Donald Trump for President Thread

[LinekersLegs]

he's popular because -frankly- people are tired of corruption. He is an outsider from the political game, that fascinates people and thats why he has been forgiven so many times. He symbolizes rebellion against the forces that are out of reach of normal people forces that are effecting in american economy and especially job situation (globalisation) . It's rather amazing how popular he is. Everybody are amazed. Without medias support to Clinton he might have had a chance.

And without the media's disproportionate coverage of him in the primaries it is unlikely he would have been able to fund his campaign enough to win the nomination.

 

[TheFinnFan]

And without the media's disproportionate coverage of him in the primaries it is unlikely he would have been able to fund his campaign enough to win the nomination.

but what kind of coverage? you are smarter than that LL

 

[dholliday]

And without the media's disproportionate coverage of him in the primaries it is unlikely he would have been able to fund his campaign enough to win the nomination.

It's not the amount of coverage he's complaining at, it's the nature of it.

 

[TheFinnFan]

and @LinekersLegs i would have hoped that american media would have given more air time to Clinton. thats the real problem. they are not airing the stuff that would seriously damage their campaign.

 

[LinekersLegs]

but what kind of coverage? you are smarter than that LL

Actually it was relatively common for his speeches to go out live, in full with no editing - unheard of for any politician to get such direct access unless they are the president.

Sure the talking heads then wouldn't be that complimentary in their comments afterward but even then it was often amused condescension "how is this lout winning" which enhanced rather than detracted from his brand rather than a substantive critique of his ideas. Print media was far more thorough but that has far less of the audience it once did.

Edit you seem to be under the belief that many of Clintons scandals haven't been covered. Perhaps that is true of the more recent Wikieleaks but part of that is Trump's actions taking all the oxygen out and the usual factor that sex sells better than dry process stories. The initial server detail was covered extensively, part of the reason why Clinton's favourability numbers dropped like a stone from her time as Sec State.

 

[dholliday]

and @LinekersLegs i would have hoped that american media would have given more air time to Clinton. thats the real problem. they are not airing the stuff that would seriously damage their campaign.

it'll be similar with Corbyn vs May: Corbyn will have much more coverage, but the nature of it will be mostly vindictive. May will win because of this.

 

[TheFinnFan]

it'll be similar with Corbyn vs May: Corbyn will have much more coverage, but the nature of it will be mostly vindictive. May will win because of this.

not familiar with politics in your country mate

 

[orly]

And without the media's disproportionate coverage of him in the primaries it is unlikely he would have been able to fund his campaign enough to win the nomination.

Have to say I'm massively anti-Trump but you're (and the author of the tweet) drawing totally wrong conclusions from that data. It runs until end of February, during which time Trump was still vying for the nomination in a rampantly toxic selection process. Clinton's was virtually a procession; so where do we expect the vast majority of the media coverage to be centred? Plus he was from outside of the political norms at that time, a hilarious novelty candidate as it were - as he should have remained.

Judging by the graphic style I suppose that's been used in the Economist - hardly going to get balanced Trump media therein.

Let's keep it honest

 

[atrottel]

not familiar with politics in your country mate

As a matter of interest, why are you so familiar (apparently) with politics in the USA and so one-sidedly partisan about those politics?

 

[tsubaki]

Actually it was relatively common for his speeches to go out live, in full with no editing - unheard of for any politician to get such direct access unless they are the president.

Sure the talking heads then wouldn't be that complimentary in their comments afterward but even then it was often amused condescension "how is this lout winning" which enhanced rather than detracted from his brand rather than a substantive critique of his ideas. Print media was far more thorough but that has far less of the audience it once did.

It isn't unheard of; ever since news became a business they prefer stories that both write themselves and are memorable. Put a Trump speech on live and it means your hacks don't have to go out and do anything - they can let him speak and then spend the next few hours / days going on about it, with viewer numbers and website hits all going through the roof. You can see the same phenomena in the way they cover terror attacks.

 

[atrottel]

Judging by the graphic style I suppose that's been used in the Economist - hardly going to get balanced Trump media therein.

Now I have seen it all - the Economist is being alleged to be part of a liberal conspiracy.

 

[orly]

Now I have seen it all - the Economist is being alleged to be part of a liberal conspiracy.

Where on earth have you got that from?!?!

This thread is becoming a bit of a no-go zone for sensible debate

 

[dholliday]

not familiar with politics in your country mate

My country's Merkeland. We're wondering if Petry can bring the AfD centrist enough to make her as much a target as Trump/Corbyn are in their respective countries.

 

[BlueLlama]

Regardless of your previous gripes with our moderation, this is well out of order.

Are you some sort of Adonis? I'm not.

End of.

I think your being harsh on yourself

 

[longers]

As a matter of interest, why are you so familiar (apparently) with politics in the USA and so one-sidedly partisan about those politics?

My guess based on his posting history is he doesn't like Muslims and thinks Trump will crack down on them better. Finnish people in my experience are massively anti immigration, their population is about as white and undiverse as it gets and thus they are very easy targets for fearmongering. Fear of the Unknown etc