The scam works like this. All over the country, heinous losers endorse candidates on all sides. You never hear about Pedophile for Clinton or White Power for Sanders however, because the media ignores those people as cranks. But once you get anyone unsavory claiming to support a conservative, the media goes into overdrive acting like this is typical of their supporters. Then they demand that the candidate disavow them -- usually on some leftist terms that would result in a massively over-broad disavowal that sweeps in normal conservatives and conservative ideas as well. The candidate does the disavowal, but the issue doesn't die. The next MSM interviewer repeats this. As does the next. And the next. Soon, the candidate has spent weeks repeatedly disavowing the same irrelevant thing.
This creates the impression that the party must be a bunch of racists or else "it wouldn't be an issue." Similarly, the MSM writes articles in which they claim that there must be something to it or else the issue would have died off. But the reason the issue didn't die off is that the MSM is busy keeping it alive by repeatedly asking the candidate to disavow it.
The GOP should have thought about the long-term on this and shot down the MSM's game rather than attacking Trump for not disavowing it. Believe it or not, Trump did the right thing (sort of). His response was awkward, but he should have said, "I'm not playing that game. You know I have nothing to do with those people nor will they find anything to like in my administration. Issue over, don't ask again."
Thoughts?
P.S. I see more evidence this weekend that Trump has won. The combined Trump and Cruz vote is in the high 70%. That tells me that about 10% points of moderates are now supporting Trump. That means he will likely win Ohio and Florida and the rest.
37 comments:
The fact is Trump's most vocal supporters ARE KKK-fans. And individuals such as Ann Coulter play footsie with them.
And Trump's rhetoric has emboldened them.
If you are a conservative critical of twitter and your feed turns into a replication of the forum at Stormfront every time you criticize Trump, replete w/ tweets about your wife sexual infidelity with black men (Example: "I'm [insert name here] and I like seeing my wife fucked by n****ers"), you are going to be pretty pissed if it seems Trump has no interest in openly telling them to calm down.
And in fact seems to be playing footsie with him along with his most vocal supporters.
Sorry, this just touches off a nerve with me.
But you see Trump consolidating, I see him (possibly) in decline. He's starting to get hit w/ ads. But we'll see. But I'm not quitting GOP until he hits 1,237.
Saying that Trump supporters are also members/supporters of the KKK is beneath you.
LL,
I don't think all, or even most, Trump supporters are KKK. I just wish a number of his most vocal supporters would stop playing footsie with them.
if I were Trump I would mention the great and tender relationship the Clintons had with Byrd.(who was not a supporter of the Klan but a highly placed member.) Discuss how Billy boy thought Byrd was the greatest thing since lynching was invented and told the whole world this at the funeral
Donald Trump issued a clear denunciation of Duke and the KKK many years ago, but in the recent now infamous interview claimed he was unfamiliar with them. Either he is suffering from Alzheimers or he wants their support.
Fringe evil embraces mainstream politicians all the time, but normally politicians are consistent and unambiguous in their denunciations. Trump's failure to do so is what has given the Trump KKK controversy legs.
Of course, there is little Trump is consistent about aside from how awesome he considers himself. Republicans' only hope in the general is that the average voter ID as indifferent to Trump's words as his followers are. I strongly doubt it, but time will tell.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/why-wont-donald-trump-repudiate-the-ku-klux-klan/471345/
On Sunday, CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Trump whether he’d repudiate the support of David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, or “other white supremacists.” Trump evaded the question:
Donald Trump: Well, I have to look at the group. I mean, I don’t know what group you’re talking about. You wouldn’t want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. I’d have to look. If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them, and certainly I would disavow if I thought that there was something wrong.
Jake Tapper: The Ku Klux Klan…
Trump: But you may have some groups in there that are totally fine, and it would be very unfair. So, give me a list of groups and I’ll let you know.
Tapper: Okay, I’m just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here but…
Trump: Honestly, I don’t know David Duke. I don’t believe I’ve ever met him. I’m pretty sure I didn’t meet him, and I just don’t know anything about him.
In 2000, Trump was unambiguous about condemning the intolerance of the Reform Party, because it “now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani,” he said. “This is not company I wish to keep.'' On Friday, Trump was asked about Duke’s support, and replied, “I disavow him, OK?” But somehow, by Sunday, he’d forgotten both who Duke was, and how repellent his ideology is.
I don't believe much that comes out of Trump's mouth, but for some reason, the bad-earpiece line rings true to me. I think it was a combination of that and Trump trying so hard to outwit the media. It's certainly the sort of thing the media does, lumping the KKK in with "other groups" to get a disavowal, then revealing that "other groups" included the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. I think it goes without saying that Trump was being too smart for his own good.
Kit, That's a different issue. Trump is hardly the first to have some real a-hole supporters online. Conservatism has been beset by this since Romney was nominated, if not before. But again, I'm not saying he should embrace that or shouldn't try to clean that up. I'm not talking about that at all.
The issue I'm talking about here is the MSM game where they keep taking something the candidate cannot control and does not endorse and trying to make it sound like there is this tidal wave of racist who form a key part of the candidate's campaign by making the candidate constantly deny it over and over and over to give the impression that this is a major issue.
The MSM does this to every conservative and Trump is one of the first to refuse to play that game. I think he could have done it a little better, but he is the first to manage to stop the MSM game cold.
Tryanmax,
'Bad earpiece' is Trump's old excuse for not disavowing the KKK. His new excuse (which implicitly acknowledges that he heard the questions fine) is Jews.
Hillary's hope.
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Donald-Trump-cites-Jewish-charity-in-explanation-for-not-disavowing-KKK-446886
But Trump had to add a wrinkle.
Having previously blamed a faulty earpiece for failing to condemn Duke, he this time said he couldn’t just come out and condemn groups generically because — what if they were Jewish?
“And the one question that was asked of me on CNN — he’s having a great time — he talked about ‘groups of people.’ And I don’t like to disavow groups if I don’t know who they are. I mean, you could have the Federation of Jewish Philanthropies in ‘groups,’” he said.
The thing is, though, in the original encounter on CNN Sunday, Trump clearly understood that interviewer Jake Tapper was not referring to just any groups, but to white supremacist groups in particular. How do we know this? Because Trump said so.
“Well just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke, okay, I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don’t know, I don’t know. Did he endorse me, or what’s going on, because, you know I know nothing about David Duke, I know nothing about white supremacists. So you’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about,” he said.
LL, I'm not saying his supporters are KKK, though it sounds like some of them are. My point is that every candidate has these kinds of supporters and it's ridiculous that conservatives let the media play this game of tarring the candidate with the worst possible supporter they can find while giving a total pass to every Democrat.
Darski, That's an effective strategy too. The media would go insane if you start linking the Democrats to their KKK past.
Anthony, I don't think this has legs. The response has been a lot of conservative hand-wringing, a weak SNL skit and that's about it. There aren't condemnations from gaggles of politicians, international outrage, protest rallies, the creation of a new ribbon everyone needs to wear, and an avalanche of rainbow profiles on Facebook. It's largely been ignored by the public. In fact, I was shocked how quickly the issue vanished from the news cycle. And I think the reason is that Trump tossed a smoke grenade at the issue and walked away. That killed the momentum of it before it began.
By comparison, when conservatives play the media game, it goes on day after day with the conservative's entire campaign becoming focused on disavowing the same non-issue over and over. This gives the left time to gear up the outrage machine, which extends the issue even further and blows it up even larger. It also lets the MSM spin the usual stories, each of which is premise on "if there's nothing here, why does it keep coming up?" Suddenly, every article mentions the racism problem.
Trump sidestepped all of that.
Do I think Trump handled this perfectly? No. I think he could have made a very clear condemnation of those groups while still killing the issue. But I think the lesson is to kill the issue, not play into it.
In terms of his response, by the way, it reads lawyerly to me. It reads like he was prepared for it and he just left something out. What he should have said was "I have nothing to do with white supremacists, but I'm not going to condemn people without knowing who they are because you media types always lump good people in with the bad. So before I condemn someone who doesn't deserve it, I need to see exactly who you are talking about and I'm not going to accept your blanket assurance that everyone you're talking about is KKK."
I suspect that is what he was prepped to say, but he just botched it.
tryanmax, I agree with that. I think he was trying to outwit the media, he gave an incomplete or mentally garbled answer and it came out wrong -- though I think it still worked.
Here's an interesting piece about the dilemma the Republican and Democrat parties find themselves in.
The author is more kindly inclined towards Trump and his followers than I am and undersells the benefits of free trade (Americans love to buy cheap and imported goods often edge American goods on that basis) but his broad point valid. Namely, that the costs of immigration (legal and illegal) and free trade hit the working class the hardest and that they want the government to provide a solution.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/03/07/sympathy-for-the-donaldites-n2129660
Trumpism isn’t merely about unfocused anger – it would be super-convenient to write this off as a temper tantrum that will soon blow over and allow us to get back to the business as usual of ignoring the pleas (which are now demands) to stop the immigration disaster, to address the fallout of free trade, and to stop the useless sacrifice of our sons and daughters in wars we’re too damn gutless to win. But it isn’t. Again and again Republicans promised to solve these problems and yet every single time they’ve lied. Rubio got elected in Florida promising to oppose amnesty then not only fails to do so but stands up with the Democrats and did the exact opposite. And we’re surprised a candidate comes along and points that out?
--------------
Free trade is great, in a macro sense. It sure helps enrich the donor class. But go tell the guy who lost his $25 an hour job because NAFTA let Carrier move its air conditioning plant to Mexico about Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose.” What’s he free to choose? Long-term unemployment? Making a fake Social Security disability claim? Or taking a job greeting at Wal-Mart for $8 an hour?
Anthony, Two responses.
First, it's disingenuous to say he blames Jews. He is using the Federation of Jewish Philanthropies as a variable... as an example of exactly what I'm talking about. He could just as easily have said Heritage Foundation, only using a Jewish group as the example is less likely to lead to liberals saying "but they are racists!"
What he's pointing out is that the MSM has a history of saying things like:
-- "Why won't you condemn sexual violence like rape, forced prostitution, physical violence to demand sex, spousal abuse... or males generally."
-- "Why won't you condemn racist groups like the KKK, the Aryan Brotherhood, the NeoNazi... oh and the Heritage Foundation."
This is what the MSM does and this is what he is saying, though he is being clumsy about it.
Secondly, in terms of David Duke, I honestly suspect that Trump doesn't know who Duke is. I say that because Trump doesn't know hardly anything from the world of politics and Duke hasn't been relevant since the 1980s. So my guess is that he knew to condemn the KKK, but didn't know who Duke was and didn't want to let himself get tricked. So he punted.
Andrew,
The Republican primaries are still technically ongoing. The Democrats aren't going to torpedo Hillary's hope (anybody else in the race would be a much more dangerous opponent for her) just yet.
Right now they are mostly documenting Trump's spewings so that they and the Democrats can use it against him later.
The KKK thing won't harm him much, but his tongue will provide him with the political equivalent of the death of a thousand cuts in the general.
BTW, Let me be very clear...
I am NOT endorsing any white supremacist retards nor do I think Trump should embrace them. He should disavow them (just as conservatism should) and he should make sure they are not comfortable at his rallies or claiming to support him.
My only thinking in this article is the MSM game that always goes on with these people and that Trump seems to have beaten it.
Anthony, I disagree a bit. I think the MSM is working hard to destroy him, but it's not taking. I think they are pulling out all the same old tricks they always use only Trump isn't responded like conservatives normally do and they aren't getting the traction they normally get.
So while I agree that the Democrats will repeat all of this, I don't think it will work any better for them.
I do agree that if he goes down, it will be the death of a thousand cuts and it will be self-inflicted, but honestly, I'm already seeing a more centrist, less bombastic Trump. So he may surprise us.
Too bad that Season 4 of "House of Cards" wasn't released before all of the KKK stuff with Trump. He would have known exactly what to say. As if almost by design. But Trump LIKES this kind of thing. It keeps him in the news cycle.
And Andrew - I wouldn't count out Cruz just yet. Though Trump won two more states this weekend, he won Kentucky and Louisiana by a very narrow margin. Cruz won Kansas and Maine by double digits.
Delegates stand at
Trump 384
Cruz 300
Rubio 150
I think Cruz can take at least Florida. Sadly, I think Rubio harmed himself with the "little hands/little penis" reference debacle though he harmed Trump just as much because Trump fell for the bait.
By the way, unless something drastic happens, Hillary will be the Democrat candidate. She is overwhelming Bernie by taking most of the super-delegates that has her 1130 to 499.
Anthony, It's really a bad thing that the public has so stupidly turned against free trade. Free trade is what has given us such tremendous prosperity. Economically, that is undeniable.
The real problem of lost jobs has not been free trade, but the march of technology and government regulation that made technology much cheaper than labor.
Unfortunately, I think see both parties wanting to cut off our nose to win the site vote.
Anthony, to be clear, this isn't about defending Trump, this is about calling out MSM shenanigans, because I dislike MSM shenanigans more than I dislike Trump's buffoonery.
I'll tell you one thing: I cannot find through Google, Jake Tapper's question to Trump written out with quotes around it. I can't even find a decent paraphrase. Just allusions to what the question was about. I went to YouTube to discover there were actually two questions and answers that are being conflated in the coverage. That is shenanigans.
I followed your JPost link, and they're doing the same thing--taking Trump's answer to the first question and applying it to the second question. You're playing shenanigans, too, Anthony. You know full well that saying Trump's new excuse is "Jews" reads a certain way that is different from what comes out in the article you cut-and-pasted.
One more thing and I'll leave this hogwash, I think the strongest evidence that Trump did not hear the question is that Tapper claimed it originated with the Anti-Defamation League and Trump supposes that "other groups" might include Jewish Philanthropies. There's two reasons he might think that; either he thinks the ADL is out to get him or he didn't hear the question.
Bev, I don't see Cruz's victories as significant because they were caucus states. Caucuses are random and can be manipulated by small groups who play strategically. Trump is winning the primaries.
That said, Cruz has added a lot of points lately. However, I think that's the Ben Carson people. They're all committed now and Cruz remains short compared to Trump. At this point, I think Cruz's best hope is that Rubio quits and his supporters go to Cruz, but I'm not sure they will.
I do agree that Rubio hurt himself. But now we are headed into moderate states so I don't think Rubio quits unless Kasich starts beating him convincingly. If that happens, then Kasich stays in the race, replaces Rubio, and Cruz still loses.
This is an odd race.
The Hillary/Sanders race seems to be over barring some major upset.
On the KKK thing, I agree. I think Trump likes the attention either way. I think that's because he's running as the political version of a professional wrestling "heel" -- he revels in being hated to stoke up the crowd.
Sadly, I didn't see House of Cards.
Andrew,
I agree with your premise that Trump was naming a favorite liberal group in order to avert criticism of his failure to denounce Duke and the KKK (the interviewer narrowed the question for him at one point) but given that traditionally the KKK likes Jews only a little better than it likes blacks, his attempt at deflection was pitiful.
I'm not saying Trump is or isn't a racist, but he clearly wants their support. Many politicians are similarly pragmatic (in a two party system each party tends to absorb whoever doesn't like the other party for whatever reason good or bad) but most are better at keeping their more unpleasant supporters at arms' length.
Bev, no HoC spoilers! *plugs ears* LA LA LA LA LA!
Anthony, Agreed.
That's probably true, especially as he likely knows that to win, he will need to raise white turnout since he won't be getting many votes from minorities.
AS an Old cold Warrior I found it nauseating that Commies and worse supported many Democrats over the years, but as far as the media is concerned that is fine. I'm not a Trump supporter, but I will vote for whoever is running against Hillary.
Critch, I couldn't agree more. The Democrats were always aligned with socialists and communists and 60's "radicals" (read: terrorists), cop killers, race hate groups like the Black Panthers, etc. And the media never mentioned any of these people. But Heaven help you if in the darkest corner of some forgotten state, so white supremacist or cultist or John Bircher said something nice about a Republican. The media would cover that for months. Drove (drives) me nuts!
On Hillary, I will reluctantly agree. I'll vote for Trump or Cruz or Rubio or anyone else they nominate against Hillary.
Tryanmax - Sorry about that...8-/ I forgot to shout "SPOILER ALERT!!!!".
I just watched the Peyton Manning retirement. This was really a pretty amazing event compared to most NFL retirements. He seems to be one of those truly special people. Very humble. Did a ton to help people. Thanked everyone, including people he played against, cleaning staff, players, family, etc.
Want proof that this KKK thing won't hurt Trump? Here it is: LINK
It remains to be seen how Trump does Mar 15. That will tell the tale. We will know Michigan results before that and it's a portent. If Cruz beats Trump in Michigan, it will be a massive upset, but I don't think that he has the stroke there because Kasich and Trump sucked the air out of the room. (RCP average taken March 5 shows Trump +17.5)
Trump has been saying that he will run the table in northern primaries and in California where he will pick up big a big delegate count. SNL hit piece or not, I doubt that Cruz will be able to take him out. People have been forecasting Trump's demise since June 2015 and he's still in front. Cruz shot his bolt in the South and that was the source of his strength.
RCP Florida Trump +16
RCP Ohio Trump +4
RCP NC Trump +10
RCP ILL Trump +15
RCP MO Trump +12
Things can change in a week. Ohio and Florida are in play, but if Trump takes all of the winner-take-all states, it's down to Trump v Cruz as the others flake off.
P. S. - We still have yet to see what filthy games the Democrats play internally when Hillary drops out and is replaced by John Kerry. They are laughing at the Republicans now, but I suggest that tune will change as they must confront their own demons as Sanders' people claim that the game was rigged.
tryanmax, Typical of SNL. They could have written it five years ago and just inserted a different Republican name.
LL, March 15 will tell us for sure, but I think Trump will win Ohio and Florida and that will be the end.
Cruz won two states this weekend, but they were caucus states and those are random and can't be counted. Cruz did hold pace in Louisiana and Kentucky, but he did worse than he did in Arkansas and Oklahoma (both Texas border states).
His Kentucky second place was better than the other southern states, but it was basically Cruz+Carson. He's out of Carson people he can add now.
We'll see how things go, but I think Cruz has peaked and the race will be between Kasich/Rubio and Trump.
Andrew,
I'm w/ John Ondrasik; Trump's the nominee, I'm out. Not sure who I'll vote for but it won't be Trump.
A party that nominates a pro-big government, anti-gun, anti-life crony who plays up identity politics like Trump can no longer call itself conservative in any meaningful sense.
If Trump is president then conservatism and America as we know them no longer exist.
Post a Comment