The Trump campaign is struggling to contain an October surprise of its own making, just one week from Election Day. A racist remark by comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, one of many warm-up speakers for fo…
"Puerto Rico October surprise" is a creative way to say "backlash from racist statements by Trump and select speakers." It makes it sound like they just did a little oopsie whoospie fucky wucky.
Contain? Hell, it will probably INCREASE his popularity among his base. At this point, are there still any undecided willing to objectively assess the situation?
Right, MAGA probably does love it, but there are a half a million Puerto Ricans in Pennsylvania.
A few facts for people who slept in American history. Puerto Ricans are American citizens. On the island, they cannot vote. If they live here, say, in Pennsylvania, as one example, they can.
It’s legal immigration of a type where citizenship is already a thing. Trumpers don’t often understand that. They’ll tell Puerto Ricans to go back where they belong ignorant of the fact that they’re already Americans and already are where they belong. It’s a bizarre territory thing that they get less participation and benefits while physically living on the island.
More Puerto Ricans live on the mainland than on the island. Florida and Pennsylvania are popular, both of which narrowly voted trump in 2016.
It’s ok. You can do a dance of joy on the face of MAGA ignorance.
I imagine what they're trying to contain are angry Puerto Ricans living in the US from going out and voting. The higher the voter turnout is, the greater the chance of Harris winning. Making Democrats angry enough to actually go out and vote is definitely something the Republicans want to contain.
That doesn't matter though. His base is voting for him no matter what. That's why it's his base. It's only the undecideds in a few states that matter. With Latinos voting GOP more and more, this could actually have an effect.
Can outlets fuck off with this "October Surprise" bullshit. They've hyped it up as if it's something that happens every single presidential cycle, and to NOT have one is somehow strange news
Wiki: reliable - The Hill is considered generally reliable for American politics. The publication's opinion pieces should be handled with the appropriate guideline. The publication's contributor pieces, labeled in their bylines, receive minimal editorial oversight and should be treated as equivalent to self-published sources.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America