Taking down ‘The Donald’

The Marietta Daily Journal ^ | August 13, 2015 | Patrick Buchanan

[2ndDivisionVet]

If his Republican opponents will not take down Donald Trump, Fox News will not only show them how it is done. Fox News will do the job for them.

That is the message that came out loud and clear from last Thursday’s debate in Cleveland, which was viewed by the largest cable audience ever to watch a political event — 24 million Americans.

As political theater, it was exciting and entertaining.

But what was supposed to be a debate among the top-10 Republican candidates turned into a bear-baiting of Donald Trump.

Make no mistake. The issues Fox News raised were legitimate.

Trump’s threat to run third party, his remarks about women who have affronted him, the bankruptcies that four of his companies went through as he built his real estate empire — these are all fair game.

What was wrong here was that it was not his Republican rivals raising these issues or taking on Trump. It was the Fox News “moderators” of what was supposed to be a candidates’ debate. They came into the arena to do to Trump what his GOP rivals have been too timid or reluctant to do.

Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly came with their oppo research done and attack questions prepared — to sack Trump in the end zone and send him to the locker room on a stretcher.

When did that become the job of a “moderator” who is supposed to be more of a referee than a middle linebacker?

Who decided to turn the first Republican presidential debate into a two-hour version of “The Kelly File”?

With the exception of Rand Paul on the opening question about Trump bolting to run as a third-party candidate, no Republican chose to follow up the Fox News attacks on Trump that were disguised as questions. They let Fox do the wet work.

The anger of Trump and his followers that he was being singled out and sandbagged is understandable, even if his reaction revealed that Fox News had drawn blood. Indeed, this debate will be recalled in political lore as the night Fox News tried to take down the Donald.

Did they succeed?

According to an NBC poll, taken in the 48 hours after Cleveland, Trump held first place and rose a point to 23 percent. Sen. Ted Cruz had vaulted into second place with 13 percent. Dr. Ben Carson had risen to No. 3 with 11 percent. Carly Fiorina, who was not in the top 10 a week ago, is now fourth with 9 percent.

Together, these four outsiders can claim the support of well over half of all Republicans, while the beltway favorites — Marco Rubio at No. 5, Jeb Bush at No. 6 and Scott Walker at No. 7 — can together claim less Republican support than Donald Trump alone.

Who won the debate? According to the NBC poll, it was Carson, Trump and Cruz in that order.

With a real opportunity to capture the presidency in 2016, those leading in the race for the GOP nomination seem to be among the least likely to amass 270 electoral votes. But those most acceptable to the establishment seem, as each month passes, to generate less and less enthusiasm.

Yet, what is now clear is that the Republican establishment wants Trump out of this race, and, frustrated at his continuing strong support, is less and less willing to wait for him to implode.

Over the weekend, we heard talk of a Kasich-Rubio ticket, or vice versa. Yet, in that NBC poll, Kasich remains dead in the water after the debate, dropping from 3 to 2 percent, while Rubio is at 9 percent.

A real danger is emerging here of the split inside the GOP deepening and widening. For if it is seen that Trump has not been rejected by the voters, but driven out the race by the establishment and the elites, the value of the nomination will be vastly diminished.

Thus far in this presidential season, the rise of the Republican outsiders, insurgents, nonpoliticians and anti-politicians reveals how far the people of the United States are estranged and alienated from their political leadership.

In the Democratic Party, too, we have seen the rise of outsider-insurgent Socialist Bernie Sanders to within single digits of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and the fall of Clinton to where she is underwater in the polls on issues of trust and, “Does she care about people like me?”

If there is one lesson to be taken from this run-up year to the presidential campaign of 2016, it is that a huge and growing segment of the nation does not want what the establishment of either party has on offer.

And as insurgent parties spring up all over Europe, and the two-party system disintegrates there, the Europeanization of American politics may be at hand.

[BerryDingle]

That is the message that came out loud and clear from last Thursday’s debate in Cleveland

August 13th is today

Today isn't last Thursday.

[2ndDivisionVet]

So? That was the most watched debate in history. People are still talking about it.

[rusty schucklefurd]

Re: “The complaints about Fox moderators come from a misconception and a disagreement about the nature of their proper role. Moderators are interrogators not enablers.”

I thought the “debate” was supposed to be among the different candidates and THEIR opposing views, not a debate between the moderators/interrogators and the candidates.

All the questions brought up by the interrogators were valid questions for an interview or a press conference, not a debate. I wanted to hear what these different candidates believed about the issues facing our nation and how they differed in their approach to dealing with them.

Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. - their role is NOT to create the news, but to inform. Yes, of course they have agendas and I realize and am not naive to the fact that they present information to fit their agenda, but this was supposed to be a debate, not between the network and the candidates, but as I said, among the various candidates.

So, I must disagree that Fox did a service to the American people. I think it was exactly the opposite. I don’t want to know what Fox News or CNN or ABC approves or disapproves of. I want to know what these candidates think in regard to illegal immigration, the economy, the war on terror, forgeign policy, religious freedom of individuals and business owners, gun rights, etc.

[spokeshave]

those leading in the race for the GOP nomination seem to be among the least likely to amass 270 electoral votes.

New York has 29 electoral votes....seems to me the Donald will take them.

[stevie_d_64]

Jesse Ventura is the gimmick VP...

[867V309]

What would be lost by the total destruction of the Democrat and Republican parties?

[stevie_d_64]

Almost like Perot did back in the day...

[antceecee]

Jesse Ventura is insane!

[stevie_d_64]

Trump will take himself out...

Cruz, Carson, Walker, and a few of the proven candidates will privately pair up, after a few of the primaries, and when Texas finally gets a stab at what is left...

Its on to the convention...Trump will be all done by Super Tuesday...

And if not...At least the silliness will be a nice distraction, not such an air sucking MOAB...

[Catsrus]

I think his daughter, Ivanka, has been talking in his ear. He skimmed across a comment on Hannity that she is up on “women’s issues.” Also, I remember he said she is good friends with Caroline Kennedy. I also think she is friends with Chelsea Clinton. I’m really beginning to wonder about his conservative principles if he lets his daughter sway him on this issue.

[stevie_d_64]

Yep, he needs to crawl back in that hole wherever it is...

Ventura is in need of big $$$$$$$, and political relevancy...

Something tells me he is going to fail...

[nathanbedford]

I agree with you that the ideal model is to have the candidates debate one another rather than moderators but such an ideal is not practically possible with ten individuals and less than two hours of actual time. If two candidates dispute one another, as happened twice in the debate as I recall, eight candidates get no exposure during that time. When we have such an ungainly number of candidates vying for attention, the moderator simply has to play a larger role. It is unavoidable.

I agree that there were issues that were not covered but the character of the candidates and their biographies are always relevant issues. It is better to establish that in the beginning of the campaign season than later. If issue a) is discussed but not issue b), the very same criticism can be leveled, that the wrong issue was raised. These choices have to be made by the moderator. I happen to believe that the credentials of the candidates are essential questions and issues to get out of the way in the first debate. That the moderators undertook to do.

I would like to reproduce a reply posted in the wake of the debate which repeats some of the points of my initial reply in this thread but which is perhaps worth considering again:

Michael Barone was spot on in his judgments about the quality of the interrogators.

It is not the job of the interrogator to pump up or to deflate any individual campaign but it is their job to determine if someone in the Republican field will run against that field as an independent and spoil the Republican's election chances. It is their job to question a candidate about his past assertions especially assertions which reasonably label him a misogynist when the Democrats last several campaigns revolve around accusing Republicans of hating women.

Indeed, the Fox moderators would have been remiss had they not put these questions to the panel and to Trump individually. They asked hard questions of all the candidates but Trump was doubly vulnerable, first because he had so many problems in this background and, second, because he overstepped the bounds in his replies. Should the moderators not have asked Trump about his bankruptcies? Do we really believe that the Democrats don't know about them, that the Democrats don't know about his comments about women? Do we believe that the Democrats will fail to campaign on these issues should we be foolish enough to nominate Trump?

If Trump turned his answer to Megan Kelly from a triumph when he damned political correctness to a major gaffe when he belittled her individually, the fault is not Megan Kelly's but Trump's. If Trump brags about giving money to Democrats and getting favors in return and that does not wear well with the Republican electorate, that is not the moderators' fault, that is Trump's fault. If Trump brags about Hillary Clinton coming to his wedding because he paid her off, it is not the moderators' fault if he sinks in the polls as a result. If Trump cannot come up with evidence of Mexican government culpability but dissembles and rants, it is not the fault of the moderators if the audience catches on.

Trump supporters who are trying to push the blame for Trump's failures on to the moderators are casting about to explain character flaws in their man. Dr. Krauthammer who is not right on every issue every time got this one right, as did we who predicted this outcome, this is the beginning of the unraveling of Donald Trump's media Ponzi scheme.

[Catsrus]

You have a dream that isn’t going to materialize. I’ve heard this same theory from many on here. Donald doesn’t like to lose - at anything, and he isn’t going to pull out while he’s ahead. He isn’t anyone’s stalking horse, nor is he giving up $213 million a year from “The Apprentice,” to hand his voters over to someone else. That’s a lot of money to lose - even if you are a billionaire. I would be quite happy with a Cruz presidency, but, although he says all the right things and has the conservative bonafides - there is something that is keeping me from totally committing to his campaign - neither am I all in for Trump either.

[itsahoot]

What line of the budget dedicates funding specifically to abortion?

Actually the funding is not supposed to be directly used for abortion. The problem is money is fungible. We do the same silly thing with foreign aid and so far the rube voters haven't seemed to catch on.

[itsahoot]

Intellectual honesty compels us to concede that the questions asked of Donald Trump and the other Republicans were perfectly in order given the context of the times.

Intellectualism may compel the argument, but honesty has nothing to do with it.

[BerryDingle]

People are still talking about it.

LOL!. OK. I'm watching his plans on several channels now.

[nathanbedford]

If the questions were so intellectually dishonest, why were Trump's answers so inept? Is it not intellectually honest to make these observations:

If Trump turned his answer to Megan Kelly from a triumph when he damned political correctness to a major gaffe when he belittled her individually, the fault is not Megan Kelly's but Trump's. If Trump brags about giving money to Democrats and getting favors in return and that does not wear well with the Republican electorate, that is not the moderators' fault, that is Trump's fault. If Trump brags about Hillary Clinton coming to his wedding because he paid her off, it is not the moderators' fault if he sinks in the polls as a result. If Trump cannot come up with evidence of Mexican government culpability but dissembles and rants, it is not the fault of the moderators if the audience catches on.

[BerryDingle]

Comments?

Ailes called Trump Sunday and said he was laying off the negative horsecrap. Watch any current newscasts.

[sickoflibs]

RE:” What line of the budget dedicates funding specifically to abortion?
.....
Actually the funding is not supposed to be directly used for abortion. The problem is money is fungible. We do the same silly thing with foreign aid and so far the rube voters haven't seemed to catch on. “

Bingo, that is why his comment means that he will continue to support abortion.
Kelly pointing this out tonight, much to Trump's distress,

Does anyone else have the guts to ask him a specific question and demand an answer after his personal attacks on Kelly for questions he didn't want asked, then his lying about it and getting away with it??

Trump:”I would look at the good aspects of Planned Parenthood, and I would also look because I’m sure they do some things properly and good for women. I would look at that, and I would look at other aspects also, but we have to take care of women,” he said. “The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should absolutely not be funded.”

What line of the budget dedicates funding specifically to abortion?

[Zenjitsuman]

I thought the “debate” was supposed to be among the different candidates and THEIR opposing views, not a debate between the moderators/interrogators and the candidates.

All the questions brought up by the interrogators were valid questions for an interview or a press conference, not a debate. I wanted to hear what these different candidates believed about the issues facing our nation and how they differed in their approach to dealing with them.

I agree Me GYN Crowley Kelly was doing Ailes dirty work for Karl Rove and the Bush team. Ailes put out the Fatwah on Trump with all 3 of his Stooges going after him as if there were not 9 others on the stage.

These Stooges orders were to ask GOPe guys softball questions and give them max time and to go after DT and TC
and ask TC about his conversations with Jesus.

Not what we conservatives found to be so called “fair and balanced”

Me Gyn Crowley Kelly ratings are down as a result. Most Fox shows except for Hannity are down and that is because Hannity had DT on 2 nights in a row.