The press says that Trump is stoking anger, after his own columnists do the same.
The press says that Trump is stoking anger, after his own columnists do the same.
.The big papers are full of news about President Trump fueling the anger to the right.
That was the main theme of yesterday morning, a day after his own opinion pages were stoking the wrath of the left by the confirmation of Kavanaugh.
Stories about the president's strategy are on target, but the general lack of focus on liberals who employ similar tactics is surprising. After all, the argument that the left should get angry and channel anger over the current judge, Kavanaugh is right at the end of section A.
(All this was temporarily overshadowed by the resignation of Nikki Haley, who surprised the media, without leaks ?, and generated suspicion about why surprise the White House with an announcement a month before the partial examinations).
That both sides are deliberately injecting fury into the midterms, underscores that we are in the age of grassroots politics.
Let's start with Trump. After the crude and brutal process of getting Brett Kavanaugh confirmed, he may have chosen to send a conciliatory message. After all, he won. Instead, while he was swearing in the White House to the judge, who had already taken an oath, the president apologized to him and his family and then increased the rhetoric.
Trump called accusations of sexual assault a long time ago that paralyzed the country as "a hoax created by the Democrats." Then he went even further and said: "Everything was done, it was manufactured and it is a disgrace."
Then, after respectfully speaking about the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford, that is, until he mocked her for not remembering the details of 36 years ago, the president is flat and says that she invented it. Maybe he was also referring to Deborah Ramírez and Julie Swetnick, but it was Ford who was questioned in the Senate.
That was not calculated exactly to mitigate the feelings of most Americans, according to polls, who believe in the Ford account.
Like the New York Times Put it: "Instead of resorting to defense amid outrage, especially among women, Trump goes on the offensive, trying to turn the furor into an asset rather than a liability." With the loudest megaphone in the world, It is not about the treatment of women in the #MeToo era, but the treatment of men who deserve due process. "
It's a gamble, says the Times, but Trumpian's calculation "is that conservative voters who for most of the year have been lethargic about the congressional elections can now be motivated by anger over the Democratic attacks against the judge. Kavanaugh: Liberal voters in this view, they were already encouraged by their opposition to Mr. Trump and are likely to vote even before Judge Kavanaugh is charged with sexual assault and exposes himself during drunken school games, as well that the Democrats have less to gain at this time. "
Nobody really knows how this will develop. It may be true that Democrats who believed that Ford was already campaigning to vote in November. But with Kavanaugh in the high court, can Trump and his group really sustain the level of outrage?
The Washington Post Another trend stands out, saying that "Republicans have labeled the Trump resistance movement as 'an angry mafia', a term used by many of them to describe an amalgam of faceless forces that, they say, threaten the order of the country and, They wait, they energize their voters. "While Trump and the Republican Party control everything in Washington," in an effort to change the midterm elections of a referendum on an unpopular president, they are defending themselves on the barricades. "
Everyone has the right to protest, of course, and the rhetoric of the "mafia" is quite overheated. But the way in which some protesters acted, shouting to interrupt the hearings, chasing the senators through the corridors and elevators, chasing Republicans from the restaurants, has hurt their cause. No wonder Trump is making this relatively small group of people a big target. If it is true, as another story in the Times says, that "Trump seems more interested in inflaming rather than reducing tensions over his election to the Supreme Court," what about the liberal side?
It was Charles Blow who warned in his Times column, "Liberals, this is the war," saying that those on the left should fight like that.
It was David Leonhardt, whose Times column was titled "Enojarse y participar", who told readers that "if he's not angry yet, he should be."
It was E.J. Dionne, who said in her Post column that Republicans had just completed a "judicial coup", and called for a FDR-style court packing plan.
But I do not see much news about liberal anger, maybe because for some publishers it seems justified after the ugly Kavanaugh process.
The truth is, for better or for worse, that both parties are playing the letter of wrath, and the coverage should reflect that.
SOURCE LINK ERESVIRAL.COM https://www.beviral.online
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario