The way to cover Trump's CPAC speech is NOT to cover his promise to stay in the race if he's indicted, it's to point out how similar THIS SPEECH is for things he may be indicted for.
Emphasizing its inflammatory nature makes you part of the coup attempt.
Trump's play is not about the next election, per se. Reporting it as such is malpractice.
Trump's play is to make prosecuting him an existential challenge for democracy, where his partisans will take out law enforcement to undermine the case.
Trump's play is to ALWAYS reinforce division in society, to ratchet it up, so that his supporters will continue to piss away their lives by attacking democracy to save him.
His play is to keep his supporters distracted from the enormous fraud he commits against them.
Want to report on Trump's outrageousness?
Report on how his people are paying FBI Agents to spy on the investigation into him and his followers.
Blasting CPAC to audiences who would otherwise have ignored it just distracts from all that.
And I agree that @svdate's coverage of the speech--including its emphasis on how poorly attended it is--is far better than most.
On top of all the other uncertainty about polling this year, there's a specific one: How voters view the economy, bc that's often correlated with winner.
That's where things start to get interesting.
Gallup released a study showing that economy is still most important (but their poll of most important only shows 4% view abortion as being most important).
In a story on VP's interview with @SRuhle, Reid Epstein, who works for a rag that outright refuses to describe economic success of economy, whined that Harris made factual comments abt manufacturing rather than addressing econ polling. nytimes.com/2024/09/25/us/…
One way to think about this is that in early August, VP and Walz did huge rallies to recruit volunteers they could plug into an already ambitious field network Biden set up.
That said, they've been able to expand on that.
Rove compares that with Trump's intended model (remember: he defunded field so he could sow Big Lie conspiracies in the courts and at counting centers instead).
If it worked (at 1), it might work like Bush's [Rove's] successful reelect.
¶3 describes what they later call a "stream-of-consciousness rant" as a "strategic choice." That's a REALLY curious term, given that Trump is accusing VP of being unable to make coherent statements.
They say this was strategic even though they twice suggest that Trump's own campaign can't keep him on message.