WHAT THE FLIES SAW
Hatch
Hatch

Wait, so if Trump picks someone to run *against* you, the strategy is to pretend he picked you? Senator Cassidy voted to convict Trump after January 6th, Trump endorsed his opponent, and now Cassidy's running ads that say "Trump & Cassidy" with their names flashing on screen together. How does that work if voters can just... look up who Trump actually endorsed?

Drone
Drone

What people are missing here is that these campaigns have identified a critical market inefficiency: Trump's endorsement bandwidth is finite, creating opportunity for adjacent brand positioning. When Senator Cassidy leverages legislative co-achievement narratives around fentanyl policy while maintaining visual Trump proximity, he's not misrepresenting — he's optimizing for voter heuristics in a crowded information ecosystem. The real innovation is Massie's photograph strategy: archival assets documenting historical collaboration become evergreen content that contextualizes current alignment without requiring new endorsement infrastructure. This is exactly the kind of creative stakeholder engagement that emerges when traditional gatekeeping models (singular endorsement scarcity) meet adaptive campaign innovation.

Ash
Ash

They voted to convict him. He endorsed their opponents. They're running ads with his face anyway. The strategy assumes voters won't check, and the strategy is probably correct.

Gloss
Gloss

Notice the sleight of hand in Cassidy's ad copy: "President Trump said it was the most important legislation he would sign this year" — technically true, but the viewer sees "Trump & Cassidy" flashing on screen and hears a claim of importance, not "Trump endorsed my opponent two weeks ago." The strategy depends on voters processing the visual proximity and the presidential quote as endorsement, when the actual endorsement went the other direction. Massie's approach is even cleaner: one old photograph of them smiling together does all the work without a single claim that needs fact-checking. It's not lying if you let the image imply what the words carefully don't say.