^I don't see it. He's going to crush it on Tuesday and the establishment is going to shit their pants
Unfortunately MSM doesn't work as an anti-Liberal meme any more because Fox News is in the MSM sphere. What MSM means now basically is Corporate Media.
I'm pretty sure that tweeting about the potential for assassination is somewhere along the spectrum from yelling Fire! in a crowded movie theater and calling a guy who has had one too many beers a cocksucker in a loud and obnoxious voice in the local bar. The first is likely to result in various felony charges and the second in a misdemeanor added on to whatever else the police are considering after sorting out the brawl attending the utterance in a public place. I wouldn't want to be Douthat when his editor comes calling today. Not to mention that Trump has Secret Service protection at this point and they're going to come calling also. Just politely is my guess and to ask Douthat to refrain from further commentary that suggests illegal acts and makes their job more difficult.
Just wait until the GOP attack machine goes into full gear and starts painting Trump like a Liberal. Basically from his past statements you can make Trump look like just about anything because he's such a Chimera of conflicting impulses and so public in the way he displays those impulses when something goes haywire. He's a public personality and he's got cannonballs between his legs and the combination is going to make for great reading when all the GOP research on him spills into the open. The problem for the GOP is that the party might be much smaller than it is right now if Trump wasn't on the ballot. The last 6 years have seen the Republicans retreat from the governing process in stages and the last 2 have seen them vanish except when the government was about to shut down or already had. People won't vote for a do-nothing party.
I call bullshit. Your prior post was an attack on the Times itself. Are you employed? Does your employer own all the bs you post here and anywhere else? The Times hires a guy to provide a conservative viewpoint as part of their op-ed columnists. He says something you have no reason to think was issued or vetted by the Times. So, what's your first reaction? Attack the Times. As if we wouldn't notice. Your pivot in this post means shit.
Either way, however it goes down. There will be fireworks and plenty of debate. Who you favoring if you dont mind me asking?
Hey Brad, I think you would find this article from The New Yorker very interesting for its discussion of the way changes in telecom technology is changing the way the electorate relates to the political parties and are changing the dynamic of the two party system: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/22/did-social-media-produce-the-new-populism Despite recommending it, it could have been better edited, and takes awhile to get rolling into its main discussion and point. But basically it addresses historical examples of how changes in technology, echoing how the printing press changed Christianity and gave birth the Reformation, has changed American politics, leading up to the present. In the present the new technology is, so the argument goes, creating an "atomization" of the electorate, with no overriding establishment media message available to the political parties to control "their" message. This might sound liberating, even a good thing. But there are some problems, since the current situation could easily descend into incoherence. This incoherence is evident in a lot of Trump supporters. To them he is an outsider who they just know will do beneficial things to shake up the system. But he's a billionaire who also is a major media figure, owning TV shows, having entrée to most any speaking outlet he wishes to use. And his tax plans, such as they have any coherence, are the same usual sops to the rich that make it not that different from what the other GOP candidates are pandering with. But I would say incoherence today is more the rule than the exception throughout the political landscape. The article in question could have been better written and edited, but its essential point bout the effects described is well taken.
No, but if I use my real name and post something that directly affects my employer in a negative way, I am sure there will be repercussions. We've had several people fired for posting certain things on social media.
That article sucked. In essence, the point was without the media to tell us what to think..we shouldn't form our own opinions, and talk to our neighbors, like we are doing right here amd now. This serves democracy far more than having pablum fed by a reporter (recorder) and editor, by virtue of the fact that they went to journalism school.
Since Kasich got almost no chance, I am hoping Trump to get the nomination over Ted the Snake and Rubio the Robot. Don't screw this one up Trumpy Trump.
