June 22, 2016

Which of the 2 conventions is going to get the more politically damaging protests?

That's the real question, I think, behind the NYT headline, "Will Dominant Images of Conventions Be of Unity or Protest?" Look how the text — written by the delightfully named Trip Gabriel — probes into the comparison between what Trump's going to get and what the Democrats are attracting:
Republicans arriving in Cleveland next month to nominate Donald J. Trump will be greeted by as many as 6,000 protesters on the first day, a noisy coalition of dozens of groups, including Black Lives Matter and the Workers World Party. The demonstrators intend to ignore restrictions keeping them far from the delegates, raising fears the violence that accompanied some of Mr. Trump’s rallies will be magnified on a mass scale....
This doesn't seem to be much of a threat to Trump. Either the protests will be inconsequential and not matter or, if they get unruly or violent, they will help Trump. These are left-wing groups, so they're not expressing any GOP sentiments, and if they are disorderly, they'll be making the argument for more order, which is essentially a pro-GOP argument.
A week later, as Democrats pour into Philadelphia, so will an army of Bernie Sanders supporters planning Occupy Wall Street-style protests against what they call the “fraudulent” nomination of Hillary Clinton. One group, Occupy DNC Convention, is circulating information about protecting oneself from tear gas by wearing a vinegar-soaked bandanna and swim goggles.
These protesters, being Sanders supporters, are Democrats. We'll be seeing Democrats fervently asserting that the Democratic Party nominee should be opposed. That's going to hurt Hillary, because her own party's people reject her, and, if it's chaotic or violent, it will — for some viewers — suggest the need for more conservative government. The terms "Daddy Party" and "Mommy Party" have long been used to refer to the Republican and Democratic parties, and that comparison is more vivid than ever this year, and not just because the Democrats are nominating a woman. The Republicans are nominating an unusually steely patriarch. If chaos or violence cause us to long for order, it may help Republicans even more than it usually does.

When you get about half way into the longish NYT article, you'll find it gets around to the point I'm making:
In Cleveland, Mr. Trump — who will be confronted by left-wing demonstrators, not fellow Republicans — could potentially benefit from scenes of mayhem that allow him to call for law and order and project strength... Street chaos, if it occurs, could overshadow disunion in the convention hall as an increasing array of party leaders nervously break ranks with Mr. Trump.

Democratic leaders are worried about emerging from their convention with an unmollified “Bernie or Bust” contingent whose protests could provide jarring split-screen images as the party seeks to rally around Mrs. Clinton.
I'm sure that the media will work to help Hillary Clinton frame the narrative to her advantage and that they will resist any facilitation of the pro-Trump narrative even if the facts on the ground amply support it.

But Trump has some great potential material here, and he can even use the discord within his party to his advantage. That discord is drama, and Trump can make some post-Lewandowski pivoting moves that break the tension at just the right moment inside the convention hall. With peace breaking out inside, and the forces of barbarism raging outside, the home-viewing audience will feel satisfaction in the theater of Trump's convention launch.

50 comments:

Brando said...

Unlike your recent Scott Adams-esque Trumpite spinning, you have a good point here--protests are most likely to help Trump. There's nothing quite like violent or at least highly mockable masses in the street to disgust middle Americans. The fact that the anti-Clinton protesters are from within her own constituency certainly doesn't help her and will have nothing to do with Trump, but only make people wonder what's up with the Dems.

The caveat to this is that unrest in the streets and extremist protests tend to favor whichever candidate seems to signify stability, normalcy and law and order. It worked for Nixon (who together with Wallace were a supermajority in favor of "law and order" and "run over the hippies" candidates, while Humphrey just looked fazed and weak). Can Trump project himself as the "let's get things back under control" and "let's reject extremist nonsense" candidate? Can Hillary somehow do so?

Michael K said...

" With peace breaking out inside, and the forces of barbarism raging outside, the home-viewing audience feels satisfaction in the theater of Trump's convention launch."

Far more important than any advantage, I am worried about real violence and maybe deaths.

So far there have been two assassination attempts on Trump. One the media is minimizing and I do think the kid is crazy. The other one has been lionized by the media and even interviewed on CNN, as if his opinion mattered. He is a criminal but his mother is a big wheel in Democrat circles in Atlanta.

He has a mother heavily into Atlanta politics.

DiMassimo’s mother, Faye, currently works as manager of Atlanta’s infrastructure bond program. She resigned as Cobb County’s transportation director in November to take the job.

Cartersville attorney Lester Tate is representing the family and helped Thomas DiMassimo retain an attorney in Ohio. Tate said the family has received several threats since Saturday’s incident, and they have been reported to police.

“While the family is very supportive to him in this process, they certainly don’t condone jumping over a barrier and trying to rush through secret service agents,” Tate said.

Tate also said it is “unfortunate” that people are associating DiMassimo with a terrorist organization.


bagoh20 said...

As demonstrably offensive as Clinton is as a candidate, isn't it disappointing that so many in the media don't even seem offended by being call her surrogates. They seem to have even stopped trying to fake objectivity. Their bias isn't anything new, but the embarrassment of what Clinton is clearly guilty of: her criminality, hypocrisy, and dishonesty are unprecedented and impossible to explain away, yet they can still swallow it and smile for the camera, and it's gonna get worse. This will be the year the media lost it all - the year when a majority accepts that lying to them is the primary business of the media.

rhhardin said...

Analysis is always about how things will affect women who vote.

My analysis: Trump is not PC, which means he doesn't care about your feelings, like your stupid ex husband.

Matthew Sablan said...

Given what we've seen, violence against Republicans is accepted by the media, and so I doubt it will get much mainstream coverage. They'll be given the "mostly peaceful" label and move on. As long as no one dies, protesters against the Republicans can get away with pretty much anything -- property destruction, assault, hate crimes -- you name it, they've done it and gotten away with it in the past, even with police watching. There's no reason to think the convention will get different coverage, though I'd be glad if people collectively put their foot down against political violence.

The Democrat's convention will be more interesting. Especially since I believe the protesters against the Democrats are going to be checked much, much harder -- by authorities, the party and media -- than the ones that will be given support and free reign against the Republicans. There's already talk of them building a security wall around the premises, for example.

RNB said...

"...the violence that accompanied some of Mr. Trump’s rallies..." It just followed him around. Like a stray dog. No humans involved. It just happened.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, I think your last paragraph nails it. I can picture violence from the Mexican flag-waving protestors, I can picture the Cleveland police standing by and doing nothing to impede the violence, and I can picture American citizens saying to themselves "Okay, that's it, we're taking back our country and we're taking it back right now."

Johnathan Birks said...

You can be sure that Trump will have ample social-media presence in Cleveland. Even if the MSM ignores the protests or casts them in an anti-Trump light, it won't matter. Twitter and YouTube will run out of bandwidth documenting the mayhem. If I'm Trump I want BLM all over the place so he can appear the calm, rational party.

Bernie's still a wild card for the Dems. He doesn't seem to have much control over what his troops say or do, or any will to exert same. But we saw in Nevada what the Berniebots think of the DNC. Don't expect that to change.

Big Mike said...

But if I was Reince Priebus, I'd have a plan ready in case Donald Trump was assassinated by some stupid Millennial who believes too much of what he reads in the news.

Laslo Spatula said...

Sisero Wong, Strip-Club Bouncer.

Yeah, I'm half-Chinese. What the fuck does that matter?

I've been watching the news and I see the chaos at the Trump rallies. Yeah, sure, he has bodyguards, but they just hang around, letting shit happen but keeping it from getting too close to The Man. That's okay as far as it goes, but it only goes so far. The Man needs more than that, and what The Man needs, obviously, is some fucking BOUNCERS.

Bouncers: people who will wade into the shit, break some heads and CALM SHIT DOWN. It's called Presence, people, and people gotta feel it, you feel me?

You snatch the hat off someone's head? You have five seconds to hand it back before I TAKE it back, and I don't mind breaking your fingers when I do. Oopsie, motherfucker.

You feel like throwing eggs? I'll shoves those eggs right up your ass and beat you until you're shitting an omelette.

The World don't work no different than a Strip Club: you gotta keep fuckers in line, knowing their place -- you can't have people thinking they can touch the titties, 'cause then they think they can touch EVERYTHING.

Just give me the Call, Trump: it's Time to BOUNCE.


I am Laslo.

Matthew Sablan said...

Imagine if Republicans did it.

tim in vermont said...

Hillary can't run on free media because she absolutely requires the power of the media to omit and to frame. Trump has a problem in that he has to overcome free media's absolute determination to omit and to frame.

Sanders could have done fine on free media, I think, since he has far less to hide than Hillary and not as many media enemies, had he somehow defeated their anointed one's pre-primary machinations, and got the nomination.

Roy Jacobsen said...

Wrong question. The correct question is "How will the Lickspittle Media spin the protests and violence to help Hillary?"

bagoh20 said...

Why isn't anyone trying to shoot Hillary? She is hated by a lot of people, and overwhelmingly by people who have guns, lots of guns. Conversely, Trump is mostly hated by people who also hate guns. Maybe it's true what they say about "guns don't kill people",...

Matthew Sablan said...

"Why isn't anyone trying to shoot Hillary?"

-- My best guess is that the people on the right don't want her to be president, but don't believe that she will round up millions of people into camps and then systematically poison and torture them. That is, they don't believe she's Literally Hitler.

Meanwhile, on the left, Trump is Literally Hitler. When you continually tell people someone will lead the nation into murdering millions and start World War III, someone is going to make the logical leap that, "Hey! We shouldn't let that happen."

tim in vermont said...

Democrats are much better at swallowing propaganda whole. That's what makes them Democrats, the ease with which they are manipulated.

aritai said...

Gramma says it depends how many of your pTb's fans are killed by frozen water bottles with a shallow knife cut down he outside of the bottle, like getting hit with a baseball bat with no remaining evidence. Not good fun but not unusual for the left and their enablers. Never ever seen on the Right. Even when they carry rifles to a Rally. Might be prevented with very high definition cameras on the crowd from multiple angles including down low, projected on the big screens and spray paints to put a unique pattern on the attackers, not that they couldn't erase it, but the identification will last long enough to eventual be enough cause to hold the rioters for attempted murder. With subsequent death penalties with no appeal once your pTb is elected, and attacks the 4th amendments with same zeal of the left's attack on the second. Granted the conservatives may not help themselves where they always clean up the grounds after a leftist riot, as the Taxed Enough Already crowd has done multiple times. Including piles of Human $h!t carrying who knows what parasites.

Michael K said...

"Democrats are much better at swallowing propaganda whole. "

Bingo !

n.n said...

So, Fields was the first of many probes to test and weaken his defenses. It's a political war that could have progressed to a hot war on at least two occasions.

While Clinton has the obvious advantage as an insider, her weaknesses were exposed and exploited by the Obama faction in his elections. Trump seems to have an advantage as an outsider, but it has become clear that his isolation is tenuous.

Oh, well. Anyone who will lead over 300 million people, control the enormous wealth amassed by their labor, the advanced technology developed over decades, and the intelligence assets that have accumulated over years, must be honed and tempered to resist incursions, weak links, and stay the course.

Larry J said...

Big Mike said...
@Althouse, I think your last paragraph nails it. I can picture violence from the Mexican flag-waving protesters, I can picture the Cleveland police standing by and doing nothing to impede the violence, and I can picture American citizens saying to themselves "Okay, that's it, we're taking back our country and we're taking it back right now."


Yes. Those riots in San Jose just proved that Trump is right. Those people don't belong here. Peaceful protest is one thing but violent riots are most definitely another. It's quite likely that sooner or later, violence will be met by violence. I think the press is waiting for that to happen so they can spin the story about how peaceful protesters were attacked by a bunch of GOP goons. This won't end well, but then, neither will this election year regardless of outcome.

shiloh said...

Althouse is still trying to help her boy with her daily pro-Trump spin. Bless her little heart.

Re: Cleveland think 1968 Chicago x 100 as mass media has increased exponentially since then.

Actually, re: Ohio if the Dems can get LeBron James to endorse Hillary the day of Trump's acceptance speech. Talk about taking the wind out of your sails er raining on your parade!

Maybe they can get Kasich to endorse Hillary as well ...

I yield back the balance of my time.

Brando said...

"Why isn't anyone trying to shoot Hillary? She is hated by a lot of people, and overwhelmingly by people who have guns, lots of guns."

Strangely most of our country's attempted and successful presidential assassinations have been not for partisan reasons but for personal gripes, nutjobs, and anarchic attempts to take down the whole system (where it doesn't matter who the president is, but rather that it is the president that must be killed). Garfield was killed by a disgruntled office seeker, Hinckley was just crazy, FDR's attempted assassins had originally planned to go after Hoover, JFK's assassin was a communist, McKinley's was an anarchist and Ford's were a Mansonite and another nut. I think only Lincoln really qualifies as partisan (i.e., I don't think Booth would have tried to kill President McClellan).

As for why we don't see people taking shots at Trump and Clinton all the time (not to mention Obama, Romney, Bush) I think most credit has to go to the Secret Service.

shiloh said...

"President McClellan"

America as a whole dodged a bullet! And speaking of hatred ~ Lincoln despised McClellan!

I digress.

tim in vermont said...

How many refugees from Hillary's bold and decisive action in Libya drowned this past week? Google "refugees drowned in the Mediterranean" or don't if you support Hillary, because sites like Amnesty International are hopelessly right wing.

damikesc said...

It'll be a disaster for the Dems. I do hope every Republican goes on stage, says "We offered sensible gun control and Democrats voted against all of it" as well.

Unlike your recent Scott Adams-esque Trumpite spinning, you have a good point here--protests are most likely to help Trump. There's nothing quite like violent or at least highly mockable masses in the street to disgust middle Americans. The fact that the anti-Clinton protesters are from within her own constituency certainly doesn't help her and will have nothing to do with Trump, but only make people wonder what's up with the Dems.

It could, God willing, be the start of the big correction. Let parents see what their college aged kids are doing on campus. Force people to see what divisive politics leads to.

They will try, no doubt --- but there isn't any way they can blame violence on the Right.

However, the GOP better have a private security force on hand if needed. The Cleveland mayor, I'm betting, might have the same rules as San Jose's mayor in regards to police handling of protestors.

Twitter and YouTube will run out of bandwidth documenting the mayhem.

Twitter will ban all mentions and YouTube will pull all videos. Let's be real here.

-- My best guess is that the people on the right don't want her to be president, but don't believe that she will round up millions of people into camps and then systematically poison and torture them. That is, they don't believe she's Literally Hitler.

I don't want her to be a martyr. That is my only reason. If she died of natural causes, I'll find her grave and piss on it.

Jim said...

"President McClellan" Democrat candidate for president 1864. NYT loved him. Part of the platform was suing for peace, and ending the war. They were sick of the violence and death, and wanted out, at any price.
Not much has changed for the Democrats.

mockturtle said...

Good one, Laslo! You nailed it.

Peter said...

"It'll be a disaster for the Dems."

Philadelphia is one of the most corrupt cities in America, and I'd assume its Democratic apparat can and will keep Bernie's Bombers from spoiling the show.

It's unlikely that Cleveland will do anything similar for Trump. And (of course) if anything violent does happen at Cleveland the press will present it as "Well, Trump was just askin' for it." Or something.

tim in vermont said...

"Sensible gun control" has worked wonders in Paris, hasn't it? It was good ole American crazies who shot that place up!

Quaestor said...

The protestors at the Republican convention will mostly benefit Trump because they will come to celebrate their hatred of the "hater". Every Mexican flag will seen will sway an undecided voter to Trump. BLM have already made themselves obnoxious to every right thinking person, so I discount their effectiveness as well.

The protestors at Hillary's "coronation" will argue that the DNC is corrupt, that her nomination was planned at the highest levels, long before the first primary votes were cast. Their chants and placards will damn the Democratic Party for being anti-democratic.

Larry J said...

Quaestor said...

The protestors at Hillary's "coronation" will argue that the DNC is corrupt, that her nomination was planned at the highest levels, long before the first primary votes were cast. Their chants and placards will damn the Democratic Party for being anti-democratic.


It's entirely possible that many of the protesters at the DNC convention will be the same ones at the GOP convention.

eric said...

I wouldn't rule out a mass attack this hear at the GOP convention. Some large bombs meant to inflict mass casualties. It won't be your typical ISIS supporting lone wolf, either. Itll be a small group of Democrats convinced the Republican party is the second coming of the 3rd Reich.

boycat said...

The reason Democrats are so good at swallowing leftard propaganda whole is because the propaganda always comes along with promises of all manner of free stuff or some sort of special preferential treatment. And that's Ta-Nehisi Coates's main complaint about the Clintons: Bill took away too much of the free stuff.

YoungHegelian said...

I just can't wait until the Republican delegates in Cleveland riot & loot Bloomingdales & Brooks Brothers.

BudBrown said...

I bet the convention choreographers are deciding now which side Hilary should be on.
I mean Sanders will give an early concession speech at the convention and say something like he and Hilary have their disagreements but in the end they both want what's best for the country and Hilary has been fighting the good fight like
you know forever and then he'll announce a surprise appearance and Hilary will walk
on stage and they'll hug and then she'll be on Sander's right with their arms around each other and waving to the crowd. They're maybe arguing now over whether Bill should
walk out and if so where he should stand.

Hilary has somehow managed to become the moderate middle of the road candidate. But also a fighter.

Sam's Hideout said...

Why have the Occupy X movements chosen and embraced the word "occupy"? It strongly connotes militarism and authoritarianism. It's triggering! It's more than a micro-aggression, it denotes actual aggression.

Michael K said...

"Lincoln despised McClellan!"

Actually, he supported him until eventually worn out by losing and procrastination.

Had Sherman not taken Atlanta, McClellan would probably have win the election. Lincoln expected to lose.

Robert Cook said...

To answer the question: Neither.

Protestors at each convention will be segregated in "free speech zones" (sic) far, far away from the convention sites, and no attendees will see any protestors, unless they view them on the television news.

Bruce Hayden said...

Why not assassinate Hillary? Maybe because assassins, as well as most of our mass murderees (including the recent ne n Rlando), tend strongly to be Democrats. That guy was even a Hillary supporter (over Sanders). How can anyone rational admit to supporting that crooked, corrupt, lying harridan? And maybe that is the answer. Plus, politics on the left is all about power. Remember "we won" by Obama? Didn't matter to them if his election was funded to some extent by illegal foreign contributions, and a lot of his votes were illegal. What mattered was winning, and then you get to appoint the Attorney General, whose job it is to protect you. If anything, Hillary may be worse. Democracy, to the left here, is only appreciated and utilized when you are winning. Think the rise of Hitler, or that of socialist governments in this hemisphere. Assassination is just another tool in their toolbox, just like violent demonstrations, illegal voting, etc.

JPS said...

Others have alluded to this point and the why, but I find it interesting that both party's conventions will be protested by left-wing activists. No one's much worried about violent right-wing protests, are they?

mockturtle said...

Similar situation to the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago: Two factions of the Party, one, the establishment, with the power, and one with naive ideas about changing the Party. When this didn't work, violent protests and violent retaliation erupted and it was ugly. Of course, the MSM just loved it. If there is no violence at either [or both!] conventions, the MSM are really going to be pissed.

mockturtle said...

And to answer the question posed: Violent protest at the GOP convention will only help Trump. The same situation in Philadelphia will cost Hillary!

shiloh said...

1862 Lincoln removes McClellan

McClellan built a capable Army but, but, but ...

as the war continued he became too cautious and wouldn't engage when he should have.

>

Like Trumps timid opponents in the primary as we come full circle.

buwaya said...

All that matters is how they are covered.
No news, didn't happen, and vice versa.

tim in vermont said...

At least Trump had opponents, unlike Hillary, who was hand picked by the big donors.

hombre said...

Potentially violent Democrat miscreants enabled by Obama and other elected Democrat sociopaths come back to bite everybody on the ass.

Look for the mediaswine to blame Republicans and Trump even as the mob beats them and destroys their cameras.

Democrat Arab Spring in the summer.

hombre said...

JPS: "No one's much worried about violent right-wing protests, are they?"

Oh yes. The Muslim-run DHS and the Southern Poverty Law Center are always worried about dangerous right wingers like veterans of the ME conflicts, Rambo fans and pesky Christians.

Jon Ericson said...

Robert Cook said...
To answer the question: Neither.

Protestors at each convention will be segregated in "free speech zones" (sic) far, far away from the convention sites, and no attendees will see any protestors, unless they view them on the television news.

6/22/16, 10:23 AM

NYT: The demonstrators intend to ignore restrictions keeping them far from the delegates, raising fears the violence that accompanied some of Mr. Trump’s rallies will be magnified on a mass scale....

wildswan said...

buwaya said...
All that matters is how they are covered.
No news, didn't happen, and vice versa.

In the 20C mass media defined events so the issue was control of mass media which is Buwaya's point and that of others on this thread. And I just wonder if that is still true. I visited Massachusetts a month ago and passed several days among "liberals." It was the defining characteristic of them - they believe what mass media tells them. They seemed to me outdated, so yesterday, so predictable, somehow. And I know it is because I had so much more information and I had access to so many more viewpoints, including listening to the opposition on a daily basis, because I follow blogs.
They think the NYT/NPR/WaPo somehow aren't "mass media" so they don't think of themselves as gullible followers of mass media narratives. But that's just another mass media narrative. All mass-media-believers will be tricked by whatever mass-media chooses to say about the conventions. But are the gullibles a majority - still? Maybe they are. But mass media circulation is falling as steadily as agreement with Trump on issues is rising.

wildswan said...

Hillary Supporters Shut Down Congress
Hillary Supporter Attempts Assassination
Hillary Supporter Carries Out Mass Murder
Hillary Employee Breaches National Security
Hillary Supporter/Husband on Lolita Express
(to be continued)

Just a few exciting episodes from an amazing new reality TV show:
TRUMP MADE ME DO IT!!!

Watch for incredible new story-lines in upcoming episodes of TRUMP MADE ME DO IT!!!: Hillary Supporter Calls for Abolition of Men, Trump First; Hillary Supporters Riot; Hillary Supporters Beat Woman; Hillary Supporters Burn Flag. And so much more