,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
It's hard to know without seeing the whole interview. He seems like he's rambling more than anything else. A few "I don't knows" maybe isn't a bad thing from a potential candidate, especially one who isn't officially running for anything yet.
I agree that coverage should be critical. But I read a lot of stories about political candidates and they vary in the degree in which they seem to lean in to a particular narrative about a candidate. This one seemed on the lean-ier side to me.
I think mostly it would just be good if reporters & editors acknowledged that the coverage of particular candidates goes different (somewhat predictable) cycles/ moods, and that relatively neutral events can be framed quite positively or negatively depending on these moods.
To *some* extent, these cycles tend to even out over time. (Although, FWIW, it seems like it takes less for women candidates to trigger a negative media cycle.) And to *some* extent, it's a candidate's job to work through them. But let's not pretend they're not there.
