Covering Trump: Will the third time be the charm?

On Thursday I put together a brief lecture on how the media ought to cover Donald Trump’s third presidential campaign. I thought of writing a blog post about it — but then decided I could save time and just post the slides. I’m not going to do this often, but I’m curious to know whether you think this is effective or not.

10 thoughts on “Covering Trump: Will the third time be the charm?

  1. pauljbass

    From your lips to God’s ears! I didn’t think the New York Post print coverage of his announcement (bured inside one-column brief on “Florida man”) was the best.

  2. Pierre Little

    NPR is surely editorializing its Twitter post. Goodness, you are not hiding your dislike for Trump or any candidate that dares to proclaim fraud in the 2020 election. Democrats have done the same thing before and certainly after the 2016 election, to be fair. Counting is now the new political minefield. Why is that? Because there has been inside baseball going on with Democrats once in Power and Republicans once in power, and that is electioneering and gerrymandering and now more focus on mail-in balloting and absentee ballots. To set the playing field neutral, we should go back to paper ballots and only hand count ballots cast on November 8th, period end of the story. All early voting should be eliminated. The count should be done by 10-11 pm on election night. If they were able to do it in times past without computers, why can they not do it now? Computer and mail-in ballots have not been an improvement.

      1. Pierre Little

        Hire enough people to count them. What is the issue? It was done before. Why can it not be done again? Too much left-brain thinking, trying to use technology… Computers and machines are not a solution, it’s a bottleneck, which is obviously and factually true.

    1. Lex Alexander

      What in the NPR tweet was editorializing as opposed to straight fact? i’m genuinely interested in your answer.

      [To set the playing field neutral, we should go back to paper ballots and only hand count ballots cast on November 8th, period end of the story. All early voting should be eliminated.]

      Spoken like someone who is ignorant of how well early voting, in person and by mail, has worked in the states that do it, and/or someone who either 1) is ignorant of GOP vote suppression or 2) thinks his readers are.

      [The count should be done by 10-11 pm on election night. If they were able to do it in times past without computers, why can they not do it now?]

      In fact, they seldom were.

      1. Pierre Little

        “Donald Trump, who tried to overthrow the results of the 2020 election…” Point to a source in a Judicial Court of Law that proves this. NPR tweet is public slander and calumny. This is political editorializing and clear political rhetoric and schoolyard tactics from a news organization demonstrating bias. I would fire that editor for such a tweet. I may be ignorant according to your opinion, but I am certain that it is possibly manipulating the vote with the use of early ballots with harvesting and shenanigans that go on at election time. All studies show Democrats vote in higher numbers with absentee ballots and mail-in ballots. Not sure why Democratic use absentee in higher numbers than Republicans, but maybe it is because they don’t want to stand in line with a larger number of Republicans who show up on election day. I don’t know. But, single-day voting makes complete sense to level the playing field for both parties without any of the claims of voter fraud that early voting causes on both sides, not to mention the sacrificial nature the physical exertion provides in demonstrating civil duty by voting in person. Any other perspective to keep the status quo is partisan to Democrats. Computers and technology are tools but are always highly overused as some form of utopian counting solution and they bring more complexity than to simply COUNT THE VOTES, damn it. Hand counting is usually requested for recounts. You may be correct to indicate that precinct counting in the past, prior to computers, was never finished on time, however, the statistical trend percentage for the leader remained constant and formed the historical basis of the press declaring statistical winners of races presumptively prior to certification of vote counts on election night. Now we have late absentee and mail-in counting which skew the statistics. I am not a historian on elections and I know I am broadly oversimplifying a very complex State by State election system with complex differences in each State. But, that doesn’t mean we should not strive to form a standard or agreement on a neutral format that engenders trust and certitude to both the left and the right at election time. Voters and State Legislatures should all want this.

  3. Lex

    Pierre, I don’t need a court to tell me what I saw and heard with my own eyes and ears in the sworn testimony and exhibits presented during the House Jan. 6 committee’s public hearings. Neither does NPR. (Just as, if I see a police officer shoot someone, I don’t need a court to confirm that. The court’s role is merely to determine whether or not the shooting constituted a specific crime.) The court’s only role here is to determine whether Trump committed a crime. That he fomented an effort to at least delay certification of Biden as president-elect is beyond any sane doubt. Now, since I’m sure Dan is already sorry he even brought this subject up, I’ll let you have the last word.

Leave a reply. Real names, first and last, are required.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s