This morning the press turned toward further analysis of the Clinton – Trump debate and in continuance of their first reviews the pundit’s see what they want. What the media establishment saw was the good debater – Clinton, easily outpoint the bad debater – Trump. The media establishment will see what they want and in doing so will continue to miss the biggest stories of the day such as the rise of Trumpism or the anger in the populace about the status quo. They could have forgotten the debate if it was all about style points – Hillary is willing to prepare after all and the Donald is not.
But the Donald is willing to use the fatigue factor, a point that media pundits and politicians were willing to consider way before the Donald began his meteoric rise in the polls. The fatigue factor is a problem any candidate from the successful party must deal with. And that is, after two consecutive terms it is much harder for a party to win the third. It is true historically and has a basis in our psychology.
When Trump talked about our crumbling infrastructure and our incredible indebtedness though little money has been allocated to fix that infrastructure, and that representatives of the party in power should be held responsible for not fixing the infrastructure, his argument is directed toward the fatigue factor.
That the media has suddenly forgotten both Trump and Sander’s success at supporting populist issues is astonishing. The crumbling of the infrastructure is both literal and a metaphor. The media establishment will see what they want but that does not make the problems go away. There is anger and distrust of politicians and winning a debate on points is no big deal. If Hillary plans on pulling this one out ‘the vision thing’ must once again be part of the Democratic Party.
“These are two different ways to consider the nation’s current predicaments and ponder possible solutions. And the fact that (so far) the electorate is closely divided between the two suggests a deep cleavage in the body politic: Trump voters are from Mars, and Clinton voters are from Venus. Immediately following the debate, CNN pundits (that’s what was on the television screen at the media filing room where I was) pronounced the debate a win for Clinton, and instant focus groups backed them up. She was calm and knowledgeable; Trump could not control his excesses. (He defended having called Rosie O’Donnell a “pig”! He practically admitted to not paying taxes. He explained stiffing contractors by saying they did crappy work. He falsely claimed that Clinton’s 2008 campaign sent a reporter to Kenya to investigate Obama’s birth. He conceded he exploited the housing market crash that triggered an economic collapse, noting, “That’s called business.”) Clinton prevailing was a fair assessment, but the question is: does it matter? Trump is a candidate who vents. Facts don’t matter to him. They may not matter to many who want to send an angry bully to Washington to beat up all those elitists there.”
“Before the debate, I spoke to a senior Trump surrogate who told me the Trump campaign was quite pleased with recent developments: “His message, his themes are being heard. It’s working. We’re connecting. People are giving him due consideration. People are angry. He just needs to stick to these themes and messages.” And his themes are memes: law and order, bring our jobs back, she’s low-stamina, make America great again. Do these transcend the nitty-gritty of the debate and the usual political discourse?” http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/donald-trump-unreal-debate-hofstra-university