Democratic Senate candidate Rep. Beto O'Rourke is going to lose his bid this November to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, taking with him the recent avalanche of glowing media profiles that have cluttered the pages of so many newspapers and magazines.

But luckily for those who are thirsting hard for puff-pieces profiling supposed anti-President Trump saviors, another character is stepping up to fill the void that will undoubtedly be left behind when O’Rourke loses to Cruz. Enter celebrity porn lawyer Michael Avenatti, the latest target of the press' urge to write overly long, overly friendly profiles on supposed political stars.

“Michael Avenatti's Past Won't Stop Him From Running in 2020,” reads the headline to a Time magazine profile slated for its November issue.

The story begins with these paragraphs:

The woman approached Michael Avenatti with obvious purpose. A 79-year-old retired physicist with long blond hair, she wore a blue T-shirt that said AVENATTI IS MY SPIRIT ANIMAL. It was mid-August, and Avenatti had just finished giving a rousing speech at a county Democratic picnic in New Hampshire. As he threw his arm around her and grinned for the umpteenth selfie of the day, she slipped a folded piece of paper into his hand.

Later, as he checked into his luxury hotel near Manchester, Avenatti took the paper out of his pocket and unfolded it. It was a check for $1,000, made out to “Avenatti for President.” In the memo line, the woman had written, in precise lowercase print: “Our hopes are in your hands.”

The article is like this all the way down. Feel free to read the entire profile here (if you’re into that sort of thing). Don’t get me wrong: It’s not a terrible article. The authors do a good job making it a compelling and engaging read. I am just not fond of media profiles in general, as they often read more like fan mail (see: basically every Beto O’Rourke profile) than hard-hitting journalism.

If you don’t read the profile, I’d like to call your attention to its two most interesting lines. The first one is this [emphases added]:

A run for President would thrust Avenatti into the middle of the party’s identity crisis. The Democrats have not been this powerless since the 1920s, and their members have responded by nominating a historic number of women and people of color for office. But when it comes to the party’s presidential nominee in 2020, Avenatti thinks in different terms. “I think it better be a white male,” he says. He hastens to add that he wishes it weren’t so, but it’s undeniable that people listen to white men more than they do others; it’s why he’s been successful representing Daniels and immigrant mothers, he says. “When you have a white male making the arguments, they carry more weight,” he says. “Should they carry more weight? Absolutely not. But do they? Yes.”

I look forward to the inevitable apology Avenatti will issue after the base he’s ostensibly playing to read the lines highlighted in the above.

The second-most interesting line in the article is its conclusion, which reads: “Even Avenatti’s critics have to concede he’s won many of the battles he’s taken up so far. He fights, and he wins: to many of the beleaguered party faithful, that may be enough.”

I’m sorry, he "wins"?

Maybe I’m biased, but I’m not sure I’d use the word "winner" to describe the guy a judge recently ordered to cough up $4.85 million he owed to a former colleague. I’m not sure I’d use the word "win" to refer to the guy whose firm was evicted recently over its failure to pay the rent. I’m not sure I'd use the word "winner" in reference to a guy whose client’s defamation lawsuit against President Trump was not only thrown out, but the client was also ordered to pay the president’s hefty legal fees. I’m not sure I'd say "he wins" in reference to the guy who was just referred to the Justice Department by the Senate Judiciary Committee over possibly false statements made by his clearly unstable client, who alleges she witnessed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh engage in gang-rapes when he was just 15.

I guess it all depends on what your definition of “win” is.