Posted on 07/31/2015 7:59:26 PM PDT by nathanbedford
Trump as a candidate is almost entirely a creation of the media. That is not to deny that he is adept at manipulating the media, that is perfectly plain. But it is to say that a man adept at manipulating the media has met a media eager to expose Trump to further its own needs. The media gains readers and viewers and makes money off the Trump phenomenon. History tells us that the media habitually builds up that which they will later destroy when it simply begins to bore them or suits their politics.
There is a third element which is vitally important to understanding the Trump phenomenon: He has given voice to a burning frustration and actual fear in middle America that we are losing our country through feckless policies such as immigration and trade. He is right and he says it better than any other candidate. The media hates the message but loves to feature the messenger (whom they also hate) because it pays so well. The more the media attacks the messenger, the more frustrated and fearful Americans, quite rational in these feelings, instinctively side with Trump. The more Trump denigrates the media, the more middle America instinctively sides with Trump because middle America viscerally understands that the media and the two political parties are in cahoots. The disenfranchised middle has almost no choice but to turn to a maverick and the more Trump is positioned either by the media or by his own mouth to be out of the mainstream, the more he fits the role of white knight riding to the rescue with no motive other than to save the Holy Grail of our way of life.
How then will the media ultimately destroy Trump's candidacy? First it is necessary to understand that Trump's candidacy is a media event, not a grassroots movement, not a development within the party, not a political movement. It is a series of media events.Trump makes good copy and gives good video. Rather than a grassroots movement, rather than a bottom-up phenomenon, it is a sensory event, one that must occupy the screen and preoccupy the consciousness or fade out. A media phenomenon survives only so long as it is a phenomenon in the media. That implies that Trump must be ever more and more outlandish if he is to hold media momentum. He will be confronted with the choice: Either he burlesque's his own character ever more and more or he moderates. If he chooses the former he will eventually cross too many lines; if he chooses the latter he will lose the magic. His timing and stage presence must be exquisite if he is to keep the cameras rolling.
The choice Trump must make comes in the context of issues. We have already seen him start to dance on the issue of immigration: Who he will deport; how he will uncover them in America; how he will physically deport them; whom he will allow to return to America; upon what standard; whom he will make citizens; why?. His answer was virtually incoherent but even if regarded to be coherent, his answer was hardly confidence inspiring, in reality, it was not the kind of second act needed to keep the media bubble growing. Was he moderating his position? Has he continued to differentiate himself from other true conservatives like Ted Cruz? How is his immigration stand different from Scott Walker's? Sooner or later, Trump must say something other than, "I will make America great" he must choose. With choice inevitably comes opposition or disillusionment. Either he makes more enemies or he disappoints his supporters who need more and more.
The media creature can endure determined attacks in the media but he cannot survive disillusionment. Either the media bubble must grow and caricature itself until it bursts or it will spring a slow leak of disillusionment which only gathers speed and the whole balloon collapses. We have seen this time and again in American politics. Have we forgotten Herman Cain?
The upcoming debates might expose Trump to be a shallow opportunist who has diagnosed the problem but who has failed to rigorously think through his soundbite solutions. Most likely, the upcoming debates will not derail Trump's circus, it is still too early in the media cycle bubble, but it will begin the process.
I don’t think you’re right about this, because your analysis (like Mr. Wright’s) presumes that voters wear uniforms of red or blue, and that this is their principal relevant characteristic when discussing an election that is fifteen months in the future.
You now have correctly pointed out that voters are also male and female, and that this must be considered in the analysis.
But, as you have repeatedly stated over and over again, the most salient characteristic in American politics is white, or not. The reason this is not in the forefront of EVERY discussion is because white voters to not vote like a bloc, as blacks, non-white Hispanics, and Asians do.
In my local environment, white non-academic Democrats love Trump. A lot of them liked Sarah Palin, too.
These two are WHITE WHITE WHITE candidates. At this point in our history, they can’t fly the white banner, but if they can shift 4-5% of the white vote, the election is over before in begins.
I don’t think Cruz has the same appeal to white working class Democrats.
I don’t blame you for having doubts about Trump, but your accusatory title seems to be calling him an outright charlatan, which is quite something else.
On the national level, Trump apparently has already been offered the donor lists and the mailing lists of the RNC. He will, of course want the whole apparatus and he will want as well the indicia of unity that comes with the nomination.
But the big question is what occurs before the nomination or before the time when it is clear that he will be nominated. In order to get to that point he has to have an operating infrastructure in several key states. We will see how effective he is in this. I believe he will encounter real resistance from a structure that is probably dominated by the Bush family and their lieutenants. That implies that, at least for the nomination process, Trump will have set up competing organizations to take on the Republican establishment head-on. I cannot believe that the Republican Party in places like Florida will remain neutral.
Meanwhile, Trump will be forced to "choose" and inevitably divide away those who do not agree with his choice. You just mentioned Ukraine over which there is divided opinion in the party. Trump cannot please both sides. In post #97 Catherine of Aragon said this to me,
I’m curious to see if, during the debate, Trump will repeat the response he gave when asked about Obamacare. He said he would replace it with “something terrific.”
Here again Trump must choose. He can get specific and shear away some degree of support or he can attempt to obfuscate with "something terrific" and risk disillusionment.
There are forces of friction afoot and Trump is not immune. Meanwhile, as I have posted, I am happy that he has brought to the fore the issues of trade and immigration and has exposed the Republican establishment.
Incidentally, I think I just saw a headline that says the Trump has scored 30% in Iowa! If he continues at this pace he will be able to sell, as you suggest, the inevitability posture and the momentum could actually carry him. But there are many cards yet to be dealt, many gaffes to be witnessed, many black swans to swim into view.
We shall see.
I’m sorry....I don’t buy that white Democrat Trump or Palin appeal, except for anecdotal rare occasions. That universe is just not anything more than a blip of a rounding error on the electorate. A non factor, other than interesting chatter.
It’s like the 400 Berkeley students who cheered for Rand Paul.....like they’re ever gonna get Rand elected in California....HAH. Chatter, that’s all
I am glad you brought the matter of appealing to white working-class Democrats into the discussion. As you know I've been posting for months that the path to national election victory even for a generation is to appeal to blue-collar, lunchpail Democrats on the issue of immigration and trade tied to their jobs.
Trump has done this while the rest of the Republican conservatives have simply missed the boat. We know why the Republican establishment missed the boat, they sold out. I would like not to believe that Cruz and Walker also sold out although I am very suspicious of Ted Cruz's votes on trade and Iran.
I believe that this appeal to white working-class Democrats has the ability to upset the entire breakdown of our two-party demographics and actually reduce the Democrat party to a minority party of blacks, an actual minority of Hispanics, gays and lesbians, white academics whom you identify who are hopeless anyway, public service union workers and multibillionaires.
If Trump crashes we will see if either Walker or Cruz is nimble enough to grab these issues.
Agreed on the states. Here in OH, we have a totally RINO dominated apparatus. Now, in fairness the Tea Party has shot itself in the foot a couple of times by sending up county chairmen who were utterly incompetent and the rank and file said, "Why do we want these guys running things?"
But the thing about a winner is that people want to be associated with a winner. Patton's old line, "Americans love a winner." Many of the state things will be resolved if Trump demonstrates he can win and has a determination TO win, which Mittens never had.
I just came back from my 50th high school reunion. Of course Trump came up at the dinner and subsequent picnic.
Women LOVE HIM. His popularity was certainly lop sided in the group. Men tend to resent his bravado. Women love it.
Men seemed to resist JOINING him. That meant subservience in their minds. I think that’s what’s behind so many of the hit pieces. Other Alpha males are threatened by Trump.
It takes a specific set of characteristics to garner the support of other males. I don’t pretend to be an authority on social sciences, but the reaction at my reunion was measurable.
I really hope the polling trends continue. I would love to see this guy in action. TRUmp would make America great again... I loved his reaction to questions about Calais... it’s NOT HIS PROBLEM.
I loved that... America would be his problem.
HOW LONG HAVE WE WAITED FOR THAT???
First, it screams anti-Bush. Rollins has carried on a decades long feud with the Bushes and I cannot believe that his appointment means anything other than a recognition by Trump that is in a war with the Bush clan.
Second, Rollins selection means that Trump has no intention of moderating his approach. To the contrary, Rollins still has some reputation from his association with Lee Atwater.
Third, Rollins lunchpail Democrat background fits neatly with Trump's pitch to lunchpail Democrats about saving their jobs by stopping unfair trade and open immigration. No moderation there.
Fourth, it raises the real possibility of friction inside the Trump organization because neither man is known for being bashful.
It means we're in for some real fun.
Yea I understand the alpha male thing, but I also think that men, being less emotional in terms of their appeal to Trump, would be much easier to win over at election time (esp. vs. HIllary) than women. You can’t argue with “feelings.” So if Trump is already past that with many women, he’s in very good shape.
For the media to serve so that Trump is helped does not prove there are no grass roots.
Those roots are hungering for the fertilization by what Trump has to say and are responding.
Now Trump may be insincere or vacillating and that will prove out soon enough if so. I think you are just making false distinctions, however.
If one snubbed all received messages because men did not invent them at the lowest level, one would also have to snub the bible.
True
Those roots are hungering for the fertilization by what Trump has to say and are responding.
True
Now Trump may be insincere or vacillating and that will prove out soon enough if so.
True
I think you are just making false distinctions, however.
We shall see
If one snubbed all received messages because men did not invent them at the lowest level, one would also have to snub the bible
True.
Another possible thing is that the Lord is setting up a tag team. If Trump cannot push with endurance because of some fundamental limitation that he will not abandon in favor of a more godly perspective, then, e.g. Cruz might continue the race at that point.
I read you’re not happy with Trump because he’s got skeletons. Understood and even sympathized with to an extent. However the time may be coming where the Lord is setting up to show that He is doing a great work, not by the merit of men, but through His own merit. A mixed bag like Trump might play a part in this. I do not believe a Trump is as nearly to be feared in a demogogue role as a Hitler. Trump does not seem to be committedly enamored of fundamental evil.
It is his narcissism which scares me because it means that he has no spiritual North star and therefore is liable to chase after every breeze that blows and I think we have evidence of that his biography. This is really a spiritual condition and one which we ought to be wary of in all men who seek power. This is a worry I have about Donald Trump which makes me wary not a confirmed diagnosis by any means.
I think the First Amendment was made first for a reason.
Well, his message seems to be too much concentrated on the conservative side for it to reflect “no North star at all.”
Unless there is some other manipulator behind the scenes that wants to use Trump as a mouthpiece for... something.
All people come out of the background of the original sin of pride and ego. But could it also be that God has begun to focus Trump’s spirit in the direction of godliness and blessing. Why is he bothering to even so much as “drink the wine and eat the cracker” in the Presbyterian implementation of a symbolic communion (which literally does use a cracker)? Wouldn’t it be more logical to jettison this, if ego was not just important but his fundamental last resort? (C. S. Lewis made similar remarks about some nominal Christians.)
” First it is necessary to understand that Trump’s candidacy is a media event, not a grassroots movement”
ROFLMFAO!!! The media is scared sh**less!
Thanks Big...I’ll be watching...
Yes....but there’s no reason illegals and securing the border can’t be done at the same time.
But my analogy to Pickett is still valid. If Trump dies on Seminary Ridge, so much the better (in a sense). Cruz is his Longstreet just waiting to flood the breach.
Until the end of his life Lee was perplexed, perhaps preoccupied by the failure of the third day of Gettysburg and is recorded as having said that Pickett's charge might have succeeded if it had been supported as it should have been and why it was not supported he did not know.
I have stood at the foot of that hill and looked up to the copse of trees so far away and wondered how the position could even have been attempted much less carried.
Exactly. And why I chose it to signify Trump. He is doing the impossible. Destroying the Rat/enemedia preparation of the battlefield. They know it and it is why they are so furious. The 18 year old who shared my name was killed the day before just over the hill but he was wearing blue that day. I have stood at both ends of that field, thankfully over 100 years later. We have forgotten the sacrifices of these men in these days and allowed many things that should never have been. Which is why I respect what he is doing in our behalf and compare him to a “successful” Pickett. I don’t care who he gave money to or what his positions have been. Right now he is giving the enemy a dose with “the long spoon” and the damage he has done even up to this point is irreparable. He deserves a medal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.