Tag Archives: Media

Day 66: POLITICO panel of “expert GOPs” see Trump’s trip as a success

There’s never been any question that something’s seriously awry with the perceptive capabilities of the entire Grand Old Party about its own successes and failures — most recently, 2012’s “skewed polls” nonsense and Mitt Romney’s belief in his bad polling and Karl Rove’s Election Night meltdown live on FOX News over Ohio being called for Barack Obama.  Now we have further evidence: the professional GOP evaluation of Donald Trump’s disastrous trip to Mexico.

You recall this week’s trip?  Where Donald Trump was contradicted about illegal immigration, in Spanish, by the President of Mexico, from an adjacent podium?  Where Donald Trump was rebuked by the Mexican president for his lies about whether the ‘paid-for-by-Mexico wall’ even came up?  Where Donald Trump traveled afterwards to Phoenix to give the darkest speech yet of his presidential campaign?

POLITICO has a panel of professionals in eleven swing states.  Some are Democrats; some are GOPs.  They have been surveyed throughout the campaign for their opinions about the state of the race.  And the panel of GOPs was just surveyed for their opinion of Trump’s trip.

How did a large majority of these professional Republicans characterize his trip?

HUGELY OR MODERATELY SUCCESSFUL

Two-thirds of GOP members of The POLITICO Caucus — a panel of activists, operatives and strategists in 11 key battleground states — rated the Republican nominee’s meeting with President Enrique Peña Nieto, followed by an evening rally in Phoenix in which he reiterated his robust immigration proposals, as hugely or moderately successful, despite the potential contradiction between the two events.

These are the people running the GOP in the few swing states that left in this election.  They consider this trip, the presidential “summit” in Mexico and the Phoenix speech, a great  success.

FULL VIAGRA!

“A week after teasing a softening, Trump went full Viagra in his Phoenix speech, burying the crowd in red meat as he returned to his portrayal of America as a dystopian wasteland ruled by criminal aliens,” one Iowa Republican said. “

ANOTHER PHARMACEUTICAL REFERENCE!

“He’s like a kid who takes Ritalin in the morning, and it wears off in the late afternoon,” said a New Hampshire Republican. “The result is two totally different kids in the same day. His parents are constantly monitoring how long it’s been since he took his last dose.”

But one Virginia Republican disagreed. “No one will remember the speech in a week,” the Republican said. “The visual of him with the Mexican president will be in peoples’ minds.”

For Democrats, Trump’s day was almost unanimously a failure: Only a combined 17 percent rated it moderately or hugely successful.

I don’t know if the Republican or Democratic experts are right.  But their perceptions sure are different, and GOP perceptions have been very wrong recently.  It’s almost as if they don’t have their finger on the pulse of the *entire* electorate, only a sliver of it.

As long as these incorrect perceptions are reaching the top of the Trump campaign, I think they’ll make the same mistakes Mitt Romney made: belief in their own victory, despite reality’s known liberal bias.

 

Day 99: An Endorsement Cascade?

Today, the Houston Chronicle — Hearst’s largest daily paper — endorsed Hillary Clinton: a paper that rarely endorses Democrats for President (Barack Obama was the first Democrat the paper endorsed since LBJ in 1964) and never endorses this early in the cycle.

The Chronicle editorial page does not typically endorse early in an election cycle; we prefer waiting for the campaign to play out and for issues to emerge and be addressed. We make an exception in the 2016 presidential race, because the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not merely political. It is something much more basic than party preference.

My question is this: how many editorial boards throughout the country will let Oilpatch’s Pennysaver have the jump on them?  Will this endorsement by Texas’s Number Two daily paper begin a groundswell of massive early endorsements from newspapers? Papers whose boards realize Our Liberal Media has abrogated their responsibility in 2016 by enabling Donald Trump to achieve his hostile takeover of the GOP?

(Also: Will the Houston Chronicle’s reporters be permitted to continue to cover the Trump campaign?)

Who’s gonna let the Houston Chronicle be out there, alone, for very long?  Will other Editorial Boards across the country recognize their imperative: step in, help Americans realize the stakes, highlight the difference this election means to America?  Who else will be responsible, right now?

Or will they continue to pretend to be spectators, acting as if they didn’t help this happen to our country?

We’ll see.