General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs Trump made of Teflon, or does the media keep wiping his dirty ass clean for him?
I read another editorial this morning about how with all his scandals, "nothing seems to stick" to Trump. Could that be because the media keeps giving him a pass? How does something "stick" to Trump when the media won't pin it on him? The reason so many "issues" stick to Hillary is that Fox keeps hammering on it day and night. If the real media kept up hammering on Trump's scandals, they would stick. So when things "don't stick to Trump", I blame the media.
Denzil_DC
(7,222 posts)There's so much about Trump and his entourage and backers that's seedy, if not illegal, it's hard to know where to start and where to try aim for as an end point (though I have a feeling that when the shit finally hits the fan, it's going to be tempestuous and very messy).
Then there's this take:
In foreign-policy circles, people sometimes talk about boiling the frog: when an enormously consequential outcome is achieved slowly, through tiny steps rather than one giant leap. North Koreas pursuit of nuclear weapons is a classic example. The regime gradually improved its nuclear and rocket technology to the point that it is now on the cusp of becoming what the last five American Presidents said they would never allow: a rogue state with the capability of reaching the U.S. mainland with nuclear missiles. No isolated development along the waydespite the countrys steady nuclear tests and missile launchesseemed, by itself, to warrant entering a military confrontation.
Boiling the frog works in politics, too. On Monday, Julia Ioffe reported, in The Atlantic, that WikiLeaks, which the American intelligence community says collaborated with the Russian government to distribute Democratic Party e-mails and try to help elect Donald Trump, regularly sent private messages from its verified Twitter account to Donald Trump, Jr., from September, 2016, until July, 2017. Last October, in the heat of the Presidential campaign, when top Trump campaign officials indignantly denied having any communication with WikiLeaks, such a disclosure would have been politically earth-shattering. But, after a year of incremental Trump-Russia revelations, the press and publics capacity to be shocked by the details of the Russia scandal may be diminishing.
According to a recent accounting by the Washington Post, the Trump campaign interacted with Russians at least thirty-one times throughout the campaign and there were at at least 19 known meetings. If the full scope of the Trump-Russia story had been known all at oncePaul Manaforts work for a pro-Putin party in Ukraine, Michael Flynn and Jared Kushners back channels to Russian officials, Carter Page and George Papadopouloss machinations, Donald Trump, Jr.,s eager embrace of a Russian lawyer with alleged dirt on Hillary Clinton, the F.B.I.s investigation, the intelligence communitys warningsit would have been akin to North Korea going nuclear overnight. The audacity of the Trump campaigns lies would have been shocking.
It helps to take a step back and remember how politically explosive it would have been, a year ago, to know that the Trump campaign was colluding with WikiLeaks. Consider the timeline we can now piece together. On September 21, 2016, the WikiLeaks Twitter account sent a direct message to Trump, Jr., who quickly notified four top Trump campaign officials (Jared Kushner, Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon, and Brad Parscale). The highest levels of the campaign knew that WikiLeaks was in touch with the candidates son and close adviser. On October 3, 2016, Trump, Jr., asked WikiLeaks, Whats behind this Wednesday leak I keep hearing about?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-gops-boil-the-frog-strategy-to-save-trump
JHB
(37,156 posts)...the short answer is that it refers to a debate-forum tactic of bringing up point after point after point, a whole laundry list, and implying that the other side does not have answers for them and has been trying to evade.
When, in fact, each one of those points has been thoroughly investigated -- some may still have debate over the fine points, but the general shape of them is clear -- but they all require too much time to get into the details in time-limited setting like a formal debate... or media time.
Named for the practices of Duane T. Gish, one of the principles of the Institute for Creation Research, a propaganda mill for creationists trying to manufacture rationales for inserting the Biblical creation story into schools as science. He died in 2013, but in the 80s and early 90s he played much the same public role as Ken Hamm does these days.
I did assume folks would know what I meant, but your explanation's helpful.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Just not in a way to get enough movement out of his colleagues. But that aspect is shifting more and more everyday.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Massive Corporations,they invested Billions of Free Advertising into this POS. It is all about their Tax Cuts to fatten Paychecks of the Investor Class. He who controls the Air Waves controls the Populace.
It's all about the Message on Facebook and Twitter.
Response to Binkie The Clown (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
DavidDvorkin
(19,468 posts)Reagan, for example. They loved him and made sure nothing stuck to him. They did the opposite with Carter.
Cary
(11,746 posts)He is going down.