Over at the Washington Post, Erik Wemple dives into the one thing Donald Trump alleged this week that was of genuine curiosity, as opposed to a repetition of Birther Blather. (Or a positive review of the new "Trump Home Mattress," which is a thing that exists.)
On May 29, in response to syndicated columnist George Will calling him a "bloviating ignoramus," Trump tweeted:
George Will totally "bombed" at The Mar-a-Lago Club. I was there to watch. He was embarrassed and no longer likes Donald Trump.
Yes, Donald Trump apparently tweets in the third person. But what's less apparent is what all this means. How does one "bomb" at the Mar-a-Lago Club? And for what reason does Trump include Will within the cohort of those who have done so?
Wemple gets the answer: George Will gave a presentation there, way back in 1995, that nobody really remembers:
Let's ask Richard Bernstein, a resident of Palm Beach and a member of Mar-a-Lago. Bernstein was front and center on March 30, 1995, the night that Will gave a presentation at Mar-a-Lago.
So how'd the conservative commentator do? Did he really bomb? "It's been over 15 years. ... It was a long, long time ago," says Bernstein, noting that he doesn't really remember what Will said, though he appreciates the range of guests that Trump has brought to the club.
Hmmm, then Will wasn't so memorable? "If Donald said it, I'm sure it's right," says Bernstein, the CEO of an insurance brokerage firm, Richard Bernstein & Associates, that does business with Trump.
Of course, what complicates Bernstein's insistence that whatever Trump remembers must be correct is the fact that if Will had gone on ABC's "This Week" and declared Romney's association with Trump to be an aces-high strategy destined for total success, Trump would have likely bleated out that Will was a true American hero and important public intellectual that everyone should heed, etc.
At any rate, here's hoping that Will is asked to recall his time at the Mar-a-Lago Club this Sunday on ABC. Who knows? Maybe he thinks he did bomb! Either way, I doubt he's sweating any of this.
Not All Listicles Are Bad: Lord knows I make fun of the "5 Things to Watch" story construction (all while hypocritically participating in the practice myself), but when Adam Smith is doing the "5 Things" routine, it's always worth reading. (Yeah, he may not write for your local newspaper. You should still read him!) Big highlight: "Polls show a razor-thin race at the moment, and after Florida decided the winner in 2000 and Ohio decided it in 2004, it's natural to assume this will be another squeaker. History suggests otherwise." [Miami Herald]
On the One Hand: Swing state polls are tightening on Obama. NBC/Marist surveys show dead heats in Iowa, Colorado and Nevada between Romney and the incumbent. Keep in mind that Obama's best path to 270 Electoral College votes is the Western Way -- holding Colorado and Nevada make it possible to lose Florida, for example. (Also, if you haven't already, you can now chuck all of those "Romney has a narrow path to victory in the Electoral College" stories in the trash.) [NBC First Read]
On the Other Hand: Larry Sabato says of June polling results, "Meh." [Sabato's Crystal Ball]
Store It Away for Future Presidential Elections: Zeke Miller has a good piece Thursday on Florida Sen. Marco Rubio coming around, and then leading the way, on legislation that benefits the Internet and its ragtag entrepreneurs. Most of the lingering buzz on Rubio's chances in the Veepstakes centers on his buzzy popularity, relative newness and, of course, his ethnic background. But Rubio is assembling a portfolio of real work and demonstrating that he isn't quite as compromise-averse as the rest of the GOP. He's going to be a formidable opponent on the national stage, if he bides his time. [BuzzFeed]
[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not?]