The Trumpian News Cycle

If there were a Pulitzer Prize for controlling the news cycle, without question it would go to President Trump. Either out of sheer brilliance or obscene narcissism, he has the passion and penchant for making sure that he is being talked about in the news. Constantly. Ubiquitously. Unendingly. Without fail. Day in. Day out.

His latest coup to win back his preeminence in the news (Well, not latest. There have been several more. I just can’t keep up.) was his blunt attack on the credibility of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault.

First, for the sake of clarity, let’s grant that the accusations have not been legally proven.

Second, ouch! Let’s throw discretion to the wind and just get naked as a jaybird, roll around in the mud, and then stroll into church and sit muddy and naked on the pew of the most sensitive topic on America’s radar right now, sexual assault. Nothing out of place there.

Whether you believe the allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh by Dr. Blasey Ford or not, the President’s mocking rant was as insensitive to those who have been victims of sexual assault as it was steeped in ignorance about the subject, an ignorance that so many are working so hard to eradicate. First, by talking about Dr. Blasey Ford’s lapses in memory, President Trump ignored the overwhelming amount of established data indicating that traumatized sexual assault victims can often recall some details of the assault but not other peripheral details. This phenomenon is not only common, it is largely typical pf sexual assault victims. Then, he promoted the stereotypical idea that women who bring such allegations at a later date are liars or troublemakers, ignoring the overwhelming evidence that two thirds of sexual assaults go unreported and a great deal are reported after the fact, simply because women do not want to relive the trauma and face the type of ignorant, hurtful accusations that so often accompany reporting sexual assault. In just a few sentences, President Trump became the poster child, and I mean child, for all the ignorance, sexism, insensitivity, and bullying that has made sexual assault the unreported plague that it is.

Yet, it was a move that played well to his followers in the atmosphere of a campaign-style rally. Really well. Incredibly well. Unbelievably well.

Will President Trump pay any penalty?

Well, it could backfire among moderate and independent voters, particularly women, in the upcoming midterm elections.

It was a move that made some Republicans cringe, which could erode support among Republican lawmakers.

It could give more credibility to the #MeToo movement, and possibly more energy.

However, if the past is any indication, much of the negative backlash will disappear with the next Trump-controlled news cycle. President Trump’s followers will dismiss it without any further thought. Republicans, even those that decry it, will tip-toe around it and then move on with their agenda when the coast clears. Political opponents of President Trump will soon have to move on to address his next attempt to control the news cycle.

Even if it it contributes to some Republicans losing in the mid-term elections and the Democrats gain the majority in the Senate, it won’t affect President Trump. He will say the Republican candidates who lost were too weak, that they were losers, low energy, or did not support him enough. After all, it couldn’t be his fault they lost. His followers will agree, and it appears that his loyal following may be most important thing to President Trump. When he retreats to the warm, secure atmosphere that exists in the confirmation-biased cocoon of his campaign-style rallies, President Trump, like a butterfly, emerges new and transformed, ready to move on to his next battle. And the next news cycle.

Here we go again: liberals criticizing Trump on non-issues

Ok, I am not a fan of President Trump. I did not vote for him. I think many of his polices are bad.

However, just as conservatives drooled over any excuse to criticize President Obama, many liberals are doing the same for President Trump, his family, and his advisors. They are nitpicking anything that they can seemingly find fault with, criticizing the First Family for non-issues like high-heels and attire. Stop it. It is counterproductive to honest criticism of his policies. It gives his supporters another reason to tune out that criticism, not that most would listen anyway. It also is a turnoff to undecided and swing voters, and since those are the people liberals and Democrats need to reach out to in upcoming elections, you would think they would show some restraint.

But today it happened again, and liberal news sites ran with it like a hungry fish with a synthetic lure. Eventually, the hooks set in. 

Based on Ivanka Trump's interview with the Financial Times, The Daily Beast ran this gem: If Ivanka Can’t Influence Trump, Then What Is Her Job? Only she never said it wasn't her job, as an advisor, to influence the President. In the interview she said that people have “unrealistic expectations” of how much she can influence her father.

Big difference.

The Huffington Post originally jumped on the bandwagon, but later revised their original title and content with this clarification:

Clarification: The headline has been amended to more accurately paraphrase Ivanka Trump’s remarks that her critics have “unrealistic expectations” of her influence, not that any influence on her father is “unrealistic.” Language has also been added to reflect that Trump was referring to public disagreements, not disagreements of any kind, in regard to her being “part of the team.”

Listen, I get it. Many are not happy that Ivanka Trump is an official advisor to President Trump. Boo hoo. In the light of President Trump pulling out of the Paris accords, pissing off key trading partners with his America First policy, making military threats he can't keep, and challenging immigration policies that even Republicans favor, who cares? If someone is running through the streets setting buildings on fire with a flamethrower, I don't think what his wife is wearing would be an issue with which I would be concerned.

But that is exactly what many liberals are doing in their criticism of President Trump and the First Family.

For those who care to know, this is what Ms. Trump said in her interview:

Some people have created unrealistic expectations of what they expect from me, that my presence in and of itself would carry so much weight with my father that he would abandon his core values and the agenda that the American people voted for when they elected him. It’s not going to happen. To those critics, shy of turning my father into a liberal, I’d be a failure to them.

I hear ya, Ivanka.

President Trump "discovers" bipartisanship

ABC News covered Donald Trump's meeting with moderates in an effort to a actually get something done. Something besides rescinding President Obama's executive orders and having his struck down in court. Something like actual legislation.

This is another "Who knew health care could be so hard" moment. Everybody knew.

He made observations like, "'some of the greatest legislation ever passed' was done in a bipartisan manner. . ." and that he is willing to give it a "shot."

Give it a shot? Why? Oh, he wants to pass tax reform. Which, in Republicanese, means tax cuts. Which, in simple accounting, means less revenues and higher deficits. I'm sorry, but the numbers are clear. Since 1980, every Republican President has used the Reganomics model to justify lower taxes, and as a consequence the deficit and debt has grown under them. It was reduced under President Clinton by bipartisan negotiations that raised taxes a mere 3-6%, cut welfare rolls, and reduced defense spending. It was reduced under President Obama by eventually raising taxes and reinstating much needed regulations, and could have been reduced even more if taxes had been raised earlier and the welfare reforms put in place in the 1990s had not been allowed to lapse or rescinded.

Still, Republicans always manage to blame deficits on the Democrats, and Democrats have done a poor job of setting the record straight. They have also done a poor job discrediting Reaganomics. They have failed to admit that cuts are needed in both defense spending and welfare spending. Democrats have failed to put tax increases in perspective. Their campaign rhetoric, like that of Republicans, has been geared toward their political base and not moderates and independents. You know, people interested in bipartisanship and a government that actually works.

So, the partisan divide has widened and bipartisanship cast aside Now, President Trump wants it to happen.

Be careful Democrats and voters. PresidentTrump wants something. He's not getting all warm and fuzzy bipartisany for nothing. He knows if he delivers so called middle class tax cuts he may win some voters back. However, if his tax cuts are like the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, help for the middle class will be minimal. Perhaps the fact that he started talking with Democrats is reason for some hope.

On the other hand, President Trump is no stranger to stiffing people who worked for him, so Democrats and voters beware.