At Real Clear Politics:
The Washington Post and The New York Times just came out with their big editorials, but did anyone who's for Trump or seriously considering Trump even read that material? It was already understood that elite media regard Trump as not just way worse than Hillary but not even in the same category. Trump — they've told us for over a year —isn't qualified. He's not even normal.
But after media's drumming all of that into our head, Trump is still around, and he's practically even with Hillary. He's inching up day by day. Jumping up today. And that's before Trump does the kind of ad spending that Hillary has been doing all along.
Donald Trump's campaign is planning for what it says will amount to $140 million worth of advertising from now until Election Day....
The plan represents a new approach for the billionaire businessman, who has repeatedly bragged in recent weeks about how much less he's spent than Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and seemed to rely heavily on free media coverage of his large rallies.And the Trump rallies continue — tomorrow in Florida, the next day in Wisconsin — with all the attendant word of mouth. But Hillary is doing rallies too. Her campaign schedule has her in North Carolina tomorrow, New Hampshire (with Bernie Sanders) on Wednesday, and Florida on Thursday. Her campaign must know that elite media cannot carry her, no matter how hard they try — and that trying so hard has been destructive to the power of elite media.
But there's always the debate. We've been told to believe that Trump doesn't even deserve to stand on the stage alongside her and that she can somehow simply talk and look like the only real candidate and he'll somehow be revealed as the devil he is. But look at those polls. How did that man get where you can clearly see he is? She's the one who's supposed to be so well-grounded in reality, and it's undeniable real that he's right up there next to her.
पोस्ट्स
७७ टिप्पण्या:
Now-cast at fivethirtyeight is Clinton 45.1% Trump 54.9%.
Hillary Clinton is the most qualified corrupt politician ever.
If you want corruption - she's your gal. Nobody ever, in the history of American politics, comes close to her level corruption. She is the most qualified corrupt pol. Ever.
Someone in Mrs. Clinton's campaign thought that releasing this photo was a good idea.
Three predictions.
1. It will be one of the largest television events in TV history. Worldwide.
2. The media, still in thrall of the Clinton campaign, will run a three day mobbing showing how Clinton Won The Debate Decisively. I suspect they have the stuff prepared already.
3. In a week Clinton will be down another 2-3 points in reaction to what people saw at the debate.
As Mr. B. Puti has pointed out, people aren't voting for candidates, really. That's why these numbers don't change that much, election over election. The candidates are figureheads. People are voting for cliques, tribes. Which tribe do you want in?
April
One does not become that corrupt and profit that much from such corruption if it were not for an army of political hacks providing you cover.
My rationalization for voting for Trump is to keep Clinton's political army off the public payroll.
"It's beyond debate that Donald Trump is unfit to be president."
Talk about begging the question.
I happen to think he's unfit to be president, but it's by no means beyond debate. A lot of commenters here could give me a hell of a debate on the subject. They might even win it.
Derek Kite, 9:12: I have a different prediction, and I admit I'm a lousy seer. Trump dominates tonight, then says something while gloating over the next few days that costs him most of the support it won him.
As Kurt Schlichter writes about "the media" we're laughing at your self destruction
and we've lost all respect for your elite opinions.
"Beyond debate"? Who but a journalism youth would write such a phrase? What kind of editor says "Post it!" to that?
It's beyond debate that the Washington Post is unfit to be a newspaper, but you get what you get.
I happen to think he's unfit to be president, but it's by no means beyond debate
Yes! Exactly!!
My problem is: she is also unfit to be president. And she has a whole infrastructure built on her political power. At least Trump would be unfit in a way that we would get to see his failure.
AA
Althouse + Meade really should go to that rally. You will have some fun and learn something about Trump. Also a tax deductible business expense as it is material for the profitable Althouse blog.
Just do it!
Obama used to say things were beyond debate. Remember how the "time for talk is over"?
Trump should ask Holt why Holt doesn't ask Hillary about her corruption.
Trump should bring up her private server. Her decision to turn the State Department into the Clinton Cash register is all that matters.
I get a kick out of the "Kilroy was here" images of the candidates. Someone at 538 just needs to draw their noses over the bars.
It seems more people have caught on to the mainstream media game. Perhaps it took a candidate as bad as Hillary to do it.
They aren't going down without a fight, however. Derek Kite is correct that regardless of what we see tonight the media will carpet bomb us with how decisive a victory Hillary achieved: Her yet to be revealed scripted zinger is already the defining moment of the campaign! Such a command of the issues...way better then Romney!
Look for Nate to have the race 70-30 in Trump's favor by the weekend...
Tosa (9:15) - Agreed.
The entire Media Industrial Complex is a wholly owned subsidiary of the corrupt Clinton machine. They all profit when she wins.
JPS,
Trump is unfit to be president, as is Mrs. Clinton.
Mr. Trump is an individual and our system is designed to check an individual. It cannot withstand a corrupt political army embedded in the courts and bureaucracy -- both with the intent of undermining/bypassing/destroying what the people say through their elected representatives
Hillary has shown disdain for Congress--not complying with subpoenas and destroying requested evidence---and the Judiciary, doing the same and not complying with orders. That disqualifies her from the Presidency right there.
When the left says something is "beyond debate" (man made Global Warming), it means they are losing the debate, or they know they are completely full of shit.
They are so blind to the millions of voters/customers/potential readers that they turn off. The NFL is making the same mistake.
The Dallas Morning News is seeing a wave of subscription cancellations after endorsing Hillary. The liberals in the editorial departments can turn their noses in the air; the advertising and sales departments can't.
Hillary Clinton is qualified to be run the country in the smae way that a bank robber is qualified to run the bank.
Let's see the Post compare and contrast EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE between these two. It is a subject that, despite the hard working people in the media, just never seems to come up! I would like to see the differences highlighted and the experiences examined.
TosaGuy, 9:21 - I think that's exactly right.
But, why is Trump unfit to be president, according to the media?
We've seen a lot of Trump over the years, & he's really not that insane by the megalomanaical standards of American politics. He lies, they say. He lies all the time. Well, he does, in that stream of consciousness way he speaks. But, compared to FDR in 1940, Trump is George Washington cherry-tree chopping honest.
No, the real problem with Trump is that he says racist & sexist things. Not that he's really done racist & sexist things, but he says them.
And that is why, for the media, he's unfit to be president. Because the real problem with having 13 million Mexicans in the US who aren't supposed to be here is not that they're here & what they may be costing the US taxpayer, or if they vote illegally, or whatnot. The real problem is you've got to talk about them in just the right way, or you might be racist.
"Beyond debate."
In their heart of hearts, they wish Hillary could just be appointed, without this noisy election thing and its useless debates.
Hillary is far too polarizing to be an effective president. But the DNC and her billionaire backers were determined to ram her down America's throat. Maybe the WaPo should have thrown their weight behind somebody like Webb, who would be winning now in a walk.
As Mr. B. Puti has pointed out, people aren't voting for candidates, really.
Democrat and Republican die hards maybe, but Hillary is deeply flawed, and this argument whistles past the graveyard on that issue.
Ben Hogan once asserted the aggressive commoner from Latrobe was not qualified to play golf among his betters at The Masters. Hogan said, where all in the locker room heard him," What's he doing here?" Palmer was a working class man with a fierce desire to win to please his disabled grounds keeper father.
That day an unbeatable loyalty factor of a winner who could really enjoy his fans started a Movement which Made Golf Great Again. That emotional connection that Arnie was master of still controls our hearts. We are still his Army. But the bitter old Hogan faded away like Hillary is doing while we watch.
Look at the poll results that Prof. Althouse posted. All of them (except 1) within the margin of error, so basically the electorate is split 50/50.
Think about what the WaPo just said to the 50% that supports Trump: Hey, you degenerate assholes -- Fuck you & the candidate you rode in on!
Now, why is it again that the WaPo can't seem to make any money? What would happen to a door-to-door salesman if one out of every two doors that opened to him he told the occupants to go fuck off?
It is my understanding that a penguin does not have wings that are unflappable.
Rather, they flap their wings and fly.
It's just that they fly in a different medium.
How does Trump win? Go look at the electoral college map in realclearpolitics.com. As things stand right now, if Trump holds all the states that are solid Trump or lean Trump, he has 266 electoral college votes. Hillary has 263. Of the most recent six polls taken in Colorado (the missing 9 electoral college votes), half show Trump ahead and half show Clinton ahead. It's a dead heat out there where the mountains aren't the only things that are high.
Colorado isn't the only state which Trump could take from Hillary Clinton and win the election. New Mexico has 5 votes, and hasn't been polled since May. Trump could also take New Jersey (both polls taken in September show Clinton barely ahead by one or two percentage points), he could take Pennsylvania (same situation as NJ), or less likely he could take New Jersey, Virginia, Minnesota, Michigan, or Wisconsin (wait! Wisconsin?!?). He is more likely to win Pennsylvania and New Jersey than Hillary is likely to win Florida, no matter how often the snowbirds vote.
@AprilApple, I think you're right. Hillary is certainly the most corrupt politician to run for president since James Blaine ("the continental liar from the state of Maine") in 1884, but I now I think probably she's more corrupt than even Blaine.
A question for the Hillary fans out there. How much money did the Clinton Foundation raise for Haitian relief, and how much was actually spent in Haiti?
Millions of dollars of pre-paid influence will pay off at zero.
When the left says something is "beyond debate" (man made Global Warming), it means they are losing the debate, or they know they are completely full of shit.
Exactly. It is the old shut up and because I said so routine that your parents' would give you when you questioned something. I also got that treatment in Catholic catechism classes when the Nuns were teaching the 3 in 1 concept. I didn't understand the physical ability of this and when asked for a more clear explanation (yes, I am one of those literal analytical pain in the butt students) the Nuns just said, because it IS...faith...and shut up. Completely turned me off of organized religion at a very early age.
The left just pronounces things and you MUST accept or be labeled heretic, racist or any other pejorative that they have at hand.
No debating or examination of the issues are allowed. Faith and shut up just like the Church. Liberalism is a religious cult.
Mr. Trump is an individual and our system is designed to check an individual. It cannot withstand a corrupt political army embedded in the courts and bureaucracy
Yes! Well said, TosaGuy!
It's Trump and the People against Hillary and the Fortune 100 CEOs, the hedge funders, the investment bankers, Carlos Slim's NYT, and Jeff Bezos's Post. I like those odds.
Anyone who claims Trump isn't even worthy of consideration—that he's psychologically abnormal, irrational, impetuous, "you don't want him with the nuclear launch codes," etc.—without immediately turning around and observing that Clinton is mendacious, glory-and-profit-seeing above all else, and a habitual liar is themselves either delusional or at least extraordinarily successful at lying to themselves.
In other words, it's not the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth about Trump I object to. It's the delusional idea that the alternative is better in any way.
Nobody fit to be President ran for election this year.
Very few Presidents have been fit to be President.
There's always enough other factors to consider to choose a candidate anyhow.
And I agree with TosaGuy about the key factor for this year. Only Trump will get checked and balanced.
As already stated up-thread. Hillary will be declared he winner by the media, no matter what.
But, what happens if she had a medical event on camera?
Rush Limbaugh was asking listeners to call in and give suggestions on what Trump should do if Hillary went into an extended coughing fit or collapsed on stage.
what Trump should do if Hillary went into an extended coughing fit or collapsed on stage.
He should turn to the audience and into the cameras and in his best Gene Wilder imitation dramatically ask.
"Is there a doctor in the house!!! Can't someone help this poor woman. Can't you see that she is desperately ILL!! Have some mercy on her!!!"
Or actually, just stand there and express his dismay that the old workhorse hasn't been put out to pasture yet.
Or...I can come up with more :-)
We live in the Age of Hyperbole, where people learned a few decades ago to magnify language in order to get heard.
Hyperbole is useful to a degree and inasmuch as the speaker is respected.
The billionaire-driven media has lost its reputation as a sage commentary on public life and is more like the tantrum of a 2 year old.
"It's OK Hillary. Have a drink, take a break if you need to. I can wait all night. Vladamir Putin won't."
Trump could put an EMT with full kit and an oxygen tank in the front row seat next to Mark Cuban.
The only thing I remember about the Bush-Gore debate is the amused nod that Bush gave to Gore when Gore entered his space. Cool gesture. Trump is capable of making a cool gesture. If Hillary has ever made a graceful gesture in her million years in the public spotlight, I cannot recall it......After the debate the wise men on television will explain to us how Hillary won the debate, how her poise and vitality have now put health issues to rest, and how mendacious Trump's silly, racist statements were. Nonetheless, people will see what they see, and it will not be what the wise men on television see.
How many people will be allowed into Hillary's carefully controlled 'rallies'?
How many line up around the block for Trump's?
The last Bloomberg and Q polls has Clinton at +5 and +6. Now she is tied or at +1.
If Trump is going to win this things, either the polls need to be wrong (As Hugh Hewitt wrote, if it isn't close they can't cheat) or he needs to rise to about a +5 average before the election.
I'm thinking the polls are wrong. There just seems to be too much information pointing in that direction.
He beats her by +10 in enthusiasm. He wins more independents than she does. And most of the polls I've been looking at have +10 Democrats, which sure, you'll get in deep blue states but not purple states.
It's very frustrating though because polls won't give us all the data. Why? Why won't they
A: Give us the raw numbers and
B: Tell us how they skewed those numbers?
Instead, they give us very general BS telling us that they weight by certain data. Be more specific!
Why do pollsters hide their assumptions from us?
Not a good headline to print when it is evident that half of the likely voters - and quite possibly a plurality - disagree.
Hat tip to Scott Adams on how to respond.
"How can you support someone who is unfit to be president."
"Because it is not true"
It sort of sounds like man made climate change arguments, doesn't it.
How can the NY Times and WaPo and other media pitch so obviously for Clinton --reciting her campaign talking points like a bunch of stenographers-- without this being caught as illegal campaign contributions?
Of course, the more they do it, and the more obviously they do it, the more people they will alienate.
Big Mike said...
How does Trump win?... Of the most recent six polls taken in Colorado (the missing 9 electoral college votes), half show Trump ahead and half show Clinton ahead. It's a dead heat out there where the mountains aren't the only things that are high.
I wonder if Trump will come out for rolling back federal law with regards to marijuana, saying it should be a state issue. That would help him with Colorado, a bit in New Hampshire, and with libertarians and the young around the country.
Would it cost him any votes?
It’s beyond debate that Donald Trump is unfit to be president.
A very symbolic statement. Not just “Trump is unfit,” but it’s also “beyond debate.” It’s a metaphor of censorship, of political correctness which grows out of the totalitarian urge to suppress debate and to demonize competing viewpoints.
Having a candidate with charisma for the last two terms gave the MSM a false sense of invincibility. The Morning Joes this AM were searching for explanations. Why? Why is Trump winning? Why is he surging in the polls?
Maureen Dowd, pitching her latest book, said, “Angry white men.” They had a professor who has been accurate in some predictions tell them why and then turn around and cast doubt on the analysis he had just given them.
No mention of the erstwhile front-row menace to Trump, Mr. Mark Cuban. Not a word. Gennifer Flowers apparently spanked Mark Cuban and sent him to his room without his supper. O that Trump and his gaffes!
What this Trump supporter would like to happen is for the moderator to “fact-check” Trump. The Post article seems to realize that would be a mistake. Mustn’t provide fodder for the Trump cannon.
I think most talking heads are experts at smoothly reading a script rolling on a teleprompter, but little else. The idea that a talking head has the ability to fact-check any debater on the fly during a debate is … well … debatable.
For the pundits and Democrats to expect a talking head to perform this feat fairly and without error(which I don’t believe they really do) is stepping over the line into fantasy.
But somehow, someway, the moderator almost HAS to attempt to tip the scales. He could be risking his standing in the MSM community if he doesn’t. His career might even suffer.
"The idea that a talking head has the ability to fact-check any debater on the fly during a debate is … well … debatable."
-- They don't.
That's why Crowley was *wrong* when she tried to "fact check" Romney.
the big hrc talking points disguised as editorials is being pushed because everyone knows trump is going to wipe the floor with her in the debate. i'm resigned to a trump victory... it's librul karma payment for allowing hitlery to steal the nomination from bernie.
we haven't had a president fit for office since richard milhous nixon
I wonder if Trump will come out for rolling back federal law with regards to marijuana, saying it should be a state issue. That would help him with Colorado, a bit in New Hampshire, and with libertarians and the young around the country.
Would it cost him any votes?
According to a Denver TV interview, “Trump says he’ll leave it up to the states to decide if they want to allow the sale of recreational and medicinal marijuana.”
“I think it’s up to the states, yeah. I’m a states’ person,” Trump said. “I think it should be up to the states, absolutely.”
http://tinyurl.com/zd9fdlz
I doubt it will cost Trump any votes.
Romney was too polite to call Candy Crowley on what she did. I don't think Trump will have that problem.
"Romney was too polite to call Candy Crowley on what she did."
--> I don't think it was that. I think he honestly thought he had it wrong. He was under the mistaken assumption he was in the middle of a fair match. Either way, Trump won't be under that same assumption.
Presidents supply the vision and they hire people to carry it out. The notion that we have to have a President who can do all things and knows all things is pure fiction. No one does or can. Carter tried to make every decision and he wound up getting little done. Some one else can set the new fees for National Park visitors. Some one else can determine how many helicopters to use.
grackle said...
According to a Denver TV interview, “Trump says he’ll leave it up to the states to decide if they want to allow the sale of recreational and medicinal marijuana.”
Yeah, but there's a difference between leaving it up to the states by not enforcing federal law, and leaving it up to the states by repealing federal law. A strong statement on repeal of federal law could push Colorado the rest of the way into his column.
"everyone knows trump is going to wipe the floor with her in the debate. i'm resigned to a trump victory."
Well said, Howard. Hillary's corruption is what makes her so toxic. Even Bernie would not be under such distrust.
I think that the poor WAPO is trying to do a little battlefield prep for their dear Hillary! They should trust her more than that. She is a seasoned politician and debater.
Now the LIVs will finally get the chance to see her stride strongly up to the lectern. Marvel as her eyes watch out for them in all directions. And raptly listen to her lecture Trump/McHitler and his Stazi followers in her legendary dulcet tones. She'll be up but ten points in the morning.
"The notion that we have to have a President who can do all things and knows all things is pure fiction."
My liberal friends assure me- assure me- that Martin Sheen exists!
I believe that newspaper editorials don't pack the punch they used to, pre-internet.
They used to be gatekeepers, taste-makers - they filtered what you saw, what you heard. If you heard Candidate A was bad and Candidate B was great, you weren't likely to see or find anything that contradicted that unless you did a lot of diligent research, and most people didn't bother.
As the old "Outer Limits" opening went - 'We control the vertical, we control the horizontal. We can change the focus from a soft blur to crystal clarity.'
But now - they can't. And I think it ticks them off something fierce that they no longer have control of all that we see and hear. People are able to find other information, and realizing that they've been fed 'selectively edited' media for quite a while now.
And they're not happy with that at all.
These "big paper endorsements" are the same as the black vote.
Since they are so monolithically only going to go to one party indefinitely, nobody gives a shit about them one way or the other.
They thought Mondale would've been a better President than Reagan. Kerry better than Bush. Keep that in mind.
I also love that Hillary's qualification is never up for debate.
The Washington Post is correct. It's beyond debate that Trump is not qualified to be president.
However, it is also beyond debate that Hillary Clinton is not qualified to be President, and is only qualified to go to jail.
So while it's a nice argument, the fact that it equally applies to both candidates cancels it out.
The fact that the WaPo Editorial board can't figure that out marks them as not serious, and not worth paying attention to.
I've been reading the NYT Op-Eds for many years, and the last few months' anti-Trump barrage is beyond anything I've ever seen. They didn't just endorse HRC; they put out a separate article specifically un-endorsing Trump. As though you couldn't tell how they felt about Trump already from the four or five anti-Trump articles published there daily ever since he got the Republican nomination.
Charles Blow once swore he wouldn't mention Trump's name. (He's relented since; cramps his rhetorical style, I think.) Frank Bruni just the other day wrote a very long piece hoping that Trump would rant tonight, after spending a few months saying that he's a ranter and blusterer -- because a Presidential-looking Trump tonight will hurt Hillary. Krugman and Kristof have been relentless on the subject. Even Douthat has been pretty relentless on the subject, and he's what passes for a conservative at the NYT.
Now, the WSJ editorial pages aren't famously even-handed, and they also dislike Trump, but differently. Their debates aren't about style, or "temperament," or whether this man can be trusted with nuclear weapons. They're about issues -- trade and immigration, mostly. (The WSJ is obviously pro-both.)
If you claim someone is unfit, you damn well better define "fit".
MayBee
Obama used to say things were beyond debate. Remember how "the time for talk is over."
Excellent memory, MayBee. From the link:
Said the president: "...when you hear these attacks deriding something of such obvious importance as this, you have to ask yourself -- are these folks serious? Is it any wonder that we haven't had a real energy policy in this country?"
"The time for talk is over," he added.
What has Obama said about energy policy?
From the 2008 campaign: But we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling — if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much!
In 2008, Obama's claim that the energy savings from tune-ups and inflating tires would yield the same energy as increasing drilling was nonsense to anyone who knew anything about oil and gas production. By 2016, even the man on the street knew that Obama's claim about tune-ups and inflating tires was nonsense.
Recall another "settled science" pronouncement from Obama on energy in 2012: "We can’t drill our way to lower gas prices!"
Once again, Obama's "settled science" on energy has been proven wrong.
By contrast, consider Texas. Not only is Texas the largest oil and gas producer in the country, it is the largest wind energy producer in the country. This is in large part to the Renewable Portfolio Standard,which then-Governor Bush signed into law in 1999.
As far as I can tell the WaPo is as much a Democrat operative today as it was before Jeff Bezos bought it. This makes me reluctant to use Amazon.
I wouldn't get too excited about these numbers yet. Based on the timing, I'm assuming this is just meant to lower expectations for Hillary. Just wait for all the frenzied media headlines tomorrow as Nate reports that Hillary! has recaptured the lead.
Hillary Clinton is an eminently qualified candidate, possibly the most qualified ever to run for mob boss. However that isn't officially on the ballot.
Washington Post:- Trump is NOT unfit.....it is YOU who are unfit to call yourselves a newspaper.
You have become as authoritative and useful as the back of a cereal box.
Just wait for all the frenzied media headlines tomorrow as Nate reports that Hillary! has recaptured the lead.
They are just salivating at the possibility of calling her The Comeback Kid. LOL.
How much have the NYT and the WAPO contributed to the Clinton Foundation? Or is this just an "in-kind" contribution? In any case, to hell with them. They are mealy-mouthed hacks pimping for a criminal enterprise.
It's beyond debate that elitism won't convince the voters.
How dumb is the fucking media?
Think of how Hillary ran the State Dept as a cash register for the Clinton foundation plus her love of bombing places so they can become weapon depots ...now think of that unfettered in the White House. She can and would pardon herself regularly. Trump does not have to get bills though a stone walling congress...he will be plenty busy in his first term enforcing existing law...which has been ignored since at least Dec 1999 when the Supreme Court gave the prize to W
Mr. Bezos is trying the patience of many of his customers.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा