Allah:
Makes sense. If I was running a news network and there was a guy out there who’d just singlehandedly turned my debate into a political Super Bowl, I’d want to blow him up right quick.
Got a goose that lays golden eggs? C’mon, let’s kill it:
“I don’t know if it was the RNC, or Fox, or whoever, but it certainly appeared to look like an organized attack,” [Trump special counsel Michael] Cohen said. “Obviously, somebody, you know, doesn’t want him to continue to rise in the polls. They need to figure out how to stop this movement.”
Trump is currently the front-runner in Republican primary polls. During the debate, he faced tough questions from Fox News moderators on his past comments about women, his business record, and his controversial positions on immigration. In the hour after the debate, Fox News featured Luntz’s focus group, as well as commentary from hosts and guests who described Trump’s performance as a “collapse.” Cohen described this as an “insidious” attempt to spread the perception Trump lost the debate.
“They attempted to create a negative narrative of Mr. Trump both during and after the debate but failed,” Cohen said. “Their actions are insidious and not in line with viewers or the American people as Mr. Trump won, according to three independent polls.”
Among those who agree with Cohen about the tenor of questioning is … Trump nemesis Lindsey Graham? Huh?
“This was more of an inquisition than it was a debate,” Graham said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Friday morning. “It was a missed opportunity to talk about things that really mattered.”
Graham charged that debate moderators Bret Baier, Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly were particularly unfair in their questioning of Trump, the outspoken billionaire who is leading many GOP polls.
“At the end of the day, ask the man a question that explains his position and his solutions rather than a ten-minute question that describes him as the biggest bastard on the planet,” Graham quipped.
The “Fox is out to get Trump” theory is silly on the merits but savvy as a narrative for Trump fans. Even if you think Fox News is RINO Central, on a mission from God and Reince Priebus to nuke Trump so that he doesn’t threaten the establishment’s hold on the GOP nomination, there’s no reason for Fox to come after him now, when we’re still many months away from a meaningful vote. On the contrary, Team Jeb considers Trump’s presence in the race a godsend; if Fox is quietly on the Bush bandwagon, they should want Trump to hang around for awhile and keep his boot on Rubio’s and Walker’s throats. If they’re determined to take him out eventually, there’ll be plenty of time to do that this fall. In the meantime they can prop the guy up, give him as much exposure as he wants, and milk him for every drop of ratings they can get. I’ll be shocked, in fact, if Megyn Kelly doesn’t publicly challenge him on tonight’s “Kelly File” to come on her show and take questions for the full hour. But like I say, it’s savvy to accuse Fox of being out to get him: The jet fuel in the rocket of Trumpmania is that the GOP powers that be can’t handle the hard truths he’s been telling (like how effective single-payer health care is). All Cohen’s doing here is moving Fox into the category of “GOP powers that be.” Makes perfect sense, even if it’s a novel — and potentially fascinating — thing for the Republican frontrunner for president to engage in open warfare with the right’s most trusted news network. Now we get to watch and see which side big-name conservative pols and media stars take in that war. Rush Limbaugh, staying on the right side of righty populism, has apparently already chosen his side. Glenn Beck, an ex-Foxie, seems to be on the other. Hannity, a talk-radio and Fox News star, may be caught in the middle.
For what it’s worth, there’s an obvious reason why Kelly was especially hard on Trump and it has nothing to do with Fox being in the tank for the RNC. She’s known for being a rare mega-star at Fox who’s not obviously and reliably conservative, and she knew she’d have an audience of mostly non-regular viewers last night who’d be curious to see if she lived up to that hype. If she softballed him, she’d never hear the end of it from critics who’d pronounce her a fraud and a shill who’d rather protect Fox’s golden goose than ask him a tough question.
Questions for Trump:
Every one of those questions could have been used by Trump to explain his positions and set forth his solutions.
But that is not what Trump chose to do.
Not once.
He called people names (Lenders are total killers. These are not the nice, sweet little people that you think, OK?)
He obfuscated (Hillary came to my wedding.)
He slid the goalposts (Border Patrol told me.)
As to him not committing to endorsing any eventual Republican candidate, I wish he had turned that back on the group and asked them all if they would endorse HIM (or any of the others) if they don’t get the nod.
As to when he became a Republican, I would have loved an answer.
RUBBISH!
It is neither “silly” nor “savvy” to describe the verbal attacks as such.
(and NO, I won’t call you a RINO)…perhaps a gullible troll, though…)
NO QUESTIONS OF SUBSTANCE/POLICY were asked of Trump; they were ALL PERSONAL ATTACKS.
Oh, yes: and nothing but SOFTBALLS TO BUSH.
BUT: “nevermind!” according to this “flopping cowpie” genius.
I’m not the greatest fan of Trump.
I prefer Cruz.
BUT: Trump FORCES the Right (especially the Establishment GOP…AKA ‘RINOs’) to WAKE UP and see the most existential issues we face.
But puh-lease!…go ahead and keep on blabbering about the “business as usual” cr*pola just like the Democrats…err…Socialists…want you too.
You may not be a RINO, but you ARE – as Vladimir Lenin coined the term – a USEFUL IDIOT.
@Nanny G: Do you continue to ignore these “questions” as PERSONAL ATTACKS…and IGNORE the direct “policy” questions posed to a handful of other candidates?!?
LOOK AT THE QUOTES YOU YOURSELF WROTE!
They are ATTACKS, not issues.
It’s refreshing to have a candidate HIT BACK rather than offer smooth platitudes in response.
@Kauf Buch:
I never saw you here before.
But, as to your point, yes, most of these questions set a background before the question, based on Trump’s own actions.
IF he had chosen to do so, he could have answered these questions based on his own solutions through his book (“Time to Get Tough.”)
He had answers in that book and reading it sounded just like his own voice, so I expect those were his own ideas.
But instead he allowed little nobodies to push his buttons.
Now, should we put him in charge of dealing with Putin? with the Mullahs? with China? with North Korea?
I think he showed he has not got the temperament to be a leader on the world stage.
Kelly handled Trump in the same fashion as John King did to Newt…how soon we forget. Was she auditioning for a CNN slot?
“Gingrich delivers show-stopper at beginning of South Carolina debate”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/…