Pages

Friday, September 18, 2015

The Selective Outrage Over Trump

What's been fascinating about the Trump phenomenon as I have had a chance to agree with Rush Limbaugh more than once. I do think he's right on here.

"I think one thing that's become obvious during the campaign is that the news media try to pick our candidates long before even the first primary vote is cast. And that's just not new. I say it's becoming more and more obvious here. And you can watch it here in the aftermath of all of these debates. The donor class sometimes is in harmony with the media; sometimes they're not. This case is more harmony than not. But the way the media does it is with their coverage, fawning or negative pieces. "

"And of course, they do it via their polls, never forget that, which are often the result of their fawning or negative coverage so that the coverage feeds the poll result that they want to get. And we are witnessing this in the current GOP race. The coverage of Carly Fiorina being the latest example. It is more than obvious that the Drive-Bys and the rest of the ruling class inside the Beltway have decided based on Wednesday night that Carly Fiorina now represents the best chance to knock off Trump."

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/09/18/the_media_declares_trumpmania_over

I fully agree that there is this alliance of the GOP establishment and Beltway press to take out Trump. 
For the GOP, of course, there are two problems with Trump. 
1. He's way too upfront about this immigration stuff. It's not that he's for deporting 11 million people-I maintain that this is the mainstream GOP view-implicitly. Trump's sin is being too explicit about it. 
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/tom-brown-and-i-debate-trump-vs-mccain.html
But what's interesting is that because Trump has been so blatant in serving up the read meat to the base he's allowed to get away with heterodoxies no other GOP candidate would be allowed. 
2. No less an economist than Paul Krugman says that Trump makes a lot more sense than the rest of the filed, economically. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/18/opinion/paul-krugman-fantasies-and-fictions-at-gop-debate.html
And I do agree with Rush that the media likes to think it decides who gets to run for President and who doesn't. One thing it hates about the Clintons is that all its attacks on them over the years haven't hurt them. 
Trump, too, they feel it's time for him to have to play by the rules of gravity that they have legislated all candidates must go through. 
Rush is also dead right what all the praise of Fiorina is about. She doesn't matter and the GOP insiders ideally don't want her as the eventual nominee-they want Jeb. 
But for now they need someone-anyone-other than Trump to have won that debate the other night. 
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/09/18/fiorina_s_the_flavor_of_the_week_because_the_establishment_thinks_she_can_take_out_trump

Brian Beutler has a great piece that documents how selective the outrage of even Trump's handling of his Muslim hating follower last night was. Trump is not the first one to get such a question from a supporter
But other examples haven't been nearly so publicized. Why? To assist the GOP in nominating Jeb hopefully, but failing that anyone but Trump-and Carson though he's not much of a threat. 
Trump is being rightly pilloried for not dressing down the questioner, including by Republican operatives, who are happily forwarding along the unflattering news clips that followed.

There’s no sense in giving Trump a pass on this, but it’s worth keeping in mind that this isn’t a Trump problem. It’s a politician problem, and in particular it’s a Republican politician problem. The Republican interest in Trump’s dishonorable conduct is deeply selective.

Anyone who’s watched C-SPAN call-in shows can sympathize with people put into Trump’s predicament. Campaigns, and especially campaigns, draw out the most agitated voters in the country, in the same way a political call-in line self-selects for people with things they need to get off their chests.

But these outbursts spill over into racist conspiracy theories frequently enough that the politicians really ought to have pat reprimands at the ready. They can't really get a pass for placating racists and xenophobes. And Trump isn’t even close to the only politician who fails this test, though he may be the first politician who posed it to other candidates.

"Just this past March, former Senator Rick Santorum, who has since joined the presidential race, spoke at the South Carolina National Security Action Summit, and fielded a question from a woman who was alarmed that President Obama’s plan to destroy the city of Charleston with a nuclear weapon had to be thwarted by a military officer."
"Why is the Congress rolling over and letting this communist dictator destroy my country? Y'all know what he is, and I know what he is. I want him out of the White House. He's not a citizen. He could have been removed a long time ago. Larry Klayman's got the judge to say that the executive amnesty is illegal. Everything he does is illegal. He's trying to destroy the United States. The Congress knows this. What kind of games is the Congress of the United States playing with the citizens of the United States? Y'all need to work for us, not the lobbyists that pay your salaries. Get on board, let's stop all of this, let's save America. What's going to stop—Senator Santorum, where do we go from here? Ted told me I've got to wait until the next election. I don't the country will be around for the next election. Obama tried to blow up a nuke in Charleston a few months ago, and the three admirals and generals—he's totally destroyed our military, he's fired all the generals and all the admirals who said they wouldn't fire on the American people."

"To the extent that Santorum took offense at all it was at the implication that, as a former Senator, he bore any responsibility for Obama's communist takeover."

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122847/trump-far-only-republican-let-supporters-spout-crazy

This was my point about the righteous outrage of Chris Matthews last night: it seemed just a little selective. Matthews seemed particularly concerned to argue that Birtherism is a fringe view within the Republican party-albeit a decent sized fringe.

But this is false. True 66% of Trump supporters think the President is not a citizen but then so does 54% of Republicans in general.

Santorum's performance was no better.

P.S. For the record it didn't look as if Trump welcomed the question. Matthews claimed he said he wanted the question.

But what Trump said was 'Great, we need this question now.' It was kind of a nervous joke.

The fact that two-thirds of his supporters hold this view-and yes, he has unquestionably inflamed it directly during his 2012 nonrun-less explicitly this time, probably makes him feel he can't directly repudiate that view as it's the basis of his support.

Again, he gets no pass but why does Santorum get a pass for doing the same thing? Beutler actually makes a good point that it's McCain in 2008 not Trump last night who is the outlier.

"In October 2008, Senator John McCain, who was then the Republican party’s presidential nominee, famously quieted a woman at a rally who had read all about how Obama is “an Arab” (not that there’s anything wrong with that)."

"No, ma'am,” McCain said after reclaiming the mic. “He's a decent family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not [an Arab]."

"The crowd booed and McCain went on to lose the election. The only reason anyone remembers the altercation is because we expect Republican politicians to behave the way Trump did."

No comments:

Post a Comment