dagblog - Comments for "Marshall on "Norms""

This cynicism is the biggest

artappraiser — Mon, 28 May 2018 05:52:23 +0000

This cynicism is the biggest advantage Trump has on any number of fronts, based on same experience. “All politicians lie/have conflicts of interest/sic gov on opponents” etc, even “collude with foreign rivals.” Accurately rebutting puts you in position of defending hated pols.
— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) May 27, 2018

Maybe, except people don't

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 26 May 2018 19:20:28 +0000

In reply to But Trump was supposed to be

Maybe, except people don't like to admit they're wrong.

I feel it's only right to add

artappraiser — Sat, 26 May 2018 19:07:18 +0000

In reply to If they weren't cowards, they

I feel it's only right to add to this thread that I do see pushback all the time from the White House media, every day, constantly, and a lot of it, like these tweets just now, easily picked out in a few minutes on twitter:

The president of the United States is now claiming that his own White House briefings are fake news and that an official his White House put in the briefing room "doesn't exist." https://t.co/ozT6QMhEsM
— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) May 26, 2018

And witnesses thousands of people just blindly believing him with no questions asked simply because he tweeted it... https://t.co/4RqwVeEwdM
— Tucker Martin (@jtuckermartin) May 26, 2018

I’m fond of that construct, as you know https://t.co/7CmpIyhT2Q
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) May 26, 2018

For those keeping track >>> A first even in annals of Trump admin: president claiming own staff gave fake and nonexistent briefing.
— Susan Glasser (@sbg1) May 26, 2018

This is a good example of why, at pretty much every background briefing, you'll hear an AP reporter ask why it's being held on background/why it's not on record. https://t.co/EYkrUszieZ
— Jill Colvin (@colvinj) May 26, 2018

The reason that this official was not named in our story is that the White House press office insisted that its briefing -- for hundreds of reporters -- was on background. Best way to alleviate the President's concern about anonymous sources would be for WH to name the official. https://t.co/dTKNTbGzJR
— David Sanger (@SangerNYT) May 26, 2018

Trump told two demonstrable falsehoods this AM, one about his administration’s policy of separating undocumented immigrant kids inclu infants from their parents, which he tried to claim wasn’t his own policy. The other was falsely claiming his own aide didn’t give a bg briefing.
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) May 26, 2018

This tactic echoes how Trump handled DACA. Ended the program and blamed it on Democrats; cast himself as supportive of the sympathetic policy while actually using it as leverage to extract concessions on restrictionist policies central to his political identity.
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) May 26, 2018

Trump’s claim that a WH official doesn’t exist reminds me of this story by @maggieNYT & @jmartNYT where Trump started saying it wasn’t his voice on the Access Hollywood tape. “His lifelong habit of attempting to create and sell his own version of reality” https://t.co/XBSYc3RNmc
— David P Gelles (@gelles) May 26, 2018

Oh, I thought it was "we'll

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 25 May 2018 13:09:00 +0000

In reply to Great comment because your

Oh, I thought it was "we'll crease those britches when we [censored] in them" or "we'll cross these bitches with a conundrum" or something - never could figure out what it was supposed to mean, but I never met a four I couldn't double into eight, not that it pays to prays them or be pro-voke or anti-voke.

Could be easier if English were my native tung, rather than an object of misuse & abuse.

Moat's bridge metaphor earns

AmericanDreamer — Fri, 25 May 2018 01:02:40 +0000

In reply to Great comment because your

Moat's bridge metaphor earns praise.

Seriously, I thought this was a very good piece from Josh.

Great comment because your

artappraiser — Thu, 24 May 2018 20:32:34 +0000

In reply to If they weren't cowards, they

Great comment because your metaphors are so thought-provoking.

I'm always for not closing bridges. Especially as neither big tent party seems to be able define an overriding ideology anymore.

You might notice that I tend to pick out stories that are pointing to where there are actually ideologies involved; i.e., congresspersons who are driven to focus on certain things they promised their constituencies when campaigning. (Then there's also congresspersons who owe payback to a lobby for those campaign funds, of course.) That tells you where new coalitions might be formed, where something might actually happen, or the converse, something gets stymied.

Furthermore, I am a little sympathetic to hostage negotiator journalist type. In the age of Trump in particular, I don't see any benefit for the populace in journalists amping passions up more with righteous name calling and labeling and outrage. Maybe the guy who is a lying asshole harasser hypocrite in most areas still has some sausage-making use if he believes one or two things unabashedly. I don't need my facts passion-ized, I don't need them to tell me what I should think.

But Trump was supposed to be

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 24 May 2018 17:32:18 +0000

In reply to Yes for the media. Except

But Trump was supposed to be different, wasn't he? A businessman not a politician, against the establishment, doesn't need their money, bla bla bla. So if the skeptics who think all pols are crooked start to see him as just another crooked pol (as opposed to a "norm breaker"), it matters.

Any Republican with a spine

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 24 May 2018 17:26:33 +0000

In reply to If they weren't cowards, they

Any Republican with a spine has already crossed over. The spineless ones will only cross when the fear of staying put overcomes the fear of crossing, and that fear is driven by the voters. If the cowards decide that rejecting and denouncing Trump will gain them more votes than embracing him, they'll do it. So what counts is public opinion, not the opinions of a few weak-kneed moderates. And I don't see how mealy-mouthed journalists failing to tell it like it is wins the battle of public opinion.

If they weren't cowards, they

moat — Thu, 24 May 2018 13:31:10 +0000

In reply to Who are these others? The

If they weren't cowards, they wouldn't need the special treatment. They also don't want to cross over because that means leaving behind the privileges they gained through Trump. Maybe nobody will cross over.
But if the bridge is closed, they will shrug their shoulders and say they no longer have to explain themselves.
The situation makes many journalists look like negotiators with hostage takers.

Yes for the media. Except

artappraiser — Thu, 24 May 2018 04:41:37 +0000

In reply to Marshall on "Norms"

Yes for the media. Except that I think that a lot of Trump voters who are still with him believe that most politicians profit from their work just like business moguls do. And They bought that a guy who supposedly knew how to play in "the swamp" might be the last best hope for fighting the supposed swamp. Because they think nothing else has worked. So to them, these are norms, they think this kind of thing with corruption and lobbyists et. al. has gone on a long time and nobody fixed it. So to them, it's norms, business as usual for most politicians, and Trump is there because you don't bring a knife to a gun fight. It's not just very low info voters that think like this, there are people who have been around a long time to feed this belief that "they" are all crooked, someone like say, Lou Dobbs. And maybe the only time this type reads a NYTimes article is when a friend sends them something on some crooked congressional lobbying deal, so bias is continually confirmed that there are no honest politicians available, or ones too inept and naive to get more than a knife to fight with.

Cherry picking for bias confirmation has always been a problem and it is just rapidly increasing by leaps and bounds. I see that as more of a problem. It's almost like there are two major groups of voters: those who believe there's a swamp of crooked pols running this country, and those who believe in the political parties general good faith with crooks here and there.

I think this definitely goes across the spectrum, for the people sending Freedom Caucus members to Congress as well as those from the other side sending Liz Warren types, they think the norm is a crooked system.

Of course I do not buy it. But am sympathetic because I know well how the ghosts of Tammany Hall still run rampant in Albany and NYC government and how the very same Trump used that for decades previous. Not to mention: he also has long experience pre-political races playing the pop culture p.r. machine, not just "The Apprentice" but news tabloids and talk radio.