But if he loses I'll have to listen to everyone from the media to space aliens get blamed for it.
Trump certainly isn't his best own ally in his campaign, but make no mistake about it, there is a very real effort on the part of the mainstream media, which is already liberal from the get-go, to show a stark bias against Trump and in favor of Hillary. For example, there are plenty of Democrats, prominent ones, who have come out and said they won't vote for her, but we never hear much about those, and we certainly aren't presented by a laundry list of those names. But not a day goes by when we don't see the list of Republicans who have said they won't vote for Trump.
How the media presents the candidates will mold public opinion, and they know it. Journalists today present themselves as opinion-makers. It's their job to mold opinions. Most people know that Trump viciously attacked and disparaged, with full-on evilness, Mr and Mrs Kahn, but very few can tell you what Trump actually said, without inserting the characterizations (opinions) of the comments impressed upon them by the media. For example....
Here's a story today from CBS News, a real, actual mainstream media stalwart
Donald Trump goes on the offensive against everyone
The first paragraph states:
Donald Trump's day in a nutshell: At a rally in Virginia, Trump
accepted the gift of a Purple Heart, an honor given to service members who are killed or wounded, from a retired veteran and said, "I always wanted to get the Purple Heart. This was much easier." At the same speech, Trump ordered that
a crying baby be escorted out of the room - and it was unclear whether he was kidding.
OK, lets take a look at that. The first part, about someone giving him a Purple Heart, they have a link to the original story, which they know less than 7% will click and go read, and only half of those will watch the video of what was actually said. The two very out-of-context sentences they quote Trump leave the impression that Trump's a real asshat. Those where the last two sentences Trump said, but they completely leave off the lengthy paragraph where he gave the full story on how and why it was given to him, and his was clearly touched by the gesture. The story should be about who gave it to him and why, but that would make Trump look good instead of an asshat. Wrong narrative. Trump went on about how is was such an honor to receive the medal, and even had the retired Lt Colonel come up on stage. Do they report that? Of course not. Wrong narrative. And in the original linked story, no one had any problem with Trump's comments on receiving the Purple Heart, but the "journalist" who wrote the piece made it quite clear that someone certainly should, dammnit.
The second part, where Trump "ordered" {pejorative buzzword} a crying baby out of the room, and then the CYA of "and it was unclear whether he was kidding." Well, it was quite clear to everyone other than the Pinball Wizard who is deaf, dumb and blind. They again give the link to the original story, which they know few will go and read, and even at the original story they misquote Trump by not giving the correct inflections in what he was saying, because they know that a bare quote doesn't read like he's kidding. And the video at that link? It's a 64 minute video that they know no one will sit through.
The third paragraph states...
Then, Trump left the rally to have lunch with a Washington Post reporter, where he informed the reporter
that he wasn't endorsing House Speaker Paul Ryan in his primary campaign ("I'm not quite there yet," he explained) or Sen. John McCain in his. Both Ryan and McCain have endorsed Trump for president.
The use of "informed" implies an unsolicited statement, but Trump was responding to the question, "Have you endorsed Paul Ryan or John McCain in their primaries?" His response was, same as Ryan's when Ryan was asked about Trump, "I'm not there, yet." Pure payback for Ryan. But "I'm not there, yet," doesn't mean he won't get there eventually, same as Ryan and McCain did (after the primary was settled, which isn't yet the case for Ryan or McCain). But that comment is presented as "Trump Refuses to Endorse Ryan, McCain," and "Trump won't endorse..." That's disingenuous journalism at it's finest. But it promotes the narrative.
The CBS News piece of full of misrepresentations and straight-up snipes ("Then came dinner - this time, presumably, without a reporter or a crying baby in the room.").
My favorite still, and it's hard to find a story about Trump where it's not mentioned is, "Trump had previously set off a fresh round of outrage when he suggested that she was silent because her Muslim faith didn't allow her to speak." Which isn't even a little bit true. He didn't suggest anything of the sort. He didn't mention faith in any way, shape or form. But that's what people read into it, because that's what they wanted it to mean. And they still do .But the context of his comments where about whether or not Mr Kahn or the Clinton campaign wrote his speech. Him saying "she just stood there, was she allowed to speak?" the "allowed" word which everyone did a knee-jerk to could refer to her faith, her husband, or the even Clinton campaign. No one ever asked Trump what me meant, they merely inferred what worked best for them and jumped to a conclusion. Why bother gathering the facts when you can make up your own?
The media is pathetic these days, have been for years, and if you let them mold your mind, they certainly will. That's their job.
