Somehow you are the only journalist who hears Trump correctly. This guy tells it exactly as you understand it as do I but mainstream media are deaf dumb and blind
Other journalists also understood what Trump meant and have been loudly complaining about the mainstream media choosing to ignore it, downplay it or excuse it as Trump talking in code or just being Trump. I have seen several media Trump apologists explain it as Trump just meaning that he will make things so good that everyone will want to vote for him next time so they won’t have to worry abour voting — choosing to ignore the inconvenient fact that it would be his third term.
The WaPo did post an early article but did not place it at the top of their website. The Times didn’t even write about it until it had caused an uproar but even then they minimized the speech. Now the WaPo’s media apologist Eric Wempel has a piece he thinks disproves the complaints. It is a long list of articles published by mainstream outlets about Trump’s authoritarian statements. The commenters are pushing back hard, pointing out that many of those articles were buried in back pages, spread out over time, etc. The good news is that it is making the media very uncomfortable, hence the defensive Wempel article that you know the editors just love.
It boggles my mind that the WaPo got rid of the highly regarded Margaret Sullivan (who is criticized in this article ) and kept Wimpy Wempel. Luckily we can still read Sullivan for free at the Guardian. She also has a substack.
Compare that from the highly respected NY Times public editor and more recently a media critic for the WaPo until she was let go with this defensive column by Erik Wemple, the man the WaPo kept on as media critic/media apologist:
“The media is ignoring the Trump threat! Well, except for all these stories.
An inventory of stories on a topic that some say the media is not covering enough.”
Don’t hold your breath. Here is the headline from the WaPo about Trump’s insane remarks about Harris turning black:
“Trump’s comments on Harris’s race move contest into new phase”.
Compare that to the headline at the Guardian:
“ Trump repeats lies and attacks Kamala Harris’s racial identity at panel of Black journalists:
Chaotic event hosted by National Association of Black Journalists saw Trump lie about abortion and immigration”
Roy Wood Jr. has a hilarious post on Twitter inviting people to post about when they turned black, saying it is a “safe space”. The replies are epic. Luckily I read about in the Daily Beast so I didn’t have to go to Twitter. I really, really want someone like RuPaul to post “I turned black around the same time I decided to turn gay.”
This does demand interrogation and explanation from the candidate. If he can't justify this comment credibly (and so far, he hasn't), it must be hammered on because not a single explanation of what he said is good for our country.
Michael Gold embarrassed himself with his first filing of the "Believers' Summit" (LOL!) report, where the "don't need to vote" remark was quoted verbatim w/o comment or context. After the WaPo article came out next morning zeroing on the appalling subtext of tRump's comment, Gold refiled the next day with a bit more focus on the potential implications of tRump's speech.
Cross-posted from TCinLA, "...The corporate media doesn’t care about democracy, norms, or whether a political leader is damaging society. Don’t believe me? The Executive Editor of the New York Times is on the record in a recent interview that “saving democracy” is not their job and that “democracy” itself is just another issue, like inflation..."
Man, the word salad that would result if Trump actually had to explain what he meant - about this or Project 2025 or any of the 80,000 other authoritarian comments he's made. (This is why he desperately wants to avoid a debate. Because Harris will certainly bring it up and demand an answer.)
He was telling Christian Nationalists (not just "Christians") that they won't have to vote because he will turn our constitutional democratic republic into a Christianist dictatorship. Say that, news outlets. Report that. Because not only is it news, it's the biggest news in the 236-year history of our presidential politics.
Well, just yesterday he appeared on Laura Ingraham's show and essentially repeated it multiple times. She actually attempted to get him to clarify, which was amazing on Fox, but he kept dodging and smirking and she never got an answer. Let's see if the other media step up.
Trump just says weird things to get attention. It is verbal shock and awe. His statements are entertainment for his fans. If a phrase catches on, he keeps it ambiguous, so people spend time trying to discern it's meaning. Ambiguity is not new to politics. Each of his followers can assign their own unique interpretation of his words. The media loves the Ambiguity because eyeballs and clicks mean dollars in their pockets. He wants to be richer, more famous, and out of prison. If elected anything that does not conflict with those 3 things is possible.
If he said it to the Christian nationalists to remind them that once they establish their regime, they don’t have to vote, he was wrong. It’s like democracy, if you are in process of establishing theocracy, you have to keep watching and voting. In other words: NONSENSE argument.
At the very least, Trump's words demand a "WTF are you talking about?" from the press.
Somehow you are the only journalist who hears Trump correctly. This guy tells it exactly as you understand it as do I but mainstream media are deaf dumb and blind
Other journalists also understood what Trump meant and have been loudly complaining about the mainstream media choosing to ignore it, downplay it or excuse it as Trump talking in code or just being Trump. I have seen several media Trump apologists explain it as Trump just meaning that he will make things so good that everyone will want to vote for him next time so they won’t have to worry abour voting — choosing to ignore the inconvenient fact that it would be his third term.
The WaPo did post an early article but did not place it at the top of their website. The Times didn’t even write about it until it had caused an uproar but even then they minimized the speech. Now the WaPo’s media apologist Eric Wempel has a piece he thinks disproves the complaints. It is a long list of articles published by mainstream outlets about Trump’s authoritarian statements. The commenters are pushing back hard, pointing out that many of those articles were buried in back pages, spread out over time, etc. The good news is that it is making the media very uncomfortable, hence the defensive Wempel article that you know the editors just love.
It boggles my mind that the WaPo got rid of the highly regarded Margaret Sullivan (who is criticized in this article ) and kept Wimpy Wempel. Luckily we can still read Sullivan for free at the Guardian. She also has a substack.
Margaret Sullivan just posted this on her substack:
“ The media fails to take Trump at his word. Again.
Three theories about why journalists don't sound the alarm loud and clear about his authoritarian plans”
https://margaretsullivan.substack.com/p/the-media-fails-to-take-trump-at?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1186548&post_id=147096500&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=40l5a&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Compare that from the highly respected NY Times public editor and more recently a media critic for the WaPo until she was let go with this defensive column by Erik Wemple, the man the WaPo kept on as media critic/media apologist:
“The media is ignoring the Trump threat! Well, except for all these stories.
An inventory of stories on a topic that some say the media is not covering enough.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/07/15/trump-authoritarianism-media-stakes/
At least all the criticism from Dems seems to be intimidating the mainstream media — finally.
Don’t hold your breath. Here is the headline from the WaPo about Trump’s insane remarks about Harris turning black:
“Trump’s comments on Harris’s race move contest into new phase”.
Compare that to the headline at the Guardian:
“ Trump repeats lies and attacks Kamala Harris’s racial identity at panel of Black journalists:
Chaotic event hosted by National Association of Black Journalists saw Trump lie about abortion and immigration”
Roy Wood Jr. has a hilarious post on Twitter inviting people to post about when they turned black, saying it is a “safe space”. The replies are epic. Luckily I read about in the Daily Beast so I didn’t have to go to Twitter. I really, really want someone like RuPaul to post “I turned black around the same time I decided to turn gay.”
This does demand interrogation and explanation from the candidate. If he can't justify this comment credibly (and so far, he hasn't), it must be hammered on because not a single explanation of what he said is good for our country.
Michael Gold embarrassed himself with his first filing of the "Believers' Summit" (LOL!) report, where the "don't need to vote" remark was quoted verbatim w/o comment or context. After the WaPo article came out next morning zeroing on the appalling subtext of tRump's comment, Gold refiled the next day with a bit more focus on the potential implications of tRump's speech.
The Times...[sigh].
WAPO reported this weekend that Trump made similar statements at a Faith and Freedom Coalition event in DC last month.
Cross-posted from TCinLA, "...The corporate media doesn’t care about democracy, norms, or whether a political leader is damaging society. Don’t believe me? The Executive Editor of the New York Times is on the record in a recent interview that “saving democracy” is not their job and that “democracy” itself is just another issue, like inflation..."
Man, the word salad that would result if Trump actually had to explain what he meant - about this or Project 2025 or any of the 80,000 other authoritarian comments he's made. (This is why he desperately wants to avoid a debate. Because Harris will certainly bring it up and demand an answer.)
I read that this was the second time Trump said it. Why does he get a "next time" when no one else does?
He was telling Christian Nationalists (not just "Christians") that they won't have to vote because he will turn our constitutional democratic republic into a Christianist dictatorship. Say that, news outlets. Report that. Because not only is it news, it's the biggest news in the 236-year history of our presidential politics.
Why was this not discovered first by most of the anti Trump groups, or groups that promote voting? Why was there a delayed response?
Where is the 'counter response' today, by anti Trump/pro democracy/Demo leaders to the claims that it was all taken out of context?
It will fall out of the news cycle until kept in my political/advocacy groups.
Trump’s the media owners’ preferred candidate. So, you know, that may factor into the reporting that gets published and produced.
In ~50+ years, all they’ve done is building him up despite there being literally nothing good about him.
Well, just yesterday he appeared on Laura Ingraham's show and essentially repeated it multiple times. She actually attempted to get him to clarify, which was amazing on Fox, but he kept dodging and smirking and she never got an answer. Let's see if the other media step up.
Trump just says weird things to get attention. It is verbal shock and awe. His statements are entertainment for his fans. If a phrase catches on, he keeps it ambiguous, so people spend time trying to discern it's meaning. Ambiguity is not new to politics. Each of his followers can assign their own unique interpretation of his words. The media loves the Ambiguity because eyeballs and clicks mean dollars in their pockets. He wants to be richer, more famous, and out of prison. If elected anything that does not conflict with those 3 things is possible.
If he said it to the Christian nationalists to remind them that once they establish their regime, they don’t have to vote, he was wrong. It’s like democracy, if you are in process of establishing theocracy, you have to keep watching and voting. In other words: NONSENSE argument.
Don't hold your breath. Just saying.