January 27, 2015

"SCENE: Murdoch sitting with Valerie Jarrett gushing over Jeb, immigration..."

Drudge teaser, linking the NYT "As in 2012, Romney Can Do No Right in Murdoch’s Eyes."

This scene is most helpful to the reputation of...
 
pollcode.com free polls

This scene is least helpful to the reputation of...
 
pollcode.com free polls

The NYT was well aware of whose reputation was hurt and helped by its description of this scene.
 
pollcode.com free polls

15 comments:

Hagar said...

Poison pen article.

Scott said...

A comment in an in medias res lead to a nothing NYT thumbsucker.

Valarie Jarrett was bait to get the average NYT reader to read an article about a man they hate.

If you don't buy the premise that Rupert Murdoch is some kind of kingmaker manipulating the mindless Republican hordes to his own purpose, the article is pointless.

tim maguire said...

Most Help: Rupert Murdoch
Least Help: Valerie Jarret
Did the Times know? Probably not.

Hagar said...

That said, it would be nice if the Republicans would quit whingeing about amnesty, etc., and come up with something useful.

mccullough said...

All this Jeb v. Romney stuff at this point is helpful to other Republicans.

Neither of these guys is electable, Jeb less than Romney.

The Republicans need someone new and someone younger. Even if they don't win in 2016, they need to get their next generation out there. The Dems have no bench and two rich old white female scolds are what they are stuck with.

Scott said...

If I were running for president, I wouldn't want Rupert Murdoch endorsing me. So I guess the article was least helpful to Jeb Bush's reputation, but geez, the impact was miniscule.

tim maguire said...

Hagar said...That said, it would be nice if the Republicans would quit whingeing about amnesty, etc., and come up with something useful.

Why do Republicans always have to propose a solution to whatever the Democrats' priority is this week? You know what's more useful than basically every single thing the Democrats have done in my lifetime? Sitting on their hands and doing nothing. That would be more useful.

Watching a nice movie. Washing the dishes. Sitting on the front porch with an unsweetened Iced Tea. Any of these would be more useful.

Hagar said...

It is not about "proposing a solution to whatever the Democratic priority is this week." And in fact, the Democrats' priority this week, and any other week, is not to provide a solution, but to keep the controversy going, and if possible, inflate it, for political electoral reasons.

However, it is a real problem that is hurting both people and the government of the country, and should be approached on a rational basis.

tim maguire said...

What is?

traditionalguy said...

OK, this old billionaire living in his 1990s mind set is drawn to the "donor class" GOP candidates that he knows.

The winner of that headline, picture and story is Scott Walker. This sudden Walker bandwagon is amazing to watch.

Fandor said...

The NYT's sees the future.

A tsunami is coming.

Liberals are going to want (and need) a place at the table if they don't want to be swept away.

Murdoch and Jarrett are going to be yesterday's news very soon.

SteveR said...

I would not have a problem voting for Jeb Bush, there is no democrat that I would vote for, in any case. His problem, even with getting the nomination is that many republicans won't vote for him.

chillblaine said...

That is almost too much gruesome for such a confined space.

David said...

So now you are having poll questions that require us to actually read the article. How professorial.

David said...

I read it as a hit piece on Jeb. Sitting with Jarrett and hitting "all the right notes" on immigration.

Unfortunately that's probably a killer with many on the right, even if you remove Jarrett from the scene.