![]() Poor people would vote Dem, because they always had. Current Democratic minority Senate leader Chuck Schumer was clear during the election that this didn’t matter. There was but a handful of journalists in progressive press pointing out Clinton’s absolute failure to address the 51% of voters who survive on less than $30,000 pa. And, of course, he was always going to screw those people, and lost no time in trading their health care entitlements for tax concessions to the rich.īut, why wouldn’t these voters, which included a male Hispanic swing, roll the dice? Especially when there were no significant proposals for job reform coming from the other side. His greatest swing in the election was, at 16 points, by low income earners, those people who generally vote for the Democratic nominee. To the parents of children whose most likely chance at a career was military, he promised both military spending and military isolationism, AKA a bigger pay-cheque without a bigger risk of death. To the jobless, he promised protection of jobs. In the opinion of voters in counties Trump had strategically visited, he made a little sense. In the opinion of press, Trump was a loony. “If press had genuinely resolved to talk about Trump as a collection of flawed policies rather than one of personal dysfunction, maybe we wouldn’t be in this mess.” ![]() The absolute refusal of mainstream commentators to truly analyse him as more than a psychological patient was, I venture, a bad decision. That it came to be the entire story had what we might agree is a shocking consequence. The traditional media class-and, at first, this even included Fox News-were unified in their disdain for Trump the individual, their relative approval of Clinton.Ĭertainly, assessment of individual character can play some part in political inquiry by press. did all they could to meticulously weigh the qualities of Clinton and the terror of Trump, perhaps you might consider reviewing what these and other outlets actually provided. If no one was going to examine the policy of either nominee, preferring instead to pathologize their character, I reasoned that I might as well enjoy a good feud from teen-land.īefore you get all shirty and claim that the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN etc. I just needed distraction from the coverage of the US election. What I craved was not the extinction of Swift, whose icy message of female “empowerment” will be devastated by history in any case. I had long thought of Swift as Lovato may have thought of Barney: a falsely optimistic dancing dinosaur who feeds on the bodies of the weak. All I needed to know was that this former star of Barney & Friends had declared war with Taylor Swift. That I was then yet to endure the young singer’s oeuvre was incidental. In October 2016, I came down with an acute case of Demi Lovato.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |