But there was often method to what seemed like madness, and most of the nicknames he gave people – actually, all of them that I can recall – were pretty spot on in terms of locating and targeting their soft underbellies. He seems to have lost that knack, as I’ve described with his nicknames for DeSantis and now McEnany (who is not even an opponent of his, but his extremely bold and competent former press secretary for whom the moniker “milktoast” [sic] is absurdly inappropriate).

Which brings me to ruminating on why on earth Trump would attack DeSantis’ COVID record, when all it does is invite comparisons to Trump’s own COVID record, which is one of his soft underbellies. And in addition, Trump compared DeSantis’ COVID record unfavorably to that of New York’s Cuomo. But as Powerline’s Steven Hayward points out, the metrics demonstrate DeSantis’ superiority.

I’m not a mind-reader, but I submit the following as possible logical or at least somewhat-logical motives for Trump’s accusations:

(1) He knows his own vulnerability on the COVID score, so this is a pre-emptive strike at DeSantis to try to start a counter-narrative, at least among Trump’s own supporters. No matter that it’s incorrect. It reassures them and gives them talking points in arguments against those on the right who have deserted him.

(2) He’s sucking up to Cuomo for some reason. I’ve actually read speculation – probably tongue-in-cheek – that he’ll choose Cuomo as a running mate. But I think that’s absolutely not happening.

(3) Trump believes all attention is good attention, and this brings him attention.

(4) Trump is ambivalent about becoming president again, although he might not be aware of this, and is doing some things to self-sabotage.

Of course, there are plenty of illogical reasons Trump might be making these sorts of statements. But thinking of illogical reasons for them is easy. I’m interested in possible logical ones.

Speaking of which – why are Chris Christie and Mike Pence throwing their hats into the 2024 GOP candidate ring? I suppose they may have their eyes set on a VP spot, but I doubt it – especially for Pence. The simple explanation is ego, and you can hardly go wrong with that one for politicians. Another is that they may be bored, and it’s fun and exciting to become a candidate. Still another is that they’re in it as spoilers to deflect votes from someone else, but it seems to be that that would only help Trump (whose core supporters are very loyal) and hurt DeSantis. Since Pence and Christie don’t seem fond of Trump, I can’t see that as their motive.

The post Trump, DeSantis, and COVID (plus the entry of Christie and Pence) appeared first on The New Neo.

[from various tweets] ABC’s George Stephanopoulos:

“A lot of people were noticing some mansplaining going on tonight.”

Jamira Burley

“Every woman I know has given this look when some man attempts to mansplain or present an idea that isn’t theirs.”

Andrea Mitchell

“I asked a man I know what he thought of the debate. He said: ‘The debate was over when she said Mr. Vice President you are interrupting me.'”

So feminists who believe women are fully qualified to be president or vice president nevertheless also believe – when it suits their purposes, which is to say when the woman is a Democrat and the man a Republican – that a woman running for office should not be interrupted or argued with by a man.

Can we call that “womanthink” or “womanlogic”? No? Well, then, don’t call it “mansplaining” when a male opponent treats a female opponent normally.

In other words:

Pence dominated Kamala so thoroughly and convincingly that the media's only available tactic is to accuse him of being a sexist for debating a woman at a debate. These people are such clowns. Parodies of themselves. pic.twitter.com/OXaIKnV58Y

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) October 8, 2020

[NOTE: Also, among Kamala Harris’ many lies was this one about “Honest Abe.”]

The post Awww! Poor lil’ Kamala got mansplained by the big bad Pence appeared first on The New Neo.