Promoting Trump

[kaz]

The Republican party is keeping Trump at the top.

As far as him being "in the news"? Thankfully my tv has been Trump free since he's left office. I'm wondering what's gonna happen after this weekend though. He's supposed to speak at CPAC.

Democrats blame Trump for everything you screw up, you're such a moron

 

[Weatherman2020]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

They can’t talk about Biden. And their TDS has them locked into foaming at the mouth about Trump.

 

[Pogo]

The premise is absurd in that it requires a world where "the media", whatever that might mean, all colluded in some strategy meeting in a conference room in Dubuque and came up with (and probably voted on) a plan to "keep Rump in the news".

That's not the premise

Isn't it? Here's what you posted, the part you cut out so it wouldn't show:

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

Uh-huh - and notice what I didn't post. I didn't post that they "colluded in some strategy meeting in a conference room in Dubuque". That was purely your fabrication.

Thank you, I take full credit. That's me showing you why your premise is, as I said at the beginning, ABSURD. Of course the idea of "media" actually strategy-meeting at a kaffeeklatch in Dubuque is absurd, but that's what would be necessary to prop up the absurd premise. Follow me now?

Actually I neither posted nor implied anything about a "state-run media".

Seemed implied to me. You blamed the "commercially-driven media". I assumed you had a better alternative in mind. I guess you don't.

I guess I do. Information sources that are NOT driven by either how many ads it can sell, or being a tool of the State, BOTH of which dynamics pollute the content thereof.

Ever hear the expression "if it bleeds it leads"? There's only one reason to follow that directive, and that is "how much profit can we make through abusing the idea of "news", When that paradigm is common to competing operations, they're all going to follow it, slavishly.

Bottom line, your claim that "the media" is somehow colluding is provably false, and it's equally provable whether Dubuque is involved or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

Trump gained over 12 million more supporters than when he originally ran for office. There is only so much fawning they can do to Biden. They have to talk about something. So what are they going to report about slow Joe? That gasoline went up 50 cents a gallon thanks to his actions, that our southern border is once again a mess after removing Trump's successful policies, how he wrote 80 EO's in his first three weeks of office, the most of any President in that period of time?

What people fail to understand is Trump is more than a man, Trump is a movement. Even if he died tomorrow, the movement will continue.

 

[dblack]

Uh-huh - and notice what I didn't post. I didn't post that they "colluded in some strategy meeting in a conference room in Dubuque". That was purely your fabrication.

Thank you, I take full credit. That's me showing you why your premise is, as I said at the beginning, ABSURD. Of course the idea of "media" actually strategy-meeting at a kaffeeklatch in Dubuque is absurd, but that's what would be necessary to prop up the absurd premise. Follow me now?

Yes, I follow you. You're building a strawman and peeing on it. Have fun with that.

Actually I neither posted nor implied anything about a "state-run media".

Seemed implied to me. You blamed the "commercially-driven media". I assumed you had a better alternative in mind. I guess you don't.

I guess I do.

I thought so.

Information sources that are NOT driven by either how many ads it can sell, or being a tool of the State, BOTH of which dynamics pollute the content thereof.

Go on ... how do you see that happening without getting the state involved?

Ever hear the expression "if it bleeds it leads"? There's only one reason to follow that directive, and that is "how much profit can we make through abusing the idea of "news", When that paradigm is common to competing operations, they're all going to follow it, slavishly.

Blood is only profitable if consumers want blood. This has nothing to with your "profit" bugbear, and everything to do with idiot voters.

Bottom line, your claim that "the media" is somehow colluding is provably false, and it's equally provable whether Dubuque is involved or not.

Bottomer line, I didn't say they were colluding. You made that up. I'm sorry you got confused, but that's not what I said.

 

[dblack]

What people fail to understand is Trump is more than a man, Trump is a movement. Even if he died tomorrow, the movement will continue.

Yes - you morons are well on your way to creating a new religion.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What people fail to understand is Trump is more than a man, Trump is a movement. Even if he died tomorrow, the movement will continue.

Yes - you morons are well on your way to creating a new religion.

No, what happened was we finally got a leader who actually listened to us and carried out our will, at least with the things he could control. You think Trump got us to think a certain way. Sorry, but we've been thinking this way for many, many years, but the GOP never gave us anybody that would do our bidding. So of course we support him, and the media knows that as well.

 

[dblack]

What people fail to understand is Trump is more than a man, Trump is a movement. Even if he died tomorrow, the movement will continue.

Yes - you morons are well on your way to creating a new religion.

No, what happened was we finally got a leader who actually listened to us and carried out our will ...

Yes. That's why democracy is such a dangerous idea.

 

[B. Kidd]

Trump = Promises made, promises kept!
No matter who says what, Trump is the leader of the Republican Party!
THERE IS NO DEBATE!!

There is indeed no debate but Rump ain't the "leader" of anything. He's a two-time loser, or if you like, a four-time loser, having lost the Senate, the House and the vote of the electorate twice. Not exactly the résumé of a "leader", is it.

You don't become a "leader" of a political party simply by having lost the Presidency. Was Jimmy Carter the "leader" of the Democrats in 1981? Was H.W. Bush the "leader" of the Repubs in 1993? For that matter was Shrubya the "leader" in 2009?

Trump IS the Gold Standard in 'Promises Made - Promises Kept'. Didn't you see his statue at CPAC?

 

[dblack]

Trump = Promises made, promises kept!
No matter who says what, Trump is the leader of the Republican Party!
THERE IS NO DEBATE!!

There is indeed no debate but Rump ain't the "leader" of anything. He's a two-time loser, or if you like, a four-time loser, having lost the Senate, the House and the vote of the electorate twice. Not exactly the résumé of a "leader", is it.

You don't become a "leader" of a political party simply by having lost the Presidency. Was Jimmy Carter the "leader" of the Democrats in 1981? Was H.W. Bush the "leader" of the Repubs in 1993? For that matter was Shrubya the "leader" in 2009?

Trump IS the Gold Standard in 'Promises Made - Promises Kept'. Didn't you see his statue at CPAC?

Yeah, that was pretty funny.

 

[Pogo]

Uh-huh - and notice what I didn't post. I didn't post that they "colluded in some strategy meeting in a conference room in Dubuque". That was purely your fabrication.

Thank you, I take full credit. That's me showing you why your premise is, as I said at the beginning, ABSURD. Of course the idea of "media" actually strategy-meeting at a kaffeeklatch in Dubuque is absurd, but that's what would be necessary to prop up the absurd premise. Follow me now?

Yes, I follow you. You're building a strawman and peeing on it. Have fun with that.

Actually I neither posted nor implied anything about a "state-run media".

Seemed implied to me. You blamed the "commercially-driven media". I assumed you had a better alternative in mind. I guess you don't.

I guess I do.

I thought so.

Information sources that are NOT driven by either how many ads it can sell, or being a tool of the State, BOTH of which dynamics pollute the content thereof.

Go on ... how do you see that happening without getting the state involved?

See below, for one example of the past. See also public-funded media ---- any system where the underlying raison d'être is NOT "how much money can we make exploiting the masses". One where leading with some apartment fire in a neighborhood you never heard of --- BUT WAIT, WE HAVE VIDEO, NOW HOW MUCH WOULD YOU PAY --- doesn't benefit your bottom line.

Ever hear the expression "if it bleeds it leads"? There's only one reason to follow that directive, and that is "how much profit can we make through abusing the idea of "news", When that paradigm is common to competing operations, they're all going to follow it, slavishly.

Blood is only profitable if consumers want blood. This has nothing to with your "profit" bugbear, and everything to do with idiot voters.

Idiot voters or non-votes alike, who are drawn to hyperbolic dramas without seeing through why they're being fed hyperbolic dramas. "Voting" or "not voting" has zero to do with that. We're talking a school of information channels, which all have in common that they're driven by profit, exploiting exactly that ignorance. It has nothing to do with "what consumers want". Little of anything ever sold has anything to do with "what consumers want". They ain't out there to serve "what consumers want', they're there to exploit what kind of methods they can use to separate said consumers from their money.

And again to return to original point, covering a clownshoes like Rump, exactly because he plays to it, is a guarantee of success in that fly-drawing stampede to Profit.

In other words, were that underlying profit motive not to exist, the incentive to cover fly-drawing shit would not be there either. The latter follows the former. So the only collusion operational here is that common profit motive, which is what drives "if it bleeds it leads", regardless who is leading it.

CNN for example found this out the hard way 25 years ago. Running a fairly unique model of 24-hour TV news (which had already been successfully developed in radio), it initially had no competition in that "business" and could decide objectively what to cover. Then came Rupert Murdoch, from the sleazy tabloid industry, with opinionated shills pounding on tables while running suggestive chyrons, in other words appealing to emotion and the lowest common denominator of Fear And Loathing and Drama, News-as-soap-opera. Is that ethical? Hell no. Does it draw flies and sell commercial time? Hell yes. Now you have two (and more) entities competing for audience, and you don;t win that contest by being objective, because that is a money contest and not a journalism contest.

Are you old enough to remember the old Huntley-Brinkley era network news reports?

Those were ALWAYS run at a financial loss to the networks. News ain't cheap. You want real news, you have to hire people to be everywhere. Those broadcasts were subsidized by the Beverly Hillbillies and other sitcom diarrhea. That's what paid for them. Hence, they didn't need to go chasing down the lowest common denominator of Fear and Loathing since it wasn't going to affect their budget. They weren't there to make a profit, and didn't expect to.

Why did they do it then, if it wasn't profit-generating?

So that those individual stations, come license-renewal time, could point to "look how much news and public affairs programming we did" to confirm that they were operating in the public interest. That's a requirement of having a broadcast license.

Cable "networks" of course, are not broadcast stations and don't need such a license. They're not networks either but we sometimes call them such because on cable a single channel is ubiquitous.

Bottom line, your claim that "the media" is somehow colluding is provably false, and it's equally provable whether Dubuque is involved or not.

I didn't say they were colluding. You made that up. I'm sorry you got confused, but that's not what I said.

They HAVE TO collude if you're suggesting multiple, again, COMPETING players are all somehow magically taking the same approach. I asked you before how that was going to happen WITHOUT collusion. You have no answer. I do, and I gave it. Three times. You'd have us believe that "the media" are not colluding, they just all "happen to" strike on the same operational code because what, the Tooth Fairy came down and left them a nickel under their pillow?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes. That's why democracy is such a dangerous idea.

We don't have a democracy, we have a Republic. It's dangerous that people vote for representatives that will do what they desire?

 

[dblack]

Yes. That's why democracy is such a dangerous idea.

We don't have a democracy, we have a Republic. It's dangerous that people vote for representatives that will do what they desire?

If what they desire is dangerous, absolutely.

 

[Orangecat]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

They certainly don't want to report on the biden/harris shit show.

 

[dblack]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

They certainly don't want to report on the biden/harris shit show.

I really think it has more to do with Trump just being irresistable click bait. It's the same reason they gave him so much free press leading up to 2016. Trump's crazy train makes for killer headlines.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If it's not tightly constrained by constitutional limits, yes, it's very dangerous. The role of government should be constrained to specific powers and not become a general purpose tool to force anyone's will on anyone else.

What are you talking about? We elected President Trump like any other president, according to the Constitution. What will did he force on anybody?

 

[Utilitarian]

To tell the truth, just how "interesting" is an old codger with dementia? This has to be the most boring administration I've ever seen.

What a bunch of sub-par low-energy know-nothings with a complete lack of any substantial accomplishments.

Yawn.

I've always hoped for "boring" government. Especially one with few accomplishments. Win/win.

I like boring government too, but I don't think we've had that since Calvin Coolidge.

The case could be made for Gerald Ford here. Not to mention Hoover.

I suppose you could call Ford boring. He wasn't in office for very long.

Hoover's time wasn't boring at all, although it was mostly out of his hands. He was probably the most unlucky president.

 

[surada]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

You could be right!
But Trump is the leader of their "opposition" i can't help but think when someone new emerges the low grade "media" will attack them just as much.
There is too much hate.

The twisted psychology of victimhood....

1) In order to be a victim, you need an oppressor.

2) In order to remain a victim, you need to keep your oppressor close at hand.

3) At that point, you become a twisted version of a demon worshiper.

Trump won't be allowed to go away, because the moonbats need to be besieged by an "oppressor".

Of course, Trump will help them by not going away.

Trump has been whining that he's a victim since 1980.

 

[Pogo]

Anyone besides me think that the liberal media is deliberately working to keep Trump "in the news" and at the top of the Republican party?

You could be right!
But Trump is the leader of their "opposition" i can't help but think when someone new emerges the low grade "media" will attack them just as much.
There is too much hate.

The twisted psychology of victimhood....

1) In order to be a victim, you need an oppressor.

2) In order to remain a victim, you need to keep your oppressor close at hand.

3) At that point, you become a twisted version of a demon worshiper.

Trump won't be allowed to go away, because the moonbats need to be besieged by an "oppressor".

Of course, Trump will help them by not going away.

Trump has been whining that he's a victim since 1980.

He is a victim. Look who's in charge of his mouth. Then the fake nooz media insist on quoting it verbatim
Not to mention that bizzaro skin tone.