August 7, 2015

Was it a FOX hit job on Trump?

Last night after the debate, my initial impression was that Fox did not want Donald Trump coming out of the debate still standing.  This morning in response to a comment from Proof Positive, I wrote the following:
...Trump I think blew an opportunity. Fox clearly wanted him to fail, starting the debate with the 'general' question about third party run. If Trump didn't see it coming, it speaks to his preparedness. He could have put his hand up and argued that while he wholeheartedly supports conservative principles, it's a tactical move not to reveal that answer just yet because he feels that the RNC has to prove that they'll treat him fairly.

I'm not saying that's the truth or that the RNC isn't being fair, just that it would have been a more palatable answer for Republican voters and for conservatives.

As for the Fox broadcast, I think more practice would help them stylistically. It really seemed like a sub-par performance. Not horrible, but definitely nothing to brag about. Post debate the Frank Luntz panel seemed like a Trump hit job too, since those opinions were starkly anti-Trump and as you point out, the (faulty methodology) Drudge poll presents a diametrically opposed result.

My fear is not that Trump doesn't get a fair shake but rather that those who control the microphone on the right (i.e. Fox) are going to winnow down the field until their preferred establishment candidate wins out. This morning they highlighted a Ben Carson clip to show he did well in the debate, and it wasn't his closing remarks, which were clearly his best.

I smell a guided predestined outcome. I hope that feeling goes away because I don't like the idea of being a tinfoil hat, conspiracy theorist. - See more at:
It turns out, I'm not alone on this. Reaganite Republican:
Sadly, Fox proved themselves to be absolute GOP establishment hacks they way the were so obviously out to kill Trump last night... the loaded, purpose-engineered questions aimed at him took up a lot of time -were intellectually dishonest- and showed they're trying to hand a GOP 'lead' back to Jeb that apparently Fox News' attack-dogs Kelly, Baier, and Wallace were tasked with retrieving for it's proper owner.
While William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection may have softened his stance, he felt it:
At times I felt the aggressive attacks on candidates were inappropriate, and much of the show was the moderators using oppo-research type facts to get a reaction. Trump was the focus of most of this. That’s not the role of moderators. BUT, when viewed in its entirety over the two hours, I think the moderators achieved a good result.
While that was only a cursory check of opinion, I'm quite certain others noticed it too. As I stated, this is not about fairness to Trump. This is about fairness in general. Don't tilt the playing field in favor of Jeb Bush. If he really is the best candidate, he will win the nomination. If he needs your help to win, Fox I'm talking to you, then he's not strong enough to take on Hillary, the DNC and the mainstream media. Keep your powder dry until the eventual candidate goes against Hillary (or Bernie). Let the Republican voters decide for themselves you paternalistic $@&#%s! Or do you want to be remembered for hosting debates just like this woman on the left?


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This