Friday, November 20, 2015


The mean old liberal media is being unfair to poor Donald Trump -- by accurately quoting his responses to reporters' questions! That's what we learn from "How the Media Smeared Donald Trump as a Nazi," a piece by Breitbart's Joel Pollak.

Pollak sees the "smear" proceeding in steps -- undoubtedly, in his mind, dictated by a shadow liberal politburo:
Step 1: Seed.
Step 2: Amplify.
Step 3: Distort.
Step 4: Smear
Step 5: Nazi.
Pollak writes:
Note that none of these esteemed journalists bothers to question their own assumptions, or to ask Trump precisely whether he is talking about American citizens or about foreign nationals. They chase their own questions down a broken telephone line.
That's an interesting analogy, because the "broken telephone line" would seem to be the candidate himself, who can't seem to process the questions reporters are asking him, a skill you'd think you might have developed if you've been a globally famous public figure for decades.

But Pollak's rage is nothing compared to Rush Limbaugh's:
[Trump's] probably worn out and spent, and there's the usual crowd of autograph seekers and supporters and fans, and amongst them is a Drive-By Media reporter....

... they report that Trump "demands a database and registration for all Muslims," when he didn't say it! He never said it. It's a Journalism 101 trick. It's right out of the manual they teach you at the first year of journalism school in how to destroy political opponents or powerful people you don't like. It's that common a technique.
Pollak implies that there's an off-the-shelf technique that all liberal media apparatchiks learn in order to destroy enemies, but Limbaugh talks of an actual manual. Okay, maybe not a literal manual -- but he knows that character assassination techniques are taught in J-school as coursework, dammit!

Ann Coulter is even angrier -- here's just a sample from her Twitter feed:

Trump was barely listening to MSNBC's Vaughn Hillyard when he was asking about this. Trump was barely listening to Yahoo's Hunter Walker when he was asking about this. Clearly the common thread is ... evil liberal reporters! The fact that Trump thinks he's qualified for the presidency of the United States but can't grasp the import of these questions couldn't possibly be the real issue here, could it?

So, according to Coulter, Trump totally didn't agree to totalitarian treatment of Muslims, and it's libelous to say otherwise -- though, now that you mention it, that totalitarian treatment sounds kinda sensible to Coulter:

So, according to Coulter, it's absolutely awful to say that Trump is in favor of this perfectly appropriate proposal!

What Trump said might have been off-putting to a lot of people, even some Republicans -- but, on the other hand, he now gets to be the Whiner of the Week. Previous winners were the entire main-stage debate field (a group award after the CNBC debate) an Ben Carson (whose biography the media had the nerve to examine). Trump's victory could be good for a poll bump. We'll see.


Ten Bears said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ten Bears said...

I've reposted the Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism at my place, Homeless on the High Desert. Particular attention need be to number fourteen, fraudulent elections.

Glennis said...

Trump is finding that his generic, anodyne responses to stupid questions are being analyzed. Whodda thunk it?

Feud Turgidson said...

Thnx 10 Bears; lot of work went into that. It's not like we don't have a strong basis for concern about it (no-paper no-record machine voting, systemic gerrymandering, systemic vote suppression, systemic reduction of voter options, Florida 2000, Ohio 2004, Kentucky 2015, among them).

Trump is one media savvy cookie. He's a natural elider. Despite lots of warning signs and clear opportunities, he's not actually denying anything implied in either interview or surmised by either interviewer. I believe he will APPEAR to deny, if he thinks it's necessary, but his polling numbers aren't telling him that - yet, or maybe ever. He's certainly not going to EMBRACE what he's implied, but instead leave it to others, like Coulter here, to obfuscate.

Both here and elsewhere, I at least HAVE embraced the idea that Trump is serious about this contest. I think it's not at all naive to think the GOP establishment being against him (so far, at least) represents a problem as the GOP really get into their state-by-state primary vote days - &, at least as importantly, to the business of delegate selection, where the GOP establishment's and state party organization's real potential for exercising power lurks. I also have reservations about his ability to compete with the regular pols, Bush, Cruz & Rubio, in GOTV, because all 3 of them have routes to reaching into state operations that can be expected to be largely denied Trump. However, I can only assert 'reservations' because I don't have anything like the same handle on how GOP GOTV works as I do in how Dem GOTV has worked in the post-union-centric environment. But my SENSE is that Trump's best positioned to take advantage of the TeaP and FreeDumb movements' active decentralization of the national-state GOP coordination that's taken place since 2009. I don't think he's anywhere near as far ahead in the 'actual' race as he is in the popular polling, but he lead in the latter is so large and so DURABLE (so far), I'd be very much open to the possibility he also leads in the 'actual' race (for rules control for seating, delegates, for number of delegates, and for control of the convention agenda).

Here's an image that's coming together in my mind: the last non-establishent irreligious media-savvy populist crank to win the Republican nomination: Ronald Reagan. He's Saint Ronnie now; but before 1980, he was really no more than a gifted grifter, a carnival act so compelling he was able to sell it to a coalition of political operatives interested in running the California state government. His sheer crankitude worked against him in 1964 (He made even Goldwater seem establishment.), he was out-manoeuvred by the establishment insider in 1968, the next two cycles were denied him by circumstance, but in 1980 he benefited critically from the party being out of the White House 4 years, just enough that he was able to defeat the establishment candidate, GHW Bush, who had every bit as much control over the national party as Nixon had enjoyed at Nixon's height.

Indeed, this current scenario could be easier for media-savvy populist grifter Trump than it was for media-savvy populist grifter Reagan in 1980, because there's no single establishment favorite - and won't be unless Bush were to drop out.

Never Ben Better said...

Damn you, Ten Bears! So many of those 14 points are so goddamned on point that my once happy little morning is now down the toilet. Leading the way for the rest of the country, no doubt.