Absolutely superb answer, on an emotional and intellectual level.
Really curious if he and Mamdani ever faced off, because they’re both elite.
A reporter tried to trap Abdul El-Sayed on camera over something he wrote back in 2012, and he got out of it by asking the reporter one question about his own dad.
You can steal this move for pretty much any argument where someone's trying to box you in.
Here's what happened. El-Sayed was running for Senate in Michigan, and Barack Obama was about to fly into Detroit to campaign for him. The awkward part is that El-Sayed spent years criticizing Obama, including a 2012 essay saying Obama wasn't the right choice. So as he's walking away from the podium, a reporter calls out the obvious question. You've criticized Obama before, so why is he campaigning for you?
Think about how nasty that question is. If he says the old essay was wrong, he looks like a guy who'll say anything to land a famous endorsement. If he stands by it, he's trashing the former president who's about to show up and help him win. There's no good answer, and that's the whole reason you ask it.
So he turns around, walks back to the mic, points at the guy, and asks him whether he loves his dad and agrees with everything his dad has ever done.
The reporter says "Not entirely."
Once he said that out loud, it was basically over. The reporter had just admitted he loves his own father and still disagrees with some of what he's done, which is exactly what El-Sayed was being accused of doing with Obama.
It works for reasons that go deeper than it looks. Trial lawyers get taught to never ask a witness a question unless they already know the answer. El-Sayed asked one where he knew the answer for sure, because nobody on earth agrees with everything their dad ever did. And people really hate contradicting something they said out loud a minute ago. Psychologists have studied that urge to stay consistent for decades. So the reporter couldn't push back without arguing against himself.
Then El-Sayed used the rest of his time to tell his own story. He talked about watching Obama speak at the 2004 convention when he was about 20, and how it was the first time he'd ever seen himself in a politician. Both of their dads came over from Africa, and as he put it, they both got stuck with a funny name. A question meant to make him look fake turned into a free minute to tell voters who he is.
He was also solving a much harder problem with that answer. El-Sayed needed two groups of voters who don't see Obama the same way. A lot of his progressive supporters are still angry about the deportations and the wars under Obama, and El-Sayed used to say so himself. Meanwhile, the Detroit voters any Michigan Democrat needs still love the man. Any answer that sided with one group was going to cost him the other. Talking about his dad let him keep both, because everybody knows what it's like to love someone and still be frustrated with them.
He won last night, by the way. He's the first Muslim ever elected to the U.S. Senate.
So next time someone hits you with a question where both answers make you look bad, try finding the version of it they've lived through themselves, and ask them about that instead.
INEOS have a real problem. The problem stems from the Glazers. But being crippled by all the debt, high wages and misspending has led to them making their own mistakes and the problem snowballing.
This next appointment is critical. But even more so than that, is the support.
Dom retweeted
When Grandma doesn't understand what AI is and you create a movie clip with her in it 🤣
Writer: Ian
Dom retweeted
How is Technical Director Jason Wilcox still employed by Manchester United Football Club?
He says he feels lucky?
Jason Wilcox - Lucky Man
Dom retweeted
We're set to play at least half a season without a striker. Half a season where we don't have a single back up option for a position that is arguably the most important position on the pitch.
Welcome to Manchester United.
🚨 Confirmed: Benjamin Sesko out until at least January through shin injury.
Period of rest is required so striker is fully healed.
Details + analysis ⬇️ #MUFC @TheAthleticFC
nytimes.com/athletic/7716805…
Dom retweeted
‘Michael Carrick will be given time to turn things around’ and ‘the hierarchy do not want to rush next steps’ should be read and digested for what it really is: an indecisive club without any succession planning or contingencies because it doesn’t have clarity of identity in the first place. A club that often takes the cheap instead of the smart or right route because of the crippling Glazer debt, plus decision-makers who are never aligned - except in their own self-preservation. And it ends up costing more.
It explains the chaotic nature of lurching from one coaching philosophy to its extreme, to revisiting candidates that were on the agenda - some as far back as 2019 - that were already ruled out, to having a shortlist of options with nothing in common to take over a mishmash team that has suffered from horrid squad planning; both in incomings and exits.
Blame the players, blame the name in the dugout while the people who brought them to Manchester United, kept them, created the absolute opposite of a culture of excellence are allowed to rinse and repeat.
If I were Carrick, I’d troll:
“Best training session ever. Really looking forward to seeing the boys put in a shift on Saturday.
And they told me that if they don’t win, they’re buying every United supporter in the world, a pint!
Cheers!”
Dom retweeted
🚨On behalf of Manchester United fans ALL OVER THE WORLD:
THIS is the FIRST announcement we want to wake up to tomorrow morning!
PLEASE, @ManUtd — JUST DO IT! 🙏
Dom retweeted
Emotional exit by Michael Carrick as fans sing his name. A farewell?
Supporters turn on players once Carrick down tunnel.
#MUFC
Dom retweeted
Sense of decency 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Sources have told ESPN that the handling of the job cuts did not sit well with the Glazers, particularly Joel and Avram.
One source said Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s implementation of the programme jarred with Joel’s "sense of decency and old-fashioned values." [@MarkOgden_]
The Glazers are almost unmovable. The only way I see things changing is in Feb if the others sell their stake & the 3 remaining have to dilute theirs in return for the new stadium.
But you can get to Jim. As he’s said, if the hate goes to him he will leave. His ego won’t take it
Dom retweeted
Since the start of the 2024-25 season, Manchester United have won just 32 Premier League games out of 84. Twelve of those wins came in a 17-game run after Michael Carrick took over last season. Those four months aside, they have been dreadful for two years.
They have had two strong spells (one under Erik ten Hag in the middle period of 2022-23, one under Carrick in the second half of last season) in five years. Beyond that, under a succession of managers, there have been long periods of dysfunction, discord and disinterested performances that leave you wondering what on earth this team is meant to look like.
And that is a reflection of the club’s ownership, a regime that has taken so much out of United — well over £1billion ($1.3bn) in interest payments, refinancing costs and bond buybacks to prop up the Glazer family’s ownership after their leveraged takeover 21 years ago.
When fans wonder why a club with £677.6million revenue has been under pressure to bring down the wage bill, signing second-rate players and leaving gaps in their squad, it is partly because they are still paying a heavy price for years of mistakes in the transfer market and partly because the debt carries such a burden on the club’s finances.
Then there is Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who arrived as a minority shareholder in early 2024 and spoke breezily about how he planned to restore Manchester United to greatness with a smart, strategic approach. How’s that going, Sir Jim? If anything, his decision-making has been even worse than that of the previous Glazer-led regime, which is really saying something.
📝 @OliverKay
🔗 nyti.ms/4Bs8GVG
