I flagged this on social media, but I wanted to make sure you knew. Trump just announced a “crime and safety” rally for next Tuesday in Howell, Michigan, a town that has for decades been heavily associated with the KKK. Indeed, just late last month, white supremacists marched in the town chanting, “We love Hitler. We love Trump.” Some but not all of the town’s reputation comes from the fact that a long-time Grand Drago of the Michigan Klan lived there and his farm was a sort of home base for the Klan. (I just found out this afternoon that a good bit of the 1991 documentary Blood in the Face — great doc, by the way — was shot there.)

This is the kind of move that will be lost on many reporters and especially most out-of-state reporters. But it won’t be lost for a moment on Blacks and Jews from Michigan. It’s a bullhorn, not a dog whistle. I had to have the connection pointed out to me too though, once I did, the connection with the Blood in the Face documentary which I saw when it first came out placed it for me.

We’re closing in on $450,000 raised in this year’s TPM Journalism Fund drive. We’re currently just over $438,000 $446,000 $447,000 $452,000. Can we get there tonight? Click here to give us an extra push.

I got another note from TPM Reader NS this morning. He expresses rightful frustration with the way that elite media continues to focus on Trump’s recent antics as an extended tantrum or flawed strategy when it is much more appropriately seen as a mental and cognitive state which is manifestly unfit for holding public office. Trump is also not morally fit for office. But that’s different, and that’s always been the case. The normal rejoinder is that Trump’s mental fitness is sort of irrelevant since most of us already know that and his supporters don’t care. Those conclusions are mostly true as far as it goes. But it represents a failure of journalistic logic which is remarkably widespread in media today. Put simply, that reasoning is mainly above the pay grade of journalism. It’s not the job of journalism to adjust the editorial choices or insights of daily news coverage based on driving electoral or public opinion outcomes. It’s to cover the news. There’s no single way to cover the news and no single, objective version of what constitutes the news. But that reasoning about impact is not an appropriate one and it is deeply damaging to journalism in myriad ways.

Here’s NS …

I got an email last night from a reporter doing a piece on Ezra Klein and his prominence in Democratic politics. They asked me how I felt my own piece criticizing his Thunderdome primary proposal held up given recent events and whether I saw Klein’s arguments differently now. It was an interesting question. So I thought I’d share with you what I wrote. I’m not identifying the journalist or the publication. Because I’m not trying to get a jump on them or get in the way of their piece. I’m doing it because it’s a good and interesting question. I took some time to write out a response and I thought you might be interested in seeing it.

Here it is.

TPM Reader KJ sent me this in response to yesterday’s Backchannel. At first I thought these might be made up headlines. But they’re each real. I linked them.

It’s fun to split screen this email with today’s headlines:

The New York Times: Harris Is Set to Lay Out an Economic Message Light on Detail

The Hill: Harris is trying to run a no-substance campaign. Does she believe in anything?

The Washington Post: Opinion | Does Harris need a serious policy agenda? Only if she wants to win.

Poynter: Opinion | When will Kamala Harris meet the press?

I’ve come at this debate in my head from a bunch different directions over the last few days. I gave my overarching view in yesterday’s Backchannel. But there are so many different dimensions to it. Kate and I knocked several of them around in today’s podcast. I actually got in a minor spat today with a reporter who I’d dinged for an article description which presented Harris as a sort mystery candidate verging on a Manchurian Candidate, with unknown views and barely detailed ambitions. Are we kidding with all of this?

Thanks for taking a moment to read this post. We are now at a critical stage in our annual TPM Journalism Fund drive. It’s critical that we hit our goal this year which is to raise $500,000 to prepare TPM for what comes next. We’re in the final lap. Late yesterday we surpassed $400,000, which is simply incredible. We’re now at just over $404,000 $409,000 $415,000 $418,000 $420,000 $423,000. But we really need to reach that goal or at least get as close as we possibly can. I’m pumped because the milestone last night means we now have the wind at our back. The Journalism Fund is the critical piece of the puzzle that allows TPM to thrive while virtually all of our peers have retrenched, announced layoffs or shuttered entirely. We rely on you, our readers and members. And again and again you’ve been there for us.

If you’ve been planning on contributing this year and just haven’t found the right moment, please take just a couple minutes right now, hop out of that frenetic routine, and do it now. You just click here and it takes like literally two minutes. Super simple. Any amount helps a lot. Just click right here.

We’re currently just $525 short of $400,000 raised in this year’s TPM Journalism Fund drive. That’s 4/5ths of the way toward our goal. Can you take a moment to contribute this evening and help us reach this big milestone? Just click right here and thank you so much.