2 Comments

Mike, I appreciate your comment. The challenge for the media, of course, is that when one deals with a character as reprehensible as Trump, playing it straight, as you put it, means a lot of negative reporting. In that regard, the dilemma is a bit more subtle than you suggest: the bad news about their golden boy will inevitably turn Trumpers off and those are just the folks the press needs to reach. As for Harris, we simply disagree; whatever her limitations -- and I'd put them in a charisma category rather than an intellectual one -- she'd almost certainly have been a better choice than the buffoon. The execrable Cabinet picks, I suggest, are just the beginning of chaos, incompetence and divisiveness. Nonetheless, I welcome the discussion and am flattered that you weighed in.

Expand full comment

I have no problem with the press reporting honestly on Trump and his Cabinet picks, some of whom are indeed execrable. But the press has very little credibility left to sway clear-eyed observers (let alone Trump fans) for two reasons: (1) Much of the reporting on Trump has been flat-out dishonest (how many years did we spend on Russiagate, which no one in the press will even mention after Mueller blew it up in them?), and (2) There was scarcely any honesty in reporting on Biden’s infirmity, Harris’s inability to think her way out of a wet paper bag, “mostly peaceful” protests, the deep flaws of Bidenomics, the cultural damage of Buden’s Title IX rules, or (let’s face it) much of anything that might undermine the Democrats.

You can be a cheerleader for one side, or you can play it straight and muster some credibility on both sides. The mainstream press made its choice, but is baffled by the (utterly predictable) results.

Expand full comment