DC journo tweeps are a-Twitter today over whether the latest development in “Goatee Gamble” between ABC’s Jake Tapper and NBC’s Chuck Todd is a “wimp-out clause,” as dubbed by ABC colleague Rick Klein, or legit.
We’re particularly enjoying these exchanges between Tapper, Klein and Politico‘s Jonathan Martin (who apparently only orders drinks with umbrellas in them)…
@jmartpolitico: @thenote — exactly. what’s pt of bet if u have an “out” clause
@jaketapper: @thenote $1,000 is a “wimp-out” clause? thats a lot of bread, man. $20 would be “wimp-out.” $1K is skin in the game. i call BS.
@thenote: @jaketapper for a network correspondent? just a small investment in your future. why include clause unless someone isn’t fully behind team?
@jaketapper: @thenote Why dont you make a $1,000 bet for charity on the series and we’ll see how wimpy it is.
@thenote: @jaketapper I don’t have skin (or hair) in ur game. But I’m with @jmartpolitico – why bet if you have out clause?
@jaketapper: @thenote @jmartpolitico $1,000 is an “out” clause? i dont need to hear that from two guys who never pick up a bar tab.
Tapper also admits initially it wasn’t much of a bet- Todd shaving a goatee versus his growing one- tweeting, “Growing a goatee — however patchy + greasy — not as big a deal as shaving a trademark.”
You can follow all the Twitter fun at #GoateeGamble.
And then there’s this… Daily Intel weighs in with “Chuck Todd’s Goatee Is Not Really in Danger.” “Like the Bible’s Samson, Todd’s power – his very elan vital, if you will – is vested entirely within his goatee, and everybody knows it. How else to explain his meteoric rise from under-the-radar Hotline editor to the worldwide phenomenon that he is today?”