Thursday, September 1, 2016

A Tale of One Immigration Speech and Two Newspapers

What was the NY Times thinking last night when it claimed that Trump had announced a major change in position in his Arizona speech last night?

The Times' Patrick Healy declared that Trump had 'shelved his plan to deport 11 million undocumented people and suggesting that the United States and Mexico would solve the problem together.

Which makes you wonder if Healy watched the speech? Many questioned if he did.

Get him, Yglesias:

"This lead from @patrickhealynyt is malpractice." …

"This simply did not happen. It’s a work of fiction."

It’s like he published a prewritten draft without noticing what the speech actually said."

The NY Times later edited this piece heavily. Even so, it was and is subject to a lot of criticism.

But other's seemed to watch Trump's speech in a parallel universe as well, like MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell who claimed to believe that Trump was no longer going to do mass deportations.

"No the softening is 11 million will treated like they've always been instead of all deported."

That is flat out false. If O'Donnell honestly believes this, then Trump tricked him. It's that simple.

While the NY Times fell on its face, the Washington Post covered itself in glory:

"WaPo gets it. NYT blew it."

"WaPo's Phillip Rucker sounds like he actually watched the speech."

"Here's what happened today. There was no backing away from deportations or softening to expand coalition."

Thank you. Benji Sarlin also got it right:

"Pivot is over. Trump is going mass deportation. My writeup."

Politico also got it right:

"Trump's immigration rope-a-dope"

"After diplomatic turn in Mexico, a fiery immigration speech proves the GOP nominee's moderation to be a ruse."

Read more:

Most of them got it right, thankfully. The Times edited what they said heavily-while pretending to only minor changes.

For those from Patrick Healy to Lawrence O'Donnell saying that Trump ruled out huge deportations; O'Donnell went as far as claiming that Trump is going to be status quo, they have to ask themselves why:

1. Ann Coulter loved the speech.

2. David Duke loved the speech:

3. Some Hispanic Republicans who were Trump surrogates are reconsidering their support.

If Trump said what Pat Healy and Lawrence O'Donnell heard, and what Kellyann Conway would like us to believe Trump said, then 1, 2, and 3 all don't make sense.

No comments:

Post a Comment