• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Horsewhipping of Donald Trump

Beaudreaux

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:

The Horsewhipping of Donald Trump

By William Murchison
October 04, 2016

To call the massive media obsessed -- eyes roaming crazily in all directions, mouths afoam with horror -- would be an understatement. They fear that the sovereign voters, in their obvious dimwittedness, could put Donald Trump in the White House.

And so the words of abuse tumble forth. The New York Times is unable to take its corporate finger off the fire-alarm button. On Sunday, my favorite left-wing newspaper of record -- to which I have, unaccountably perhaps, subscribed for three decades -- cried aloud that Trump "could have" (legally, yes, but never mind that) avoided paying income tax for 18 years. Not that he "did," just that he "could have," in light of losses from what the Times helpfully characterized as "the financial wreckage he left behind in the 1990s through mismanagement" of various enterprises. Ah, the objectivity, the impartiality, the civic spirit of our journalistic eyes and ears -- the media!

[...]
Click to expand...

This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
 
Last edited:
When Trump acts like a child, it's not media bias to say he's acting like a child. Maybe Dallas Morning News guy needs a safe space.
 
The major media outlets, in the tank for Hillary from the beginning, propped up Trump through the primaries as he was polling worst against her at that point. Now that he's the GOP nominee they are coming after him with everything they can find because there is a real possibility that he could win.
 
Trump bought the whip (probably with someone else's money) and handed it to the media...then he continued to say and do stupid things.

What should he expect?
 
Beaudreaux said:
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:



This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
Click to expand...

With regard to Trump, the media is basically shooting itself in the foot, thinking it was Trump's foot the whole time.
 
Deuce said:
When Trump acts like a child, it's not media bias to say he's acting like a child. Maybe Dallas Morning News guy needs a safe space.
Click to expand...

Typical conservative tactic. Turn your candidate's weakness around and blame someone else. So in this case they blame Trump's weaknesses on the media for reporting on Trump's daily F'ups.

Trump's got $3 bil or so in free media publicity, he knows that which is 1 of the reasons why he keeps saying controversial and outrageous things. But when the media reports on and criticizes Trump for those controversial and outrageous statements, they then blame the media.

If the media ignored him, the right and Trump supporters would complain and scream bias. They cover him and they complain and scream bias. Can't win, and I no longer care.
 
Last edited:
Beaudreaux said:
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:



This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
Click to expand...

The media is partaking in Donald's own plan, which is to act outrageously so he gets countless millions in free campaign advertising. If his chosen manner of acting outrageously is to say terrible things, that's on him.
 
Lutherf said:
The major media outlets, in the tank for Hillary from the beginning, propped up Trump through the primaries as he was polling worst against her at that point. Now that he's the GOP nominee they are coming after him with everything they can find because there is a real possibility that he could win.
Click to expand...

Any claims of an unbiased media are completely and utterly destroyed, evaporated into the thin, reedy, and obvious dishonest and biased reporting on Trump.
Nothing but good stories for Hillary, nothing but bad stories for Trump. Yeah, it's that obvious.

And apparently obvious to everyone by now:

32% say they have "a great deal" or "a fair amount" of trust
14% of Republicans express trust, down from 32% last year
Confidence drops among younger and older Americans

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.

dkvnto6zb0kw5c0shdj57q.png


Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low
Click to expand...

I'm seeing a consistent 20+ point drop over the course of the graph. One thing the media needs to remember is that these low trust ratings aren't going to recover quickly, as once trust is lost, it's very difficult to earn it back.

The media have done themselves great harm in their biased reporting of this campaign. The bad part for the media is that this lack of trust translates into lost subscribers and therefore a loss of revenue.

How long, do you think, they'll keep this self-damaging behavior up?
Will they keep it up until the first of the major media outlets goes bankrupt? (Which hasn't happened yet, as far a I know - it may not, but could potentially lead there).
 
Abbazorkzog said:
With regard to Trump, the media is basically shooting itself in the foot, thinking it was Trump's foot the whole time.
Click to expand...

Didn't see this post until after mine. I think basically we are saying the same thing.
 
Trump is like many celebs, they use the press to gain attention then when the heat gets turned up they say the press is unfair. Too Bad, it is what he wanted, now he has it.
 
Beaudreaux said:
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:



This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
Click to expand...


Donald Trump deliberately put himself on the leading edge of criticism by his constant boasting, rabid comments, and outlandish deeds. It is said he got $3 billion in free advertising in what Trump himself has said "any press is good press".

So now, "the media", always spoken as though it was a single identity, and there is no competition for audience, is the reason Trump is getting more negative coverage, as reporters, looking for a competitive edge, go looking into some of his boats.

After Trump's performance, the arrogant "that makes me smart", which admits he paid no taxes, it is only reasonable that professional, trained journalists will now be looking into these areas of his life.

One day, and soon, people who are condemning the NYT, will cite that very newspaper when it runs something they agree with

And so now queries becomes a "horsewhipping". Not extreme at all..........
 
Fearandloathing said:
Donald Trump deliberately put himself on the leading edge of criticism by his constant boasting, rabid comments, and outlandish deeds. It is said he got $3 billion in free advertising in what Trump himself has said "any press is good press".

So now, "the media", always spoken as though it was a single identity, and there is no competition for audience, is the reason Trump is getting more negative coverage, as reporters, looking for a competitive edge, go looking into some of his boats.

After Trump's performance, the arrogant "that makes me smart", which admits he paid no taxes, it is only reasonable that professional, trained journalists will now be looking into these areas of his life.

One day, and soon, people who are condemning the NYT, will cite that very newspaper when it runs something they agree with

And so now queries becomes a "horsewhipping". Not extreme at all..........
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have a problem is journalists were looking into the issues Trump brings upon himself but we are in a media era of the "JournoList" and micro-outlets are driving the story. Major media seems to be rooting around in the swamp of blogs and social media to come up with stories. That creates a dynamic where the major media outlets seem to keep with whatever bias drove the initial story because that way they have a built in target group for their advertisers. As long as they can perpetuate the story they can keep pointing advertisers to it.

If you can no longer be the media behemoth who consistently comes up with the "scoop" to draw in an audience you may as well be the Christmas tree on which all those "scoops" are hung. Matt Drudge created a fairly pure version of that model and put it in place 20 some years ago. Now the other media outlets are running with their own interpretations of that model.
 
Beaudreaux said:
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:



This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
Click to expand...

"Could have"? You're castigating the NYT for using the words "could have", while the GOP nominated a guy who claimed that thousands of Muslims in New Jersey publicly danced in celebration of the destruction of the WTC, who is now implying that Hillary cheated on Bill, who is now postulating that veterans with PTSD simply weren't "strong enough"?

I get that you're not trying to defend Trump...but in a way, that's a compliment that you're paying to the NYT. Why? Because the castigation of the NYT for using the words "could have" simply shows the standard to which they are held by the nation, just how high the bar is for their journalism...

...whereas for so many others (*cough-Fox-cough*) the bar is set so much lower.

Oh, and your source - the Dallas Morning News - did endorse Hillary Clinton for president. And it's not as if the DMN is some kind of "liberal rag", seeing as how she's the first Democrat they've endorsed in 76 years.
 
Lutherf said:
I wouldn't have a problem is journalists were looking into the issues Trump brings upon himself but we are in a media era of the "JournoList" and micro-outlets are driving the story. Major media seems to be rooting around in the swamp of blogs and social media to come up with stories. That creates a dynamic where the major media outlets seem to keep with whatever bias drove the initial story because that way they have a built in target group for their advertisers. As long as they can perpetuate the story they can keep pointing advertisers to it.

If you can no longer be the media behemoth who consistently comes up with the "scoop" to draw in an audience you may as well be the Christmas tree on which all those "scoops" are hung. Matt Drudge created a fairly pure version of that model and put it in place 20 some years ago. Now the other media outlets are running with their own interpretations of that model.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, but no one is driving the story but Trump. I have seen nothing from any mainstream media outlet that originated with blogs or internet rumor. Trump is a typical media hound, he basks in the message when he's in control of what's said, but turns ugly with excuses and blame of the media when it turns negative. The New York Times is a Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper several times over, and is noted for prying open that which the world needs to know, from the Pentagon Papers, to Jimmy Carter's failures on end.

As a retired professional journalist I see nothing in the recent coverage Trump is bellyaching about that is partisan. Trump opened these doors himself, and this one in particular with "that makes me smart". He has also, against tradition, refused to reveal his holdings/tax returns etc. That and when a candidate virtually admits, no boasts about not paying taxes, that's a story, a big story and in my newsroom I would turn every resource available to document it.
 
Beaudreaux said:
An interesting take by William Murchison of the Dallas Morning News:



This is not a thread where I'm trying to defend Trump. I just thought the article was very interesting and IMHO, accurate.
Click to expand...

If this is a 'horsewhipping", then Trump can end it himself; release his returns.

That's what he would say if the situation were reversed
 
Apparently that loss was part of his comeback.


Crowning the Comeback King

Though there are still four years to go in the 90's, business and government leaders in New York honored Donald J. Trump yesterday for pulling off what they called "the comeback of the decade."

Mr. Trump, the developer who came to epitomize opulent wealth during the 80's before tumbling into deep financial trouble, has managed to erase much of his debt and is moving ahead with major projects at a time other developers are idling.

[...]​

Crowning the Comeback King | The New York Times​
 
Lutherf said:
The major media outlets, in the tank for Hillary from the beginning, propped up Trump through the primaries as he was polling worst against her at that point. Now that he's the GOP nominee they are coming after him with everything they can find because there is a real possibility that he could win.
Click to expand...

After two years of watching the major media outlets skewer Clinton over the emails....I think you are full of beans.
 
I hope if Trump wins and he goes forth with tax reform, he will take a look at the tax status of the DNC's print media machine.

And since a weaponised IRS is OK now, we use it.
 
Moot said:
After two years of watching the major media outlets skewer Clinton over the emails....I think you are full of beans.
Click to expand...

Well, considering that the official outcome of the email scandal was that Clinton was either too incompetent or too stupid to understand the ramifications of her actions I'd say those beans came with a healthy helping of meat.
 
Lutherf said:
Well, considering that the official outcome of the email scandal was that Clinton was either too incompetent or too stupid to understand the ramifications of her actions I'd say those beans came with a healthy helping of meat.
Click to expand...

That's the partisan right wing narrative...but it's not by any means the "official" outcome.
 
Last edited:
Casper said:
Trump is like many celebs, they use the press to gain attention then when the heat gets turned up they say the press is unfair. Too Bad, it is what he wanted, now he has it.
Click to expand...

Yes. Trump is where he is because of themedia, not in spite of it.
I said elsewhere, if the media hates Trump it's the same hate Frankenstein had for his creation.
 
Moot said:
That's the partisan right wing narrative...but it's not by any means the "official" outcome.
Click to expand...

Now even the FBI is handing out "partisan right wing" narratives? Who'd a thunk!:lol:
 
If a candidate is a massive hypocrite, liar, and miserable excuse for a human being, is it "bias" to report on him as such? Does being "fair and balanced" require that the media lie by pretending that all things are equal between candidates, between parties, between sides, on every issue?

What I fear is that somehow, people have gotten into their heads that the latter is actually true.

For example, they blame Holt for interrupting Trump more than Clinton. Well, the reason Trump was interrupted more than Clinton was that Trump kept changing the subject in rants and telling lies that were immediately debunked in media (and by Holt). Was Holt supposed to make sure to interrupt Clinton for no reason at all, just to keep the tally of interrupts even? NO! That's not neutrality. That's idiocy. That's pandering to the right's version of Political Correctness.

Similarly, Trump lies all the time. I thought Hillary was a bad liar, but then I saw the main campaign unfold. It would be poor journalism to avoid reporting on Trump's lies to make sure that the number of lie reports is equal for both candidates. It would be worse to falsely accuse Hillary of lying so that the count matches the reports on Trump lies. And people are going to treat its refusal to do so as "bias"?


No, treating unalike things as alike is not the mark of neutrality. It's the mark of poor journalism and pandering to the right wing's take on Political Correctness.
 
Last edited:
Lutherf said:
Now even the FBI is handing out "partisan right wing" narratives? Who'd a thunk!:lol:
Click to expand...

The FBI director said she didn't lie or a commit a crime....and that's the "official" outcome.
 
Moot said:
The FBI director said she didn't lie or a commit a crime....and that's the "official" outcome.
Click to expand...

Well, not to parse too closely, but I believe what they said is that they didn't recommend charges in a similar situation, but had only done so where there were "aggravating factors".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom