In order to blow obscuring smoke around her many gaffs, her many scandals and her many health issues; Hellary Clinton, with the reliable help of her media pals, has tried smearing Trump at least three major times during and after the Democrat convention ... and there is a calculated pattern to these stunts ... a sympathetic figure has been wronged by Trump and therefore a certain voting block should abandon this evil evil man at the polls:
First it was the poor "gold star mother" that Trump dissed ... represented by the wife of Khizr Khan ... see: Khan Artist.
Next it was that poor architect (and other contractors) that Trump has stiffed ... see: Bag Job.
And the latest ploy was a former Miss Universe, Alicia Machado, a poor victim of Trump's fat shaming ... see: Miss Piggy.
The thing that I find curious about these Clinton brickbats is that their effects are diminishing both in terms of initial impact and also in duration. They are obviously carefully planned and staged events ... with follow-up stories and events pre-programmed ... and talking points distributed. However, since the hits that Trump takes in the polls from these stunts are getting smaller and less persistent, they are becoming less effective ... that is ... Clinton's campaign hench-persons are clearly reaping diminishing returns.
And why are the returns on these attacks diminishing? Perhaps, just perhaps it is because of Trump's rapid responses ... his 3 AM tweets, his often candid admissions of partial responsibility ... but with clarifying explanations. If this is the reason Trump is so resilient through these political smears, then what should the Clinton campaign do? Why attack Trump for his 3 AM tweets of course ... like they have taken to doing recently. This, to me, is a good indication that he should continue doing what he has been doing ... and ignore even those on his own side who are echoing these Clinton media gripes.
The Clinton juggernaut might even go too far with these obvious smears and move into the territory of negative returns. Wouldn't that be special?
14 comments:
Your seeing a mirage. Hillary could just start planning her cabinet and initiatives while The Donald tweets and blathers his way into irrelevance.
No Fortune 100 CEO supports Trump. Romney and all the Bushes do not support him. And they are business people.
Who are “the smartest people… the sharpest people… the most amazing people.”? GOP illuminati in his camp are Cheney, Rick Perry, Cruz, Boehner, Bolton, Jindal, Santorum, McCain, Ayotte. His biggest fans include Guiliani, Christie, Palin, Dennis Rodman, Duck Dynasty, Pete Rose, and Ted Nugent. The only foreign leaders that express support are Mugabe, Kim Yong Un, and Putin.
Karl Rove is (I believe still) undecided.
What better measure of him being anti-establishment? If you already gave money to Hellary ... and expect a return on this investment, why would you endorse Trump? Just sayin'.
As you probably already know, I am not a follower of the crowd ...
Antidisestablishmentarianistically, the establishment needs focus, tuning, and a fresh reread of the Constition but the state of the union does not need a complete teardown.. or a declaration of bankruptcy.
Somehow it was OK for many years for the left to be the nihilists ... but now that the right is out to remake things, they are dangerous?
When were the left nihilistic? Actually the GOP, having firmly and proudly set as the party of "No!" for the last 8 years, is remarkable for having a candidate who is tapping that reboot spigot... considering that so few Republicans support him. How can it be that these same Republicans will endorse everything that Trump wants to do? Or is AltRight and Trump actually a thitd party?
I forgot about how much the hippies railed against the unprovoked unilateral invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq that was praised for its shock and awe. Or the "Mission Accomplished" banner placed behind W when he came in to a carrier in a fighter jet. Or flying everyone named binLaden out of the country on Sept 12. Or kissing the Saudi king on the lips.
Are you referencing HW or Reagan administrations? Or Reagan, Ford, and Nixon? Why did everyone think Nixon was such a bad guy? Because he recorded himself being a bad guy?
The right is not dangerous. They just want to unmake things more than remake things. D=forward R=back
"Never trust anyone over 30," Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Weather Underground, Obamacare, etc.
I am not sure that Trump is even "right" ... since both D and R are moving sideways into a new world order.
Did you not read the veto comments on that right to sue a foreign sovereign nation? Even the boneheads that were overriding the veto had buyer's remorse the next day. From soldiers raping women in japan to families blown away by drone attacks as collateral damage, the US is way overexposed. If we sue and judge Saudis in US courts, can [insert country here] sue and judge Americans in their judicial system?
Are we back to trying to equate a bow of respect with holding hands and kissing?
I'm not sure about kissing, but holding hands seems to be between equals. Bowing is servile and didn't we fight a revolution not to bow to kings?
My senses tell me that a great many Americans are sick of being led by the nose into globalism. Yes, the elites seem to benefit at the expense of the lower and middle classes ... and so are distressed. If this popular revolt does not succeed this election, it most likely will in the next ...
Post a Comment