• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Fascinating Field Report From Reporters Covering Trump

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Read the whole article to get the full picture. Here are a few excerpts:

My new (press) pals swiveled their heads, quickly pinpointed the disturbance, and raced back into the crowd.

Was this the normal gig? “Totally normal,” said Deb, safely in the [press] pen once more, unfazed by the brewing rancor. “People think it’s new, but this has been going on at Trump rallies since at least November. There’ll be 10 more of those tonight.”

And of course there are the lies. Politico Magazine tallied more than 60 in a week of Trump appearances. At a rally in Boca Raton, Florida, on March 13, I heard him utter at least two bald untruths in the first two minutes of his speech (he said there were 25,000 people at his Chicago rally when the arena holds fewer than 10,000, and then he repeated the falsehood that no one had been injured at the event). But journalists I talked to who continue to report the lies as such don’t feel their efforts have much effect. “How many times can you write that the same statement is untrue?” mused one reporter. “At some point, the lie stops being news.” And debunking a claim doesn’t stop Trump from making it again.

The hokum washes over you after a while. A reporter sitting next to me at the Saturday rally in Cleveland chuckled when Trump bragged there were 29,000 people in the room. “That can’t be remotely possible,” she said, lifting her head for a moment to assess the crowd, then giving up and returning her gaze to her laptop. A fire marshal later announced the attendance had been about 7,000. The lie, though, never made it into her piece. Why bother to spend the time and column space to correct a silly exaggeration, when this same man has said he might want to summarily execute enemy combatants and defile their bodies? You need to pick your battles.

We used to fact-check everything, every day,” another reporter told me, “but it gets hard to keep up.” For a writer filing on deadline an hour after a rally ends, there’s not enough time to thoroughly fact-check the dozens of fabrications that spilled from the stage. It’s also hard to know who the fact-checking is for. At this point, anyone who hates Trump has ample evidence he’s a liar. And anyone who loves Trump doesn’t care.

Despite the heavy adjectives getting thrown around—fascist, demagogue, authoritarian—the beat reporters I spoke to mostly felt they couldn’t use that kind of language. Opinion writers, sure. But straight news journalists felt the best they could do was catalog the madness and let the American citizenry decide.

The first thing they all said about Trump’s press operation was that “there is no Trump press operation.” There’s just Hope Hicks, a twentysomething former Ralph Lauren model who’s never previously worked in politics. She functions more like a celebrity PR shop than a political communications team.

[...]

Asking policy questions is like throwing a rock down a bottomless well. “If I have a question about women’s issues, or Hispanic issues,” said one reporter, “it’s not like they point me to specific press liaisons who handle those. There aren’t any such people.” Most policy queries simply go unanswered. When a response does come back, it’s rarely sufficient. “There’s no point anyway,” said another reporter. “You might get a response to a question about immigration policy, but the next day on TV, Trump will contradict it.”

The campaign will sometimes single out specific outlets for vindictive treatment. The Des Moines Register, the New York Times, BuzzFeed, and Univision were all denied access to Trump events in the wake of running negative coverage. Both the National Press Club and the White House Correspondents’ Association have already felt compelled to fire their first meek shots over Trump’s bow.

“Trump doesn’t let the press on his plane now, something that other candidates do. Would President Trump let reporters on Air Force One?”

President Trump, yeah. Be careful what you wish for. 🙁
 
As someone who considers himself an independent, I've been seriously considering both candidates (assuming Trump-Clinton in the GE), and up until now I've concluded I'd rather have a known evil over an unknown evil. Trump doesn't bow to the GOP establishment, in fact he doesn't bow to anybody. He serves his own ego and lives in an alternate, delusional reality which this report underscores. Trump sees himself as a king and we are his subjects.
 
There's a shocker, lefty reporters don't like Trump and whine about it. Yep, a real shocker there. 😀

Not only is it obvious that you didn't read the article, it's obvious you didn't even read my OP. Here, I'll repost one of my excerpts for you:

Despite the heavy adjectives getting thrown around—fascist, demagogue, authoritarian—the beat reporters I spoke to mostly felt they couldn’t use that kind of language. Opinion writers, sure. But straight news journalists felt the best they could do was catalog the madness and let the American citizenry decide.

Keep living in your idiot reflexive fact-free zone. To borrow your phrase in regards to your own post, "Yep, a real shocker there." 🙄
 
Which is the unknown evil? For fucks sake both of these dinosaurs have been in the national spotlight for nearly thirty years.

News flash: Trump has never been a public servant, or worked in the government sector. I don't know if you weren't aware ... ?
 
There's a shocker, lefty reporters don't like Trump and whine about it. Yep, a real shocker there. 😀

It's a neat trick, this assumption that you can't trust anyone who tells you what you don't want to hear. The right has honed this form of denial into a fine art.
 
News flash: Trump has never been a public servant, or worked in the government sector. I don't know if you weren't aware ... ?

I don't believe that the writer said the Trump held a public office, only that he has been in the national spotlight, which he has. Who hasn't heard of the Donald prior to the primaries?
 
It's a neat trick, this assumption that you can't trust anyone who tells you what you don't want to hear. The right has honed this form of denial into a fine art.

Elegantly put. Their attitudes filter out contrary information before it's even analyzed. They've done a lot of that over the years resulting in yuuge frustrations bottled up just below the surface.

Trump plays on that like Tarzan swinging thru the trees...
 
Not only is it obvious that you didn't read the article, it's obvious you didn't even read my OP. Here, I'll repost one of my excerpts for you:



Keep living in your idiot reflexive fact-free zone. To borrow your phrase in regards to your own post, "Yep, a real shocker there." 🙄

Actually, that's another fail on your part. I did read your post and part of the linked article. The section you re-quoted shows just how biased those lefty reporters are. They want to use that kind of language but can't. Not sure which one is more worthless, Trump or the reporters.
 
I guess that Brietbart reporter who was assaulted by Trump's COS was another lefty

Did I say anything about that reporter? Also, you're making an assumption about what actually went down. Apparently her own organization didn't buy her version of events. I dunno, I wasn't there.
 
As someone who considers himself an independent, I've been seriously considering both candidates (assuming Trump-Clinton in the GE), and up until now I've concluded I'd rather have a known evil over an unknown evil. Trump doesn't bow to the GOP establishment, in fact he doesn't bow to anybody. He serves his own ego and lives in an alternate, delusional reality which this report underscores. Trump sees himself as a king and we are his subjects.

Those are good points.
Goes to show how mad voters are at the GOP, that Trump even has a chance.
 
Last edited:
Those are good points.
Goes to show has mad voters are at the GOP, that Trump even has a chance.

I think it really goes to show how crappy the options are overall. I mean seriously, Bernie? Cruz? hildebeast? Rubio? Carson? Common, surely one would think as a country we could come up with something better than that collection of trash.
 
Actually, that's another fail on your part. I did read your post and part of the linked article. The section you re-quoted shows just how biased those lefty reporters are. They want to use that kind of language but can't. Not sure which one is more worthless, Trump or the reporters.

You quit reading because it was burning your eyes out or because you were afraid your precious bodily fluids might be polluted?
 
Actually, that's another fail on your part. I did read your post and part of the linked article. The section you re-quoted shows just how biased those lefty reporters are. They want to use that kind of language but can't. Not sure which one is more worthless, Trump or the reporters.

Why is that biased if they believe that is an accurate description? If anything this shows how much the right has worked to censor the media from describing things as they are, no?

I mean he certainly displays authoritarian and demagogic attributes, no? There's also a fascistic element to his statements as well.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top