January 28, 2017

"Where I think political correctness got in the way of what we all knew as reporters and didn’t fully deliver was how hated the Clintons were in the heartland."

"And I think it was a fear of, 'Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?'... I think we underplayed it a little bit out of political correctness fears... No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad.... If we sort of were straight-up honest and blunt about hey do we understand the level of hatred that’s out there and you know, all the Hillary for Prison signs that are out there, we certainly would have at least made the viewer know, hey, you know, she’s not well-liked in some places in this country in ways that’s times 10 when it comes to Trump.... What do I think we did wrong in this election? The biggest thing is we didn’t tell the stories of all Americans. We told the stories of coastal Americans. And ultimately, that’s like the larger trust issue. We were more likely to do a story about the Dreamer that might get deported with new policies than we were about the 19-year-old opioid addict who feels hopeless in Rolla, Missouri. And, I’m not, I don’t pick on Rolla, Missouri, it’s, my point is that we just, we did not equally tell those stories very well, right, and, we were not, that is an out-of-touch issue."

Said Chuck Todd.

122 comments:

Kevin said...

Political correctness is incompatible with truth. The media chose poorly.

campy said...

"And I think it was a fear of, 'Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?'.

Shorter Chuck T: we wanted Her to win.

Quaestor said...

Yeah, right...

And those KL guards at Dachau and Buchenwald, they did it out of fear of the SS.

rhhardin said...

They always told the story that rated highest with their idiot core audience, and will always do that.

The idiot core audience pays the bills.

Joe said...

It wasn't political correctness as much as it was fear of losing power.

David Begley said...

If Chuck would have read my Power Line blog posts or joined me in Iowa it would have been obvious.

YoungHegelian said...

And I think it was a fear of, 'Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?'... I think we underplayed it a little bit out of political correctness fears..

Oh, what a gargantuan steaming pile!

The press didn't want to report accurately on HRC's campaign & HRC herself because they all knew they'd have no friends & be out of a job if anything they did was seen as contributing to a Republican victory.

In actuality, if HRC had had meaningful & powerful enough outside criticism perhaps she could have fixed the glaring deficits in her campaign in time to make a difference. As it was, the habitual bad habits of Clinton & her longtime staffers took them down in defeat.

YoungHegelian said...

Note to self --- all "bad habits" are habitual by definition.

Tautologies are our friends.

Bay Area Guy said...

These post-election "confessions" by Todd are superficially honest, but they fall short, because: (1) He doesn't explain why he and his media ilk carried water for Hillary (because they share her liberal world view) and (2) he and his ilk make no commitment to stop doing this nonsense (because they like where they are).


Owen said...

A perfect storm. Their own loyalties to the Prog Narrative + their fear of being punished for straying from it + their lack of familiarity/comfort/contacts in Darkest Flyover Country + NO ERROR CORRECTION CIRCUIT = epic fail.

By "error correction circuit" I guess I mean some structural feature in their epistemic strategy (sampling and testing reality to ensure their mental model was not drifting off). They all talk to each other. They all sit at the same table in the lunchroom. They watch the same shows, they read the same books. Their editors and fact-checkers and producers, ditto. And they all link to the same channel at the DNC and the Clinton campaign HQ, with few or no links to that weird, rude, hostile other guy.

No wonder they misread things. As Richard Feynman said, "the easier person to fool is yourself."

donald said...

Telling stories huh?

Seeing Red said...

The Midwest didn't have to fall in love, it just had to fall in line.

It didn't.

Michael K said...

I've heard Chuck Todd interviewed by High Hewitt and he is better than the last guy they had on MTP or Clintonopolis.

Still, he doesn't understand. I expect there are 12 people who live in DC who do.

BADuBois said...

Good piece and if I may wander a bit, I hate, loathe and despise the Washington Times' website. It often has great stories but there's so many pop-up ads and videos playing and other c*** loading that it's a real pain to navigate.

Sebastian said...

Piling on: they don't want to be in touch. Deplorables are untouchables.

Still, it was a close-run thing--close enough to make the left think that with a little better turnout and little more minority mojo on the ticket, they can crush the GOP. They'll forget all about Todd's phony mea culpa and really go for broke next time.

Original Mike said...

Todd said:..."And I think it was a fear of, ‘Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?’"

He's trying to save the yokels from looking sexist? That's kind of him, but is says everything that he thinks they would look sexist.

damikesc said...

So, Chuck provided alternative facts. Irony.

tcrosse said...

Hillary's inevitability was an Article of Faith. To call it into doubt was Heresy.

Simon Kenton said...

YoungHegelian:

"In actuality, if HRC had had meaningful & powerful enough outside criticism perhaps she could have fixed the glaring deficits in her campaign in time to make a difference."

From the outside, there was plenty of criticism and advice, but all could be discounted because of its source - we deplorables. From the inside, it's been reported that Bill Clinton tried to tell the campaign it was in trouble with the old-line Democrats in flyover country, and was blown off by younger and wiser campaign officials. Though I loathe Bill Clinton, this seems along the lines of a graduate student in physics receiving a hint from Einstein that he was going in a wrong direction, and blowing off the old hairy-headed has-been. I think the campaign had a few Cassandrae, inside and outside, of whom WJC was the greatest. I don't know as there has ever been a politician in my time with his gifts. One of the reasons Gates and Jobs had such fabulous success is that they remained able to get messages from Outside. Others, not so much: where are the Borlands of yesteryear? HRC, not at all.

JaimeRoberto said...

The media behavior was a net loss for their preferred candidate. The one-sided reporting drove a lot of people to the Trump column, and it made Clinton overconfident. And judging by their ongoing behavior they still haven't figured it out.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

I think F. Chuck Todd and his cohorts knew exactly what they were doing. They are in a bubble but you can see out of the bubble. They are biased and they were trying to shape opinion as they more and more blatantly have since Watergate. It didn't work this time, thus Trump and thus "we might have done this wrong" post-apocalyptic media bullshit.

Nonapod said...

Not quite Chuck.

Obviously the whole tribalism/team sports aspect of politics made it extremely difficult for these leftwing hacks to objectively see and assess all the deep flaws with Hillary Clinton.

Even now Chuck seems to believe that any failings he/they made weren't that weren't being objective with Hillary, but rather that they simply didn't "tell the story" of the the people who did actually see her flaws. And sure, that's a problem, but it's not the real problem.

The real problem is this weird delusion that many in the media clearly had. The delusion was that Hillary Clinton was this amazing, historic candidate, this brilliant genius with a fantastic record. And any problems she may have had were really no big deal and were exaggerated by Fox News and Talk Radio and the right wing blogosphere. They constantly dismissed any concern people had about Hillary. Benghazi? Private Email server? All overblown in their minds.

The fact of the matter is that if the Democrat party and the main stream media were really trying to be honest with themselves and were really listening to people, Hillary Clinton would have never been their candidate. Honestly at minimum the whole Benghazi thing should have shut down her chances of becoming their candidate for 2016, forget the email server thing. And with a more honest and objective press would possibly lead to a more honest and objective Dem party, and they could have avoided this debacle. But they were just too in love with the mythology of the Clintons that they had crafted over the past few decades. It was silly.

madAsHell said...

I wonder if Chuck is a life-long republican?

Jupiter said...

"We were more likely to do a story about the Dreamer that might get deported with new policies than we were about the 19-year-old opioid addict who feels hopeless in Rolla, Missouri."

That's right, Chuck, Donald Trump was elected by junkies from Missouri. And the Hillary For Prison signs had nothing to do with the fact that the woman is an unrepentant criminal, they were due to HATRED! Some kind of irrational, white supremacist misogynist sexist homophobic xenophobic Islamophobic eenie-meenie-minie-moe-ophobic HATRED. It's too bad that Chuck has to live in the same country with such people. Who let us in, anyway?

Michael K said...

"That's right, Chuck, Donald Trump was elected by junkies from Missouri. "

Oh,yeah. They don't know what they don't know.

Lots of Trump supporters didn't even know that others felt the same way.

That's the definition of a preference cascade.

but they spend a lot of effort making sure that citizens don’t realize the extent to which their fellow-citizens dislike the regime. If the secret police and the censors are doing their job, 99% of the populace can hate the regime and be ready to revolt against it – but no revolt will occur because no one realizes that everyone else feels the same way.

clint said...

"YoungHegelian said...
Note to self --- all "bad habits" are habitual by definition.

Tautologies are our friends."

A selection of non-habitual habits: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4eSnVz_Rbvw/T4lQ9SVdkII/AAAAAAAAHEk/uj4Jc76C_40/s1600/chicago-1.JPG

I make no judgement as to whether any of these are bad habits, though the one on the right tempts me to do so. While the habits are not themselves habitual, the nuns do seem to make a habit of wearing them -- and one might be described as a particular nun's habitual habit, I suppose.

buwaya said...

Excuses is right.
They were told what to write/cover and how to do it.
In considerable detail too, else the coordination wouldnt have been as tight as it was.
And its still in effect.
Todd is a professional liar like the rest.

Jersey Fled said...

The amazing thing is that they continue to do the same things now and still don't get it. Like for example covering the recent Pussy March as if it was a great groundswell of anti-Trump fervor by reasonable people. With such distinguished social critics as Madonna and Ashley Judd.

Did they bother to wonder how those forgotten people in middle America feel about that spectacle? Or would that be sexist.

Big Mike said...

Still, he doesn't understand. I expect there are 12 people who live in DC who do.

And since the 20th they all work for Donald Trump.

Even in his mea culpa Todd can't resist taking a swipe at the hoi polloi by talking about "hatred" against the Clintons. Hatred implies a blind, unreasoning dislike. There were and are plenty of reasons to believe that Hillary Clinton would be a disaster as president, without hating her.

RichardJohnson said...

We should give thanks to Chuck Todd that he did what he did, because the observed blatant media bias in favor of Hillary was a strong factor in getting Trump elected.

n.n said...

It's not "hate", Todd. Judge people by the "content of their character". The Left's Pro-Choice religious/moral philosophy was a revelation that defines your class.

Ann Althouse said...

I have trouble understanding "she’s not well-liked in some places in this country in ways that’s times 10 when it comes to Trump."

Does that mean that HC is hated where she is hated but where DT is hated he's hated 10 times as much?

Or does it mean that where HC is hated she's hated 10 times as much as DT is hated in the places where he is hated?

HOW does he know that?

Is it like how DT knows that 3 million people voted illegally or does DT know that in ways that's times 10 when it comes to Chuck Todd knowing the hate ratio inside the heads of Americans in various regions?

exiledonmainstreet said...

The media behavior was a net loss for their preferred candidate. The one-sided reporting drove a lot of people to the Trump column, and it made Clinton overconfident. And judging by their ongoing behavior they still haven't figured it out.

1/28/17, 2:43 PM

They had no reason to think their 2012 playbook wouldn't work. They took a bland candidate and turned him into a monster who wanted to put women in binders and take away their tampons, kill Big Bird and fire everyone in America. If you can successfully demonize a man as boring as Mitt Romney, how can you possibly resist mining the motherlode that is Donald Trump?

The playbook didn't work this time because the two candidates were very different and because Americans worried about the job market and the increases in healthcare costs didn't have much time left over to fret about pussy grabbing and overweight beauty queens.

The best pro athletes quickly make adjustments when the game plan isn't working. If the batter has gone 2-2 against your fastball, you stop throwing the fastball to him and try the curveball or the slider. The media stayed with their fastball, partly because they were sure they were winning, but also because it's the only pitch they know.

Mark said...

Hey dumb-ass Chuck --

HALF the DEMOCRAT Party were quite vocal about how much they despised Hillary Clinton in 2016 -- and in 2008!

If you had taken off that ass hat underneath your pussy hat for a moment, you would have notice that.

Limited blogger said...

The dopes that did not understand why it happened explaining why it happened.

Ann Althouse said...

How can CT purport to know the hate inside people?

And is he saying it's okay not to have made much about the hatred of HT because there was so much MORE hatred of DT, so the greater hatred needed more coverage?

But it's an election, and each voter only gets one vote. What does the degree of hatred matter, even if we could see it and measure it? And why does the intensity of the hate work AGAINST the hated person? Intense hate is insane and... deplorable.

If there were intense hate against Obama, the haters would be deplored, and the hate would be another reason to bolster him.

Jupiter said...

Michael K said...

"Lots of Trump supporters didn't even know that others felt the same way."

Too true! I went to bed election eve feeling fairly sure I would wake up the next morning to eight years of Hillary Clinton. The ecstatic joy of realizing that she had not won was alloyed with the slow-growing realization that I am not alone, I am far from alone. There are lots of us. I feel about ten years younger.

And I think this is why the Left has come so unglued. They thought they had won the Culture War, and all that remained was to shoot the wounded and loot the dead. They were looking forward to mopping up; taking our guns away, raising our taxes, seizing our property and suppressing our speech. Now they have made the awful discovery that the bear they were getting ready to skin is still alive, and quite healthy, thank you. And more than a little pissed off.

Clyde said...

They also didn't tell the story of the middle-aged white guy who couldn't possibly vote for Clinton because he thought she was dishonest and corrupt. I didn't "hate" Hillary Clinton per se, but I did hate the crooked, dishonest things she had done and was likely to continue doing had she been elected president. I did hate listening to her talk, though. If she had been elected, I might have had to have my eardrums poked out and had the deaf woman at work teach me sign language.

Comanche Voter said...

Chuck Todd is a dork. That's both an established fact, and his excuse for acting--or in this case--failing to act, as he did.

cf said...

this is dishonest. He/They Knew Exactly what they were doing, what they have been expecially honing since the George Bush days -- think of Hurricane Katrina, oh, how Bold and Black and horrible they can make those headlines.

They Shape the News. And they have been extremely effective, just look at EIGHT.WHOLE.YEARS. of the worst administration in our lifetimes, perhaps ever.

And you cannot tell me Chuck's buddies from a few years back in news-collecting that were on the bus with John Edwards -- you can bet they winked and chuckled at his romantic antics, but the Narrative was All.

It's been going on and getting more Yellow Journalism every year.

i don't watch tv anymore, haven't really in years. so my one media that i Hear is radio, and specifially @nprnews.

OHMYGOD, what a relentless script this year has been!!!!! i am constantly debating it as I listen, at what they leave out and what they imply. May they be shaken to their miserable tight-ass Core.

What we are getting to witness is a lot.

GodSpeed to all, ever-present Boddhi, Our Own Good always calling each one of us, let us each hear it, true happiness and fearless freedom to all, I pray.

Crimso said...

"No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad"

I suspect that this is not true, but am too lazy to compile examples supporting that suspicion, all for the purpose of trying to prove Todd still doesn't get it. So either he gets it or he doesn't, and I can't change that in any case.

Jupiter said...

Ann Althouse said...

"If there were intense hate against Obama, the haters would be deplored, and the hate would be another reason to bolster him."

Which is why Chuck Todd is saying that the people who do not share the opinions he received from his professors at GWU are losers who are motivated by hate. He believes that to be the most effective propaganda he can spread in these desperate times. He is still hoping that the Nation will come to its senses, toss Trump in the Potomac and subscribe to the NYT. The idea that his job is to report on events, not influence them, has never once crossed his mind.

And yes, Althouse, the reason you call people racists and junkies and haters is so they will be deplored. And the reason you call them "Deplorables" when you are among friends is that you intend to govern without any consideration for their interests.

Fabi said...

Regardless of justification his news comrades failed to live up to their ethics. If they keep it up, people may start to not trust the mainstream media.

Birkel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
boycat said...

They also certainly didn't tell the story of white women in America-- the single largest voting demographic, and the main one which ought to be squarely, if not overwhelmingly, in Hillary's wheelhouse as her natural base, but who for Trump by 53%.

Birkel said...

What Jupiter, who is much more measured in his response than I would be, said.

Obama and the MSM spent years fomenting fear and hatred of non-Democrats. Althouse was never a target so she might have missed it. But deplorables were created by the Left as a foil for Leftist Collectivists.

If kulaks had not existed, the Left would have to create them. And now let me explain how your chocolate ration has been increased from 20 to 15 grams.

Bill Peschel said...

"No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad"

Who is he talking about? White people? Now he says the press corp was concerned about making white people feel bad?

Does he even listen to what he's saying?

As far as vocal Trump support, he's right that it was difficult to see. They saw packed Trump rallies, and assumed it was astroturfing, just like MoveOn and left-wing protest groups. They heard the hatred directed at a politician who was incapable of lying well, of little accomplishment despite decades near the levers of power, and assumed it was just the usual background noise.

They looked at a candidate who couldn't beat a socialist crank without cheating and who couldn't beat Obama eight years ago in the primaries and saw the next president of the United States, and their polished golden seats next to her.

Of course, the campaign season was so short that every story written about it assumes a greater weight. They couldn't do one story on "why the flyover zone hates Hillary Clinton," because they only had a year to stick that story in.

Considering all that, in the end, yeah, I believe Chuck Todd.

Drago said...

Michael K: "I've heard Chuck Todd interviewed by High Hewitt and he is better than the last guy they had on MTP or Clintonopolis"

David Gregory.

He was last seen on Katie Courics yahoo streaming coverage on election night so, yeah, the quality of that team was pretty much what you'd expect.

chickelit said...

I wonder how many coastal types watched "Winter's Bone" and thought "those fucking losers deserve it - and they're white too." That was basically the Kevin D. Williamson attitude, so the myopia wasn't limited to liberals.

chickelit said...

Shorter Chuck Todd: We don't do empathy for white people. We'll try harder next time.

tcrosse said...

"...how hated the Clintons were in the heartland"

This restates that canard that Trump voters were motivated by Hate, that which Love presumably trumps. So Chuck Todd still doesn't get it.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim at said...

"No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad.

Well, unless you're a white, heterosexual male.
Or a pro-life female.
Or a Christian.
Or ....

traditionalguy said...

Trump offered a leader and a pathway back to the Great America, which included a Government that cared about the lives of the American Middle Class.
The MSM over the last 25 years had abandoned all reporting about the death of the Middle Class. Instead they chose to hook their wagons to the power as Propagandists for the coming World Government.

They are DJT's Opposition Party. And he doesn't want to help them.

TA said...

They don't hate just the Clintons. They hate the whole liberal elite, as they see it, which for damn sure includes Chuck and all the reporters he's talking about.

chickelit said...

A sure sign of reverse racism on the pa of the media will be if they ignore any stories about jobs in the heartland that may be credited to Trump. Wait for it.

Chuck said...

lol.

As I read this blog post, and the lengthy quote, I imagined it was somebody in the Democratic leadership or a strategist in the Clinton campaign, talking about how "we" didn't get the messaging right.

And I get to the end, and the hyperlinked attribution for that quote; it's Chuck Todd of NBC News.

Commence all "What's the difference?" jokes.

Gusty Winds said...

They're still trying to figure out "what they did wrong", meaning: what could we have done differently to get Hillary elected.

Basically Todd admits the coastal media forgot the forgotten people. Trump is right.

What must be disturbing for Mr. Todd, is people in the heartland like him as much as they like Hillary.

Roger Sweeny said...

Chuck, I think the problem is more subtle and more deep-seated than you realize. You unself-consciously refer to "Dreamers." But that's a politically and emotionally loaded term, loaded in favor of one view (They're here pursuing the American Dream. How can you be in favor of throwing them out?) and against another (They're here illegally. The law should be enforced).

If you saw this, you probably would use another, more neutral, term. But you don't, so you didn't.

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sebastian said...

@Jupiter: "The ecstatic joy of realizing that she had not won was alloyed with the slow-growing realization that I am not alone, I am far from alone. There are lots of us. I feel about ten years younger." Though I was by no means a Trumpist, I had the same reaction. I always thought I had my finger pretty close to the pulse of Amurricans, wasn't sure by 2012, but then had some faith restored last November.

"And I think this is why the Left has come so unglued. They thought they had won the Culture War, and all that remained was to shoot the wounded and loot the dead . . . Now they have made the awful discovery that the bear they were getting ready to skin is still alive, and quite healthy, thank you." They still are winning the Culture War, and the bear is not that healthy. That is one reason why the left will not follow Todd's phony advice to get in touch with the Untouchables. They still think they will win, it's just a matter of time. With control of the MSM, higher ed, Hollywood, the civil service, and the public schools, they still dominate the culture -- DJT can only do so much.

Rick said...

Chuck Todd - What do I think we did wrong in this election?

It's interesting he now wants to report differently to achieve some goal which eluded him. It's an admission (against interest) the media was in effect an arm of the Hillary campaign, and further that they are reforming themselves only to become a more effective arm of the Democratic Party.

Kinsely Gaffe.

chickelit said...

I still think the DNCe will try to run Hillary again in 3 years, despite her age and health issues. They have given no signals that they are moving away from her. There has so far been zero introspection regarding the whole Sanders campaign.

Doug said...

No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad.... Um how about Christians? Tea Partiers? Straight people?

wildswan said...

A month after the election I spent several weeks binge watching the election night coverage by ABC, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, PBS - the major networks. The coverage had these similarities.

1. Not one major network had a Trump supporter on its front desk. MSNBC, CBS, NBC, PBS did not have even one Trump supporter as a part of their group of analysts and opinion makers; ABC had one. Trump was the candidate of one of the two major political parties and the major networks made no arrangements for representing his point of view. This is a little more serious than ignoring the opioid epidemic in the heartland.

2. All the networks began at 7:00 PM by explaining the expected result, a Hillary victory, as a consequence of (expected) high turnout among women and Hispanics. They then all by 10:00 PM correctly identified the looming Trump victory as caused by low turnout in the cities and high turnout in rural counties.

3. But since then the reporters and opinion makers have never asked why turnout in cities among blacks was low, why Trump increased the GOP share of the Hispanic vote and why a majority of white women voted for Trump.

4. The media have asked why white rural voters turned out in large numbers and they have answered (see Chuck Todd) - These Others hated us because we, the media, were superior in every way and we were far too superior to ask why These Others were drug addled and likely to vote against anything we were for and unfortunately These Others have the vote. But the large white rural turnout had a mirror image in low black inner-city turnout and the media has ignored this convex/concave similarity. Yet it was one phenomenon and it was a major cause of Hillary's defeat. If they could understand that - then maybe they'd start to understand. (Hint: Black and white together hated Hillary and they did overcome on that day. But why did both hate Hillary about the same way - as if both were citizens of one country which had been deplorably treated, a country unknown to the media?)

chickelit said...

It's still Hillary's "turn" -- more so than ever. Senority still matters to the DNCe.

mccullough said...

Todd seemed to keep his cool on election night. But too many of these newspeople were stunned. They could not process Trump's election just as they can't process his presidency. It like adults who just found out Santa Clause isn't real.

Achilles said...

"They still think they will win, it's just a matter of time. With control of the MSM, higher ed, Hollywood, the civil service, and the public schools, they still dominate the culture -- DJT can only do so much."

All of those institutions are reviled by strong majorities and there is technology available to supplant each one. I think it is only a matter of time before they are defeated.

Gahrie said...

And now let me explain how your chocolate ration has been increased from 20 to 15 grams.

Glorious news comrade. The government has discovered that chocolate is bad for you, and the chocolate ration has been replaced with broccoli.

tcrosse said...

Another story they missed is the great dislike of Hillary on the Left. Once Bernie Sanders was disposed of, it was assumed that his supporters would have fallen in line.

Paco Wové said...

"DJT can only do so much."

Much depends on whether or not Trump (assuming he does not flame out catastrophically) can inspire sufficient numbers of kindred spirits on the right who are able to follow in his path, rather than being succeeded by Life-Long Republicans™ who return to their erudite, sophisticated, and fruitless ways.

Levi Starks said...

Seriously, the key sentence in that statement is "what we did wrong". Is this not the most clear admission possible that intent of the mainstream media was to defeat Trump? A win for a Trump was a loss for the mainstream media.
Here's another possibility.... maybe they did nothing wrong, maybe they did everything Right.

Levi Starks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Levi Starks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
urbane legend said...

clint said
I make no judgement as to whether any of these are bad habits, though the one on the right tempts me to do so. While the habits are not themselves habitual, the nuns do seem to make a habit of wearing them -- and one might be described as a particular nun's habitual habit, I suppose.

Why do nuns dress like they do? It's a habit. Or out of habit. But that can start all kinds of unpleasantness.

Mac McConnell said...

Bill and Hillary are so close, Bill couldn't tell Hillary the campaign was in trouble? My guess is that Bill's supposed brilliance was BS after the fact.

AprilApple said...

What the democrat hack press fail to understand is that Hillary Clinton IS an actual criminal. she used her private server to stuff her phony family foundation coffers - a fake charity, and she did it by selling US off to the highest bidder.

AprilApple said...

Hillary for prison isn't hatred, it's shouting out that if any of us did what she did, we'd be in prison.

F*ck you Chuck Todd - blind corruptocrat.

Swede said...

He should do one of those journo-safari things and come visit me in Michigan.

He'd see many a strange sight.

Trucks.

Guns.

Blatant hetero males.

Things he's probably not used to. Strange, scary things.

Michael said...

Chuck is a jackass and not very smart. GW undergrad with a DNF. We give these guys way more credit than we should.

tcrosse said...

It's still Hillary's "turn"
If there are enough people who believe that she was the perfect candidate, who only lost because of Putin and Comey's skulduggery, then she'll take a shot at 2020. It remains to be seen if the big-money donors will buy it. Meanwhile, she and her bunch can keep a lid on any young up-and-comers in the Party. Hell hath no fury, and all that.

Anglelyne said...

Mac McConnell: Bill and Hillary are so close, Bill couldn't tell Hillary the campaign was in trouble? My guess is that Bill's supposed brilliance was BS after the fact.

Word was that Bill was telling the Hillary campaign (esp. about trouble in the Rust Belt), but they would not listen. Which, if true, further illustrates how far they had their heads up their asses.

AprilApple said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AJ Lynch said...

Interesting that Todd equates a Dreamer with a drug addict in Missouri. Is that how he sees the country?..the clean living brilliant hard working illegal Mexican Dreamer versus the white loser drug addict in Bumfuck?

AprilApple said...

Rick @ 4:29.

100%

Chickl - Yep - They will run her again. Clintons are desperate for power, they owe a lot to mega donors, and the D's have an aging weak bench.

Harry Reid himself said the Democrat party looks like a retirement home.

*desecrate -loz. fizzed

CWJ said...

You had a job. You didn't do it! For the first time in a long time, I'm actually outraged by Todd's comments. It's like saying maybe we the engineering profession should have noticed all these bridge collapses.

The Rolla, MO reference shows that he both has learned nothing and simultaneously doesn't know Rolla, MO. Missouri is still a concept, not a real place to him. All told, it's still all preening and signalling to his in-group.

harrogate said...

Most allof the states Trump won, any GOP candidate would have won. If we are going to talk about how Dems blew the Rust Belt, then fine, that's a discussion worth having. But the idea rhat the Dems ever had a snowball's chance in Mizzou or Nebraska or Tennessee? Please.

tim in vermont said...

Chuck is still trying to figure out how they could have threaded that needle and gotten Hillary elected. I doubt he has the capacity for introspection needed to get to the bottom of the mess the press is in.

A good first step would be asking why powerful Democrats are throwing you expensive, celebrity filled parties. I know, it's so you will be impartial!

YoungHegelian said...

@harrogate,

If we are going to talk about how Dems blew the Rust Belt, then fine,

You mean, like, Florida?

But the idea that the Dems ever had a snowball's chance in Mizzou or Nebraska or Tennessee?

Yeah, something like the snowball's chance the Repubs had in California & New York. Which combo would you pick for your electoral college firewall?

tim in vermont said...

The fact that they still can't even examine the argument that Hillary should go to prison, refused to even consider the evidence, but reject it out of hand, is infuriating.

CWJ said...

Sebastian @ 4:27,

Well said. What could not be said out loud was implied by the ballot box. You are not alone.

CWJ said...

harrogate,

You mean the same Missouri who elected a democratic governor and senator in 2012? Missouri is purple, pretending it's reliably red is ignorant.

Michael K said...

Harrogate still thinks the Russians stole the election.

Probably with 50% of Democrats.

Bad Lieutenant said...

The interesting thing is that if some spunky Democrat prosecutor, like maybe Preet Bharara in New York, or likewise some governor who made it his job to do so, was to have a go at the Clinton Entity in court, especially if he got results, it might look very well on his resume as a reformer and person who actually understood the problems, instead of just wanting in.

Naturally that will never happen. But generically there seems to be so much capital in disavowing/shunning/blaming the Clintons, it almost seems a matter of time.

Achilles said...

Blogger Michael K said...
"Harrogate still thinks the Russians stole the election.

Probably with 50% of Democrats."

And they are all too stupid to even explain how the Russians did it. The democrat voters are just doing and thinking what the people who give them free stuff tell them to do and think. They aren't very smart.

Sebastian said...

The other striking thing about the Todd & MSM myopia is that it doesn't take much these days to get up to snuff on what the country is thinking. I don't mean to toot out collective horn here, but if Chuck T would have just read this blog, if only to take the temperature of our collective discontent, he would have gotten a sense of the range of conservative opinion, from moderate vote-switchers to "lifelong Republicans" to actual conservatives to die-hard Trumpists, our shared revulsion of Hill expressed better and more forcefully than anything in the MSM. Together, we got closer to the real state of play -- wisdom of crowds, etc. etc. Even if the final result had turned out slightly different, the Todds of the world still should have known more and better. But they don't care.

Jupiter said...

boycat said...
"They also certainly didn't tell the story of white women in America-- the single largest voting demographic, and the main one which ought to be squarely, if not overwhelmingly, in Hillary's wheelhouse as her natural base, but who for Trump by 53%."

Oh, I don't know about that. Why should white women be Hillary's natural base? Because she has a vagina? So what? The Democrats want women to think that having a vagina defines their interests -- government-paid contraception, and government-paid abortion if it fails. Because the deepest satisfaction in life comes from growing old alone. But the interests of a married woman with children are defined by her family, not her genitals. If it were up to married white women, our new President would be Sarah Palin, having been elected after John McCain finished his second term. And I don't mean that in any figurative sense. I mean that if only married women's votes had been counted in 2008, McCain-Palin would have won in a landslide. The Democrats are counting on the dissolution of the American family, and doing their best to bring it about. What filthy scum they are!

bgates said...

I think it was a fear of, 'Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?'.

I'd like to ask Chuck Todd why that concern never comes up when he's talking to Kellyanne Conway, Carly Fiorina, Sarah Palin, or Condoleeza Rice, but not as much as I'd like to beat him to death with a shovel.

harkin said...

Pull the other one Chuck.

The MSM were like the Hillary cheerleading squad and after decades of doing everything they could to promote the DNC line, the nation caught on and decided to ignore you and your Pom Pom crew.

The entire western world is catching on.....

The jig is up! (That should be a headline for an opinion piece on these scurrying cockroaches).

JAORE said...

"...Todd equates a Dreamer with a drug addict in Missouri. Is that how he sees the country?..the clean living brilliant hard working illegal Mexican Dreamer versus the white loser drug addict in Bumfuck?"

Yeah, that jumped out at me too.

Hey Chuck, how about:
People that can't understand why Islam can not be mentioned when a mass murderer invokes the name of Allah as he kills?
People that fear transgender restrooms and locker rooms will allow (heterosexual) predators access to innocent women.
How about people that worry that nice folks can lose their bakery for not ignoring their religious beliefs.
People that watched their health insurance premiums skyrocket, and deductibles rise all the while losing their trusted doctor.

And on and on all the while being told they are despicable bigots.

These people aren't meth heads, they aren't KKK members, they aren't ignorant....

roesch/voltaire said...

They held back on reporting of Trump supporters as well as on the growing swell of Sander's supporters.Everyone I talked to only reluctantly was for Hillary but she won the popular vote and who knows what would have happened if the leak of emails, the Russian fake news and Comey's interference had not happened? We would have a different president to dislike?

Big Mike said...

You know, what the press did wrong was in not pushing back hard against the inevitability of Hillary's inevitable nomination and election.

Paco Wové said...

"Everyone I talked to only reluctantly was for Hillary"

Well, maybe the Democrats shouldn't have pushed for the Dear Leader then. Why are you guys such a bunch of lemmings?

Anglelyne said...

roesch/voltaire: Everyone I talked to only reluctantly was for Hillary but she won the popular vote and who knows what would have happened if the leak of emails, the Russian fake news and Comey's interference had not happened?

Nothing, you silly twat.

Amadeus 48 said...

The MSM should have had a clue that BHO was a thing unto himself from the GOP success down ballot in 2010, 2012 and 2014. In another post, Chuck (ALR) and I reviewed the GOP success in Michigan, which is comparable to their success in Wisconsin. It is overwhelming at every level in both states (but not at the US Senate level). With that momentem no one should be surprised that the GOP won MI and WI.
DJT was an improbable candidate, but he stayed after HRC and the national elites in both parties.
The MSM never understood what has been going on for the last 20 years. Chuck Todd is struggling. I agree 100% with our Chuck's comment at 4:11pm.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

I think, personally, that Chuck Todd is much the best of the Sunday morning journalists. He fights back. His attack on Kellyann Conway last week had to be seen to be believed. (Yes, it was over the trivial matter of inaugural crowd size, but the point was that she wouldn't answer his question and he wouldn't stop asking it.) We need more such. Not the typical blancmanges.

Seeing Red said...

Of course dems have a chance in Tennessee.

Cripes.

Crazy Jane said...

Maybe CT missed the hate that was going the other way. Here, a two-page op-ed spread from last Sunday's LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-brodner-trump-cabinet-20170122-htmlstory.html

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Everyone I talked to only reluctantly was for Hillary but she won the popular vote and who knows what would have happened if the leak of emails, the Russian fake news and Comey's interference had not happened?

For the last time, it doesn't matter who won the popular vote. Our elections aren't structured that way, and if they were, campaign strategies would be completely different.

"The leak of emails" is still from an undetermined source. Assange himself insists that it was not Russia, but a domestic, internal leaker. Which might be untrue, of course. John Podesta got caught by bog-standard phishing, which is, er, pretty lame.

Which "Russian fake news" do you mean? The only instance I can think of happened last week, and had to do with Russian whores pissing on a bed Obama had once slept in. So lurid that I almost want to believe it, but no, even I can't.

As for "Comey's interference," what did you want the man to do? In a totally unrelated inspection of Anthony Weiner's phone for kiddie porn or whatever, hey, whaddaya know, another bunch of HRC's emails. So Comey says we need to look into these and see whether there is anything there that could have compromised US security. That seems to me entirely prudent. The imprudent thing is HRC's emails sharing space with the other contents of Weiner's phone.

Bob Loblaw said...

From the inside, it's been reported that Bill Clinton tried to tell the campaign it was in trouble with the old-line Democrats in flyover country, and was blown off by younger and wiser campaign officials. Though I loathe Bill Clinton, this seems along the lines of a graduate student in physics receiving a hint from Einstein that he was going in a wrong direction, and blowing off the old hairy-headed has-been.

I don't think much of Bill Clinton either, but as Mao is supposed to have said "See the adversary you respect, not the enemy you despise." Bill Clinton is a once-in-a-generation savant at politics.

Gretchen said...

They are really afraid of being anti-woman when it is a Republican woman like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, et al.

bgates said...

who knows what would have happened if the leak of emails, the Russian fake news and Comey's interference had not happened?

If you want to really blow your mind, imagine if the leak of emails hadn't revealed collusion between the press and the Clinton campaign because at least one of them had been too ethical to pursue it.

Or imagine if Comey hadn't gone back and forth because Loretta Lynch announced that Bill Clinton's attempt to secure a secret meeting with her during an ongoing investigation only showed the importance of continuing the investigation wherever it led, election calendar be damned.

Jack Tors said...

The MSM didn't report that Mme. Defarge of Chappaqua was reviled in the heartland for fear of being labeled sexist?!? Pleeeeeze! They deep-sixed honest coverage because they're all Hillary fanboys and girls who would do whatever was necessary to put her over the top, journalistic integrity be damned. Chuck Todd, as usual, is totally FOS. Brings to mind the late, great Andrew Breitbart's exhortation to the media: "Do your job!"

Michael Fitzgerald said...

bgates said...
I think it was a fear of, 'Oh, is it going to look like it’s sexist, anti-woman if we say that?'.

I'd like to ask Chuck Todd why that concern never comes up when he's talking to Kellyanne Conway, Carly Fiorina, Sarah Palin, or Condoleeza Rice, but not as much as I'd like to beat him to death with a shovel.

1/28/17, 8:24 PM

bgates, you are by far my favorite commenter here. You only show up once in a while, but when you do, I either end up laughing like mad at your Bugs Bunnyesque wit, or, like this time, saying to myself 'That's exactly what I was going to say!"

PaoloP said...

"a little bit"

eh!

FleetUSA said...

This sounds like after the fact rationalizations. They were totally in the can for her and ignored any facts contrary to that story line. We the people saw what she had done (or had never done) and what DJT was proposing. The choice was obvious.

Big Mike said...

A quick note to all of you who keep pointing at the popular vote. The Electoral College worked precisely as the founders intended. I wouldn't want to live in a country whose policies were determined by a coalition of New York City, Chicago, and California. The people who live -- and vote -- there are loons.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Even if Chuck Todd is being honest and forthright he doesn't address WHY the Media made the mistake it did. WHY did the Mediamjust let PC concerns override their critical thinking, etc? It is a BS excuse for 2 reasons: as many other commenters have pointed out the excuse doesn't explain the poor performance (and doesn't match the Media's prior treatment of women, etc) and, importantly, it does not address WHy the failure happened to so many in the Media in the same way.
Hint: Media is overwhelmingly Leftist, and praises its own groupthink. That played a part, huh??
You didn't cover the stories of those opiate addicts and other flyover deplorables, sure. Why not? Until they examine that they're just farting out lame excuses.

Unknown said...

In a democracy, one of the things that voters trust is that even if their party loses, the winners will not stomp on them but will keep their interests (as say 48% of the country) in mind. The democrats overthrew that idea, especially with Obamacare (and blatantly so). They said by their actions: "if we win, we will do ONLY exactly what we want, and regardless of the law. We will prevent tea party groups from getting tax status. We will prevent pipelines that people need. We will shut down coal mines. We will persecute men on college campuses." and that is what they did. The consequence is that people lost trust that democrats would keep in mind the interests of the little guy, the plumber, the truck driver, the small business owner. And Trump said he would do so.

harrogate said...

"Of course dems have a chance in Tennessee."

#AlternateFacts

Martin said...

Very revealing. Given a choice between being seen as:

1. Incompetent but possibly honest, OR
2. Competent but dishonest,

Todd chose #2. He told the whole world, "We're dishonest and we don't care if you know it; hell, we'll rub it in your face."

And, the idea that they didn't want to "appear sexist" is an obvious lie to anyone old enough to remember what they did to Sarah Palin in 2008-14.

Think about it.

RonF said...

"No member of the press corps wants to look like they’re singling out a group and making a group feel bad"

AH HAHAHAHAHA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAHAHAHA *gasp* *wheeze* Holy Mother of God how did these words come out of that mouth?