Is Trump bashing worse than Clinton bashing?

Remove all ads!

Trump was a saavy businessman. Now he is old and losing his edge. Losing that edge just brings all of his unendearing ways to the forefront.

 

So he's taking the middle path?

 

Agreed, he's neither a genius nor an idiot, he's an impulsive guy with some natural talents led by smarter people (Bannon and his squad) to appeal highly to his base. He claims, and rightly so, the media won't be fair to him either way, so he doesn't apologize and that just makes their hysteria worse. This ultimately leads to them peddling sketchy stories (The Dossier, the 17 intelligence agencies lie) and weakens their credibility. Which has been a Bannon strategy for a long time.

 

I see Trump as more of a fish out of water than an idiot. Although I can't believe he got elected, so he's not as much of a political idiot as people make him out to be.

Put me in charge of a cooking school or a job dealing with women's fashions and people would call me an idiot too.

 

Frankly I'm not sold on the whole "let's lull the public into indifference" strategy. If anything Trump's actions has gained him even more scrutiny, not less, and the president's term is too short for that to really work anyway. Perhaps one day some pseudodictator-to-be will look back on this term and say "that's how I got my start", but Trump himself? Nah.

 

I was listening to C-Span this morning and I think Trump-or his backers-are pushing for greater loyalty no matter how he acts (see Alabama with the GOP primary where the winner was a character already but won in part because the guy Trump endorsed wasn't pro-Trump enough??)

Yes, but part of the Bannon's threat (to GOP incumbents) is that the GOP *will* now be the party of Trump.

And a lot of the criticism is justified before it gets sensational. A former campaign manager of his getting charged with conspiracy against the US and working as an agent for a foreign power?? This was the guy Trump promoted from lower position in his campaign to that post over the summer (only making him leave once stuff about him started making the papers).

Like was apparent on C-Span, the effort to distract from today's news was there in the form of people that wanted to talk about Hillary and a supposed scandal about her that Snopes looked into and disproved a while ago relating to uranium. But after Trump announced that it was the next watergate last week and GOP officials (of the party plus-I strongly suspect-rightwing media) below him pushed the story.

Trump is getting himself a frequently loyal political party and the political machinery that comes with it. It may be a bad thing for both the nation and the party but it has happened to at least an extent.


One last thing on Balance. At least in terms of party balance between Trump and Obama there is a difference. People argue if dislike for Trump will overcome the gerrymander or not (gerrymandering is basically cheating to win elections.) If House districts weren't gerrymandered in 2012 then Obama may have had a different Speaker of the House to work with-at the very least slightly different members. As a general supporter of small d democracy whichever party has a hold on the White House, they should have to consider that they may gain or loose in the House of Reps depending on popular mood whenever there is November federal election. This is a different thought than will the deep unpopularity of a President overcome his (or her) party's ability to cheat.

 

This morning I heard someone say that Trump uses Twitter like a "laser pointer" and liberals are cats. So true.

 

Trump's twitter account from 2012-2014 is fantastic to look at.

"Every time I speak of the haters and losers I do so with great love and affection. They cannot help the fact that they were born f****d up!"

Amazing.

 

One should remember however that perception does not always equal reality and it can be pretty darned difficult to explain a coherent policy in 288 characters. One other thing I've noticed with DJ Trump he always hits back. You get personal with him he will return the favored in spades, not to mention the other three suits. You can have discussion or an insult war, you determine the parameters not him. Sadly most of our media seem to prefer the former.

Sadly it's also nothing new. The Hays-Tilden campaign was as nasty as anything you'll see today and anti Andrew Jackson campaign was arguably worse. The media has always taken sides in political battles so the only thing new here is the pretense that they don't.