From Michelle Malkin:
After 2012, when liberal journalists routinely hijacked the [Republican] party’s 20 televised debates while cashing in on ratings and advertising revenue, the RNC resolved to change narrative-surrendering business as usual.
How’s that working out? It’s the same old, same old. Last week’s debate hosted by CNN was commandeered by a Telemundo celebrity journalist Maria Celeste Arraras, known as “the Katie Couric of Spanish TV,” who soaked up nearly half the show representing “the Latino community” on issues such as Puerto Rico’s bankruptcy.
It shouldn’t have been a surprise to the RNC. She did the same during a Democratic presidential debate in 2004, when she argued with candidates about driver’s licenses for immigrants here illegally. The lone conservative token questioner, Salem radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, received a fraction of the time. The infamous “screaming lady” in the audience earned far more buzz.
Reality check: In business, as most Republican (GOP) supporters would know, that’s called an exit interview. The harsh reality is it didn’t matter to the GOP boffins whether they won or lost as long as they pleased their donor class. And all they were doing in the last decade was proving that.
From Brent Bozell:
The tone of Trump coverage is routinely negative. But it still plays into Trump’s strategy of saying outrageous things to starve the other candidates of any oxygen from the establishment press. The billionaire pledged to self-fund his campaign but has spent little. It’s being fueled almost entirely by free TV airtime.
But there’s one thing Trump doesn’t want covered, and again the networks are complying. In that overflowing tank of news hours, only amount (14 minutes, or 1.5 percent of Trump’s total) were spent talking about Trump’s past record of support for liberal positions and liberal politicians. Put that number in this perspective: Twice as much time was devoted to Trump’s negative comments about Fox News host Megyn Kelly. Almost an hour was dedicated to Trump’s proposed (temporary) ban on Muslim immigration.
Until he decided to run for the GOP nomination last year, Trump was no one’s idea of a Republican contender, in philosophy, actions or even party label.
Reality check: It’s not clear that Bozell himself gets this but… in short, the GOP had no one who could garner big time free media attention until Trump came along. The fact that anyone could have done what he did, as a strategy, makes the offence of their own nincompoopery worse.
In fact, it’s got so bad that the fact that Trump doesn’t espouse traditional Republican positions is seen as a plus. Too many such positions were freighted with donor class baggage. = We need to “be seen as more compassionate”toward illegal aliens (and, stupid rube, it’s only your just-get-by wages they’re busting, not our massive salaries. We’ll see that the Dems have you charged as a bigot if you open your trap about it. We benefit more from the Dems and the illegals than we do from you.) The American voter apparently thanks the GOP brass as they deserve.
It’s almost inconceivable, but many average Yanks, all stripes, do seem to get it: They can sell out to corrupticrat socialism for beans or work to save their country, but they can’t give in to the GOP donor class. That’s the choice they really face this election.
For Trump supporters, a reckoning is at hand, says Jonah Goldberg:
Many decent and sincere Republicans, in and out of the Republican leadership, have been operating on the assumption that Trump will fade and that the gravest threat is a third-party run by the dean of Trump University. There was a time when that concern was defensible. But once it became clear that he was favored to win the nomination outright, Republicans should have realized that a third-party run was more like a best-case scenario.
Reality check: It would have demonstrated the sheer number of people the GOP no longer represents.
Better the GOP do battle with a know-nothing bigot (and lose the presidency) than become the party of know-nothing bigots (and still lose the presidency).
The understandable decline of trust in the GOP as representative of any class of voters other than the donor class means that losing the presidency either way is the least of the GOPs worries. The big question is, what justifies its survival now?
The Democrats can survive by offering welfare, free pot, and free Asshat U — and reduce the resulting expense by appropriating property and legalizing consensual euthanasia.
The GOP should have been the party that offered a different vision. But isn’t. Migrant labor, foreign manufacture, and automation will see to it that the typical GOP voter will end up with the Dems’ program anyway.
From Goldberg again:
That’s why I embrace the Twitter hashtag #NeverTrump, initiated by conservative talk show host Erick Erickson. For too long, Trump has benefited from the assumption that the non-Trump faction of the party will be “reasonable” and support the nominee. Such thinking paves the road to power for demagogues.
Jonah, it is out of your hands now, and out of the donor class’s. It’s too late to say mistakes were made. People need a party that actually represents them, and they will go with a demagogue if necessary in the meantime.
Watch for our American friend to offer some thoughts.
See also: Trump Tuesday = What the? Wednesday