The Hill: For the second time in less than a month, GOP presidential nominee is writing off a statement many found offensive — this time, that President Obama was the “founder” of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — as “sarcasm.”
“ISIS is honoring President Obama,” Trump said Wednesday during a rally in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. “He’s the founder of ISIS. He founded ISIS."
“I would say the co-founder would be Crooked Hillary Clinton,” Trump added of his Democratic rival and Obama’s former secretary of State. Trump has previously referred to each as ISIS's most valuable player as well.
There is no such thing as Pro-Trump free speech as Clinton corporate allies serve up a carefully curated view of the campaign.
45 comments:
These tech companies are due for a huge backlash and are ripe for competition.
You have to love a man who tells the truth.
Sarcasm, it may be, but, the pullout from Iraq (aren't our guys back there now?) was the cause.
This entire election is a conspiracy.
So far so good you two. Kudos.
Preaching to the choir makes you feel good. And, it will win you a primary. It won't win you a general election. You got to get the attention of the people in the pews who only come once in awhile and tend to daydream when they do.
Some of us try to avoid inanity, nd.
PS As the race is dead even, looks like the people in the pews are still out buying pencil boxes and grabbing a last week down't the shore.
Then they're in traffic on the Black Horse Pike, AC Expwy. and Garden State Parkway. I've sat in all 3 parking lots!
I bet you have as well.
Trump needs to recognize that the media are completely utterly hostile and dishonest.
He needs to play them. His speeches should be canned (I only disagree with John Nolte's excellent advice that they have to be boring). No, they can be funny and outrageous. But Trump needs to be ready for the backlash that follows and play the media when it comes.
It is completely predictable how the media and left will act. We see it again and again. Trump looks like a deer in the headlights lately reacting to the media post comments, that is no way to win an election. He needs to maintain control because that is part of this brand. He can do this, he has the media chops for it.
Or he can keep doing what he is doing. Ed thinks this thing is tied up? No, it's not. That is completely delusional. Trump is behind (right now) and this is not a good dynamic right now. But I agree it is hardly lost and things get really interesting the last four weeks (basically after labor day to the first debate).
The big question is can Trump take advantage of that gap of time and do a Michael Phellps finish on this election.
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...
Trump needs to recognize that the media are completely utterly hostile and dishonest.
He needs to play them.
I'd say he does and he does.
His speeches should be canned (I only disagree with John Nolte's excellent advice that they have to be boring). No, they can be funny and outrageous. But Trump needs to be ready for the backlash that follows and play the media when it comes.
I'd say he shouldn't, they are, he is, and he is, but we have had this conversation before.
He couldn't pull it off but it would be funny and effective. He should announce a day is going to be Stepford Day. That day Trump should be flat, speak in all the horseshit political euphemisms and pander to the press. But, in order for parody to be funny and poignant, an actor has to own it. Like when a guy dresses in drag for a comedy bit. The more they live the part, the funnier it is. But, Trump does not have the ability to do this.
Trump has shown the ability to beat 16 opponents in his own party and stay dead even in the general campaign even though all the media has mounted a campaign of Goebbelsian dimension to slander him.
I think his abilities far outstrip your vision of them.
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...
Trump needs to recognize that the media are completely utterly hostile and dishonest.
He needs to play them.
edutcher wrote: I'd say he does and he does.
I agree with edutcher on this. Of course he does. If you doubt this, you should see him live. There is a mutual loathing.
Trump is nowhere near "dead even." He is getting covered where it matters and only "dead even" in places like KS.
The media's loathing of Trump is not a normal state of affairs. The media should treat him with skepticism, but not disdain. Maybe they are just reciprocating? The same reporters ignore Hillary because she ignores them. The correct response on our part to continue ignoring dishonest media and continue patronizing the politically curious.
Patrick likes to come here to spread the FUD whenever we are incommunicado.
chickelit said...
The same reporters ignore Hillary because she ignores them.
You gotta 'splain that one, Lucy.
You gotta 'splain that one, Lucy.
You can't get stories out of a deaf-mute. Actually, I think Hillary's strategy is deft and is one crafted over 30 years. Don't get me wrong. Of course I think it's wrong. It's downright dangerous. But it is her strategy and it works.
No, they cover for her the way they cover for Pissy, which is make it up as they go along.
No, Clinton ignores nearly all media except for the most obsequious - the ones who clap like trained seals. You really can't get much of story out of being ignored. It doesn't fill columns and air time. It's a simpler theory than there being a grand conspiracy.
That being said, there probably is a conspiracy at the ownership level of media -- why wouldn't there be? Have you ever worked for a coercive management?
My father worked for newspapers as a printer during a time in which many newspapers went out of business. It was technology. I think it's high time for a few redundant media outlets -- I'm looking at a major network or two -- to go out of business. There are lots of alternatives these days. A few good stories about what keeps an otherwise failing business afloat could help here. Everybody is already asking themselves "why hasn't it happened already?"
I think it would be useful to distinguish what we mean by "media" -- does it mean rank and file reporters up to and including some celebrities, or does it mean the media owners -- many of whom may have no journalistic experience?
I would say both.
Kinda like the German Army and Hitler's high command.
what ed is missing is the dynamic now is completely changed. Trump has a short window to take advantage of it. You win general election by a few fundamental principals:
1) stay on message discipline
2) offensive attack on opponent
3) have a sophisticated plan on selected ad buys and marketing in key swing states.
3) having a campaign organization to do effective GOTV on election day, especially in key swing states.
Trump is okay on 2, but was getting distracted at first attacking anyone attacking him. His attacks have turned back to Hillary now and he needs to keep that up.
I doubt he has a good GOTV. I worry he does not have a campaign focusing on these swing states (Romney failed miserably on this too). That may prove fatal in close elections.
But maybe ed's good wishes will make everything okay. Believe me, I hope I am wrong and ed is right. But I am pretty sure I am right.
EBL wrote:
3) have a sophisticated plan on selected ad buys and marketing in key swing states.
4) having a campaign organization to do effective GOTV on election day, especially in key swing states.
Isn't Trump just doing what he did in the primaries: Mocking JEB!'s media machine by not countering it and still winning? It's a gamble for sure, but Trump is a casino owner and not a gambler. One thing's for sure -- if he wins he will have rewritten all the rules (and for the better). He will have beaten McCain Feingold and Citizens United at their own game. In fact, he should make that point more often.
Come November, there will be a shit ton of anti-Trump ads clogging the commercial channels. There will be little to no direct coverage of Rodham because she is unlikely to change her media strategy and even she doesn't have that much lipstick.. And there will Trump, somehow still getting "free" media coverage and drawing crowds -- just like the Florida primary.
It will be an interesting showdown. I don't think the outcome is guaranteed one way or another.
Come November, there will be a shit ton of anti-Trump ads clogging the commercial channels.
Prediction: Hillary's negative ad campaign will be so one sided and so overwrought that even the LIV's will notice and think: "hey, this isn't a a fair fight.."
The losers will be big media -- exactly who most of us want to lose.
If the commercial political advertisements are so one sided because one side decided not to participate, half the viewers will tune out the media. Men will simply stop watching shit with their wives because there will be no countervailing message for Trump. Trump supporters will begin to drift away from commercial media. Big media will not like this! Whatever will they do!!!
chickelit said...
Prediction: Hillary's negative ad campaign will be so one sided and so overwrought that even the LIV's will notice and think: "hey, this isn't a a fair fight.."
That was Peggy Noonan's thinking. Not a fan of hers, but you may be right.
PS Keep one thing very much in mind. The Millennials don't watch TV. A lot of other people are up in cyberspace - the number of households with even one TV set is dropping every year (if you're a Baby Boomer, that is a statistic almost impossible to grasp). All those ad buys may well be wasted money.
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...
what ed is missing is the dynamic now is completely changed. Trump has a short window to take advantage of it. You win general election by a few fundamental principals:
1) stay on message discipline
2) offensive attack on opponent
3) have a sophisticated plan on selected ad buys and marketing in key swing states.
3) having a campaign organization to do effective GOTV on election day, especially in key swing states.
I remember somebody else who had a great ground game. he was not nominated.
As for the rest, you don't throw your resources away as Cacklepants is doing with her minimum wage trolls and ads that run on Friday night cable sometime after 11:30.
What you say is what the consultants will tell any candidate. Like Scott Walker.
I remember someone asking a couple of weeks ago if Trump's campaign had peaked. Clearly not.
But Cacklepants may be running that risk. Especially if there are debates, after all.
You may be right, but this one may be won on the Internet. Up here, she's getting killed by Matt Drudge.
I think we should encourage ed to say one, just one, negative thing about Trump every day.
ndspinelli said...
I think we should encourage ed to say one, just one, negative thing about Trump every day.
Why? My recollection is that edutcher was a reluctant Trump supporter at first -- certainly not one of the first among us. I'm sure that he still holds whatever reasons he had for doubt. But I think that edutcher sees what's at stake and simply won't countenance foolish criticism.
ed, I am not saying the way Jeb did or Hillary is spending money is the way to go.
I am saying that the goal is to win. And Trump cannot do it by himself.
I do not see Trump winning like this.
Imagine a pro football season peppered only with anti-Trump, pro-Hillary commercial messages. What effect will that have on LIV voters? In my neighborhood it will turn them against her. She will become a laughingstock -- a Bud Light drinking game.
ANY Criticism = foolish criticism in edville. Chrissake, go through his comments. He's like Rain Man and Baghdad Bob rolled together. He's as predictable as the tides. ANYONE says anything REMOTELY critical, and ed pounces. Tedious as hell.
edutcher wrote: That was Peggy Noonan's thinking. Not a fan of hers, but you may be right.
If Noonan predicted the same then I take my prediction back and second hers out of respect for precedent.
I should do a post where people can express their greatest fears about a Trump presidency.
That is a good idea but might give ed a stroke. He can drive me crazy but I like him.
Is Newt Wrong?
I like to read Peggy Noonan. I can't stand when she's on TV. Very affected and pretentious.
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...
ed, I am not saying the way Jeb did or Hillary is spending money is the way to go.
I am saying that the goal is to win. And Trump cannot do it by himself.
I do not see Trump winning like this.
OK, let me say this and it will make me sound like Troop:
I think we're seeing a new paradigm being born as the old media dies (newspapers are ditching their paywalls since they don't increase revenue, f'rinstance). I think, if ad buys are still part of the package (they are in some way), they need to be done a lot more intelligently.
Can Trump win the way he's going? Hard to say, we're in a holding pattern and will be for a few more weeks, but I can see holding your fire while the enemy wears herself out - in every sense you can imagine.
The Noonan opinion would be it would make him an object of sympathy, but I wonder if it makes them an object of derision. Stuff that is debunked is done so on the Internet, expecting integrity out of the old media is a losing proposition.
I'm not wild about the state of affairs right now, but dead even is better than behind. We knew there would be an onslaught and we have it. I think he's got his core issues and he hits them. He goes after Cacklepants on every front available - health, emails, Benghazi, money. The rest does not have to start this minute, just because she's doing it.
Think about what chick says, his points have their merits.
As for concerns about the man, I've learned a lot about him I like, but, yes, this is his first go. He does have a gift for turning a negative into a positive and the media will make up stuff if it has to crucify him and anything he says will be twisted to sound bad.
He's a big target and I thin he knows it, but he also realizes the strong horse is the one that wins.
I think the firm of Manafort, Lewandowski, Scavino, Stone, and Ivanka have played it pretty well up to now and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
And nd is lonely without a playmate, and his repartee, always a little off since he assumes things he shouldn't, is beginning to suffer.
I like Trump's response to Hugh Whathisface who wants to moderate Clinton/Trump debates so badly that says so three times in one interview.
Hugh: You should have worded this better. He provides a sensible acceptable wording.
Trump: Well they wouldn't be talking about that that phrasing. They ARE talking about my phrasing. I'll keep my phrasing.
Hugh: Good point.
Everyone who is not Trump has such excellent advice for Trump. Yet it is Trump who is smashing through existing models, offending everyone who presumes to set the standards for speech.
He appears to be tapping the collective Id. And that is where Democrats have resided for decades. Conservatives are always so reliably ... oh what's the word for it ... on the tip of my tongue ... conservative !
~*~*~*~*~ sweet twinkling sectioning music ~*~*~*~*~*~
The Drudge link to the rich kid's summer vacays has an item from last year with Ivanka Trump, or one of the daughters at a pool. It's a perfectly ordinary photograph of perfectly ordinary people doing perfectly ordinary things.
A commenter, "Please don't let this stupid cunt in the White House."
THAT, my friends, is Democrats.
And there is no candidate that knows media so well as Trump. It's fascinating observing him in action.
Compared with that, the entire Democrat party along with life-long hopelessly corrupted operators with bylines are rot.
And not just regular rot. Heaping piles of interconnected complicit exceedingly wealthy and with vast resources stinking up the entire globe rot. Compost on a global scale.
As to the photographs of rich kids wasting magnums of expensive champaign and showing off bundles of $100.00's, who was it that said, "youth is wasted on the young" ? Because they're wrong.
I forgot.
Also, "You can't get stories out of a deaf-mute"
Point taken regarding Hillary.
But: YouTube, Theater of the deaf
I think the firm of Manafort, Lewandowski, Scavino, Stone, and Ivanka have played it pretty well up to now and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
As much as I concur in part with your view and agree with Chip's take of Trump and the Id, I know in my gut that something needs to break in Trump's favor or he is doomed. Not saying it won't happen: A bad debate nights by Hillary, a new batch of really bad emails, a world event...
But time is ebbing away. I hope Trump can break the tyranny of media. What worries me is how fucking relentless it has been on Trump. It will not defer many of us, but I worry about the center where this election will be decided. The one big advantage I see is Hillary measuring the curtains...if she fell because of her hubris that would be Christmas come early.
Our best hope is - will Hillary drop dead.
Post a Comment