNBA fans because of her? I can see some subtle or subconscious racism from leftish leaning people in her fanbase, but I'm not buying that a lot of Trumpers are watching women's basketball. I could be well off base on that though.
Basketball is a huge sport in some conservative leaning parts of the US (north appalachian, rural midwest, mormon belt). These white-skewing areas tend to be home to college teams that are more white than typical college teams, due to some homegrown talent. Sometimes NBA teams in these regions even skew more white than average (particularly Utah). Here's what I've seen on sports subreddits. Early on, there were definitely racial overtones that some fans attached to Clarke's rivalry with Angel Reese. Some people were gleeful about this white girl who was sticking it to a predominantly black league, and the more black, establishment players took cheap-shots at her or dismissed her in comments, the more Clarke was pissing off the people that MAGA people wanted to piss off. Were there a lot of MAGA-type people watching the wnba because of Clarke? I don't know, but I do think that she did become a gateway to watching the wnba, not simply because she was a really good white player, but because she was pissing off the right people. Of course, they took the next step of concluding that because she's pissing off the right people, she must also have the right views, and this is probably bursting that bubble.
The Following User Says Thank You to octothorp For This Useful Post:
I mean Trump is technically batting .500 on the debates this cycle, quitting at even is an admirable move. Of course if his poll numbers drop (as, of course, they would in any normal country) in the next week then I imagine he reverses course.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
It's probably best for Kamala if there isn't another debate.
He set the bar very low. All he has to do is be not as bad as last time for it to help him. Just refraining from saying anyone is eating pets probably does that.
But he can't do that. And since he seems to be leaning into Laura Loomer running his campaign the likelihood he does significantly worse is basically 99%.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following User Says Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
It's probably best for Kamala if there isn't another debate.
He set the bar very low. All he has to do is be not as bad as last time for it to help him. Just refraining from saying anyone is eating pets probably does that.
Agreed. There’s no shortage of people pointing out the talking points he didn’t use. A little more prep and discipline next time and he could land some blows.
It's probably best for Kamala if there isn't another debate.
He set the bar very low. All he has to do is be not as bad as last time for it to help him. Just refraining from saying anyone is eating pets probably does that.
That's what I was saying. I don't think there is much more damage she can do against Trump with another debate. If the last one didn't change anyone's mind, the next one won't either.
On the flip side, if she does any little thing wrong, you just know she will get piled on for it no matter how small. It's like betting a dollar to make a penny at this point. Even if the odds of winning are 90%, it's probably not worth the risk.
You can't really make Trump look any worse. She would be better off just being out there spreading her message, being accessible, and maybe throwing in some trolls to bait Trump into keeping up the idiotic come backs.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
It's probably best for Kamala if there isn't another debate.
He set the bar very low. All he has to do is be not as bad as last time for it to help him. Just refraining from saying anyone is eating pets probably does that.
I think another debate would hurt trump.
We talk about Biden's cognitive abilities during that debate; while not to the same level, its showing in Trump, and he was very easily rattled.
Harris has shown she can hold her own and spar in a debate. Her biggest problem is potentially not having the same exposure other candidates get during a presidential race.
- she dropped out of the 2020 race pretty early.
- wasn't overly public during her VPship
- there was no real nominee race for her to get recognition.
another debate would help harris' exposure and most pundits are pretty confident in her ability to come off as presidential and professional.
Trump has nothing to gain from another debate
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
