[Awgie]

Trying to explain the Trump phenomenon has become the holy grail of the media, the GOPe and detractors. Their goal is to define Trump in a way that strips him of any credibility. We have heard everything from personal vindictiveness to conspiracy theories involving the Clintons.

But its really pretty simple. Trump is to politics what Rush was to media.

Both politics and media are closed, guarded cliques, very similar to fraternities and sororities. There is only one way in. There is a “pledging” process in which the newbie (politics or media) must show their loyalty to the “alumnus.”

Another way to put it would be an “auditioning” process. To become career media insider and/or government “leader,” one has to systematically “perform” for incumbents at successive rungs on the ladder. First you audition and perform at a local level, then if your big break comes, you are offered auditions on the big stage.

But through it all is an understanding that you do not, under any circumstances, disrespect the organization. You must always pay homage to the corporate entity that accepted, nurtured and promoted you. Your ultimate loyalty must always reside in Big Journalism or Big Gov.

The “little people” are just there to be manipulated into believing you are their champions.

Rush and Trump were not willing to follow the unwritten rules for accessing status and power in the worlds of media and politics. Rush started it when he took the microphone and started saying what needed to be said, without the filtering and censorship of the power structure. How dare he build an audience and influence public opinion!

Trump is doing to politics what Rush did to media. The parallels are undeniable. In both cases they are providing an invaluable service by delivering relevant information and ideas while revealing the sordid nature of the corporate entities they inhabit.

Trump is the Rush of politics.

[M. Thatcher]

First-rate original analysis. You should expand it and send to Breitbart.

At the very least it deserves its own thread.

Very interesting riff on "pledging"/"auditioning."

[M. Thatcher]

Your post is MUCH more interesting, I should add, than the article posted at the top, which is a thumb-suck piece: “The polls could be right, or they could be wrong. We won’t know until the voting starts.” Utter waste of time. Sorry I read it.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Very interesting post.

A lot of truth in it.

My problem though is that Rush is consistent in his conservatism and Trump is not.

Rush says that words matter, that he is the mayor of “Realville,” and he has built an audience on that brand.

Now Trump isn’t so clear, his opinions, statements come out as big bold colors and then the colors run together in a confused piece of work - leaving the interpretation up in the air.

I trust Rush.

I don’t trust Trump.

But beyond that, your analogy is pretty good.