There doesn’t seem to be much debate over who won Tuesday night’s showdown between our two presidential candidates, with Fox News even admitting Donald Trump had a very bad night.
No question Democrats, who know a thing or two about disastrous debates, were high-fiving each other Wednesday morning, while Trump supporters can only hope their candidate’s meandering responses and dour demeanor don’t move the needle too far into the blue territory of those critical swing states.
Oh, and adding to the GOP doom and gloom is the BREAKING NEWS that TAYLOR SWIFT ENDORSES KAMALA HARRIS.
You didn’t hear it here first, of course. In fact, within seconds of her tweet announcing this social media proclamation, some newscasters, including CNN veteran political analysts Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, were treating this as if Melania herself had come out in favor of Trump’s nemesis.
For sure the media covered all the important details of this candidate face-off, with most news outlets agreeing Harris laid traps for Trump, who despite being warned of the dangers by countless friends and advisors, fell right into them, even continuing down a few rabbit holes that could possibly list this performance right up there with Joe Biden’s Waterloo.
So, yes, there were plenty of serious talking points for pundits to dissect and debate. Which makes me curious: Did Swift and her marketing team deliberately time this BREAKING NEWS knowing it would create such a hullabaloo with the left-leaning media, who used her tweet as if it was the final nail in Trump’s campaign coffin?
Did they know the pop star’s post – which featured a glam shot of Swift holding her cat and was signed “Childless Cat Lady” – would produce so much shock (as if we didn’t know she leaned heavily to the left) and awe?
At one point Bash even took on a stop-the-presses tone when she paused and then dramatically announced one more exclusive BREAKING NEWS detail: The name of Taylor Swift’s kitty is Benjamin Button.
I have to admit, at this point my head-shaking turned into eye-rolling. And still the fawning continued, into the morning when even TIME came out with this headline: Tim Walz reacts to endorsement from fellow cat owner Taylor Swift.
Seriously TIME?
Seriously, indeed, argues Suzanne Degges-White, chair of the Department of Counseling and Higher Education at Northern Illinois University, who I checked in with Wednesday morning to try and make sense of all this.
“In today’s media-saturated climate and given the global phenomenon that Taylor Swift has become, yes, for many people, this endorsement does warrant attention,” insisted the NIU professor.
For several years, she continued, Swift has been “an active agent in increasing voter registration. She is a philanthropist, as well, and invests in human causes. To encourage participation of young people in our democracy is a worthy goal for all of us.”
Still, does that worthy goal mean a celebrity endorsement be treated as BREAKING NEWS?
I do agree with Degges-White that at this point, billionaire Swift is more than a pop star. She is, after all, the highest paid entertainer on the planet. And while I refuse to put her up there with the Pope, there’s no doubt she’s close to royalty – commanding the kind of attention and adulation as the late Princess of Wales.
Taylor Swift is smart and beautiful and comes across as sweet, authentic, kind … and she loves to be in love.
She’s also a talented songwriter – I rate her as an OK singer – whose songs, note Degges-White, “touched the soul of a large swath of the population.”
So did Elvis Presley. After all, celebrity worship is nothing new. But I can’t imagine NBC anchor Frank McGee interrupting a 1960 post-debate discussion to announce if Elvis was endorsing Kennedy (or Nixon) for president.
It all has to do with the explosion of social media, maintains Degges-White. And indeed, if Elvis or the Beatles were alive today, “they would have as strong a voice and influence as Taylor does today.”
While I’m not sure how much Swift’s endorsement means, considering her fan base is hardly defined as the key voters Harris needs to win the White House, the professor pointed out just how “remarkably broad” her appeal is.
Not only could Swift’s thumbs-up to Harris motivate young people to get to the polls, the parents of these fans most certainly vote, as do Swift’s longtime fans who have been with her for decades, pointed out Degges-White, adding that while she’s not been to any Swift concerts, she has “friends from the pre-teens to the 60s who adore her and follow her on social media, buy her albums and some engage in a surprising amount of celebrity worship.”
It’s her “intergenerational appeal,” she went on, that resonates with us. “And when it comes to politics, the acrimony and venom that have been its main mode of engagement over the past several years needs an antidote.”
All of which is hard to debate. It’s just not BREAKING NEWS.
dcrosby@tribpub.com
