WSJ on Trump: He's "bananas," but people like bananas.
“We trust our readers to make up their own minds about his statement. And we think it’s news when an ex-President who may run in 2024 wrote what he did, even if (or perhaps especially if) his claims are bananas.”
The Wall Street Journal
The Wall Street Journal says it is doing us a favor by letting Trump be Trump. After all, the public will eventually realize he a dangerous nut job.
The public isn't figuring it out, and won't. Not when the Murdoch media machine is vouching for him.
The Murdoch family owns both The Wall Street Journal and Fox News. The WSJ noted that "the progressive parsons of the press are aflutter" over their having published without comment a letter from Donald Trump that presented bullet points of supposed fraud in the Pennsylvania vote. The newspaper editorial said the falsehoods in his letter were too numerous to refute. It said there were a flood of misstatements and "it's difficult to respond to everything." They noted that this was no accident; "the asymmetry is part of the former President's strategy."
The "progressive parsons of the press" are also aflutter that Fox's Tucker Carlson is promoting an upcoming special report purporting that the "patriots" involved in storming the Capitol on January 6 are under attack by our gestapo government. As Carlson tells it, the rioters in the Capital were heroes and victims-- or alternatively, maybe the whole operation was a "false flag" operation intended to defame Trump. Carlson, too, floods the zone with misstatements and conspiracies.
The Wall Street Journal wants it both ways. It recognizes that Trump is unique in American politics in his ability to gain attention by making wild, fully contradicted statements. A big segment of Americans loves what he says and believe him. That segment is a giant market share for a media company and very possibly it is a governing majority of American voters. Trump has a salesman's talent for shameless and persistent reiteration of what the customer wants to believe. He sells the world's greatest steaks. He won the 2020 election in a massive landslide.
The Journal's editorial page quietly observed what their news pages have reported. They wrote flatly that Trump lost the election in Pennsylvania by over 80,000 votes. Trump's misstatements about the Pennsylvania election are part of his justification for overturning the 2020 election. Marketers understand what is going on here. The newspaper is selling the Trump sizzle, but putting in a throw-away disclaimer. "Your mileage may vary." "Past performance is no guarantee of future results."
The Journal's position in publicizing Trump without contradiction, or in the case of Tucker Carlson, actively promoting election conspiracies, is analogous to a widespread policy of GOP officeholders and opinion leaders. There are the people out there on front lines--Marjorie Taylor Green, Michael Flynn--in full-throated support of Trump. There is also a larger body of quiet "disclaimer" partisans. They don't believe Trump and they recognize he sounds dishonest, overwrought, "bananas" even, but they will let Trump be Trump because he gets them what they want. He brings a riled up passionate base that will cast a convenient vote for the Republican team, even if based on a false and dangerous premise. The GOP leaders hope silence or a throw-away disclaimer tag relieves them of the responsibility for allowing to continue unchecked someone who attempted to overthrow constitutional government.
The movie Annie Hall describes a complicated romantic relationship between Woody Allen and Diane Keaton. The movie ends with Woody Allen narrating these words:
I thought of that old joke, you know. The guy goes to a psychiatrist and says, "Doc, my brother's crazy. He thinks he's a chicken." and the doctor says, "well, why don't you turn him in?" and the guy says, "I would, but I need the eggs.”
Well, I guess that's pretty much now how I feel about relationships. You know, they're totally irrational and crazy and absurd and, but I guess we keep going through it because most of us need the eggs.
There is a problem with the GOP's complicated relationship with a Donald Trump. They are getting eggs, but the eggs are poisoning our democracy. Many Republican thought leaders know the eggs are poison, but they have seen what happened to Liz Cheney when she said so. Better to just eat the eggs.
[Note: To comment, or to read other people’s comments, go to https://peterwsage.blogspot.com That is the home site for this blog, where there are archives and a search function.]