so being that qunnipiac was one of those big democrat skewed polls... presuming they used the same type of democrat rich sample... I am sure when you unskew the poll at least 50% of the country is smart enough to not trust the media. That is good news for our country. P.S. the poll was slanted 25 Reps - 34 Dems a very slanted poll. Hence idiots who run or trust the media were massive over sampled and people who voted for trump were massively undersampled. More distorted fake news.
I thought they didn't trust Trump. So why are they bragging they're more trustworthy than him. How did they rank against used car salesman? Ask how many trust their own common sense more than the media?
50 % is higher than trust in Trump,Trumps approval rating,Gop Congress approval,and the republican party rating.
Thanks for that interesting viewpoint. There is a lot o be contemplated. Certainly the writers condemnation of the media is not undeserved. This paragraph especially caught my eye: Because in corporate media, you can toss out baseless propaganda uninterrupted for months—to avoid actual reporting or investigation into the reason millions of Americans have turned against bought-off politicians and media—and then face no accountability when reality reenters the building. The writer has not taken account of why the media selectively reports. It is audience share and advertising of course that drives their decisions, but subliminally. It's unlikely they calculate; more likely it seems they are just responding as Pavlov's dogs would and return again and again to what has been rewarding in the past. We prefer blood and murder, rape and scandal to lead in pipes. And if you can weave the President in, its all the more entertaining. The writers suggestion that we'd somehow be better of if the media spent more time reporting on and investigating why millions of Americans are being turned against bought-off politicians and media, I expect to fall on deaf ears. No real reward there. And besides we may not need to investigate, we may already know the reason. The reason may be as simple, and as simple minded, as alternative facts are everywhere these days. And thirty odd percent of us prefer alternative facts. But i'll not think about this now. I'm busy turning the channel to "Naked and Alone". So I did my best to get into the mindset of the disgruntled and disaffected. You know, the one's who have figured out the media and the bought off politicians are lying. But I failed to reach their conclusions. I couldn't understand the value of detonating a tactical nuke in the midst of everything. I still, no matter how I tried, believed that there was enough worth saving, enough to build on, to make total destruction and starting over a bad idea.
in a terrible slanted poll. Plus I am not defending trump until he starts doing the things he said he was going to do. right now he is acting like a democrat/establishment republican. You should be defending him soon.
I think he did start by trying to do the things he said he would do, didn't he? And then more sane advisors caught his ear. But they are in trouble now. He has already driven away some of the government's most competent employees and with them important institutional knowledge. What you see going on right before your eyes is a petulant, impulsive, spoiled, over grown child with a mild learning disability and a serious personality disorder being taught, to the extent he can be, and otherwise controlled, by others in an attempt to keep him from doing something truly disastrous. Let's hope they can keep a watchful eye over him. He's a loose cannon.
Ironic that the complaints from his supporters are that he was convinced against his prior positions to get involved in the Syrian situation. Trump's instincts tend to be sound. The problem is, he is a rookie politician and is increasingly surrounded by precisely the sort of people we voted to keep out of power.
There may be something to this. On the other had if it is true that his instincts "tend to be sound" and those "people who surround him" are the one's his instincts led him to select for roles in his administration, there is an element of self annihilation here. So you can understand, I think, why I may remain skeptical of your analysis. It seems inconsistent to me.. My own analysis would be that his personality disorder predisposes him to trust those who fawn over him, or at worst those who he instinctively wants to ingratiate himself with. And having little knowledge beyond his private business dealings, and what he has gleaned from the media, including the highly unreliable social media, and also being controlled by his involuntary narcissism, he is both unprepared and psychologically incapable of assessing the veracity and probity of those bending his ear. He wants praise, and he will give deference to those who provide it. He may be an easy mark for anyone with ulterior motives. Let us remember that we can not rely on his own assessment of his business and deal making prowess because of his narcissistic disorder! When you look dispassionately at his business record, it is very mixed. There is nothing remarkable beyond the unusually high frequency of litigation. His total returns on investments, until now, have been no better than ordinary and some have said below par.
There is a massive inconsistency, and there have been low level complaints from the beginning that he was appointing establishment figures. Partly I think he did it because he respects highly accomplished people, whether they are business tycoons or generals. He is not so vain that he doesn't want to have experienced and highly competent people advising him. Part of it was an attempt both to rebut criticism that he was dangerously radical and to facilitate finding common ground with the establishments of both parties. Nothing wrong with that, and it stands in marked contrast to Obama, who appointed only fellow far left radicals, mostly minorities. But now it seems the establishment tail is beginning to wag the swamp draining dog. Poor Bannon has become the symbolic gauge of which side is winning, and he is getting pulled back and forth like a chew toy between two puppies. This situation was always the danger of electing a novice who had not spent decades in the public policy wars. There is another aspect unfortunately, which is his family. He didn't select them, but he is devoted to them. That gives us a situation where he is vulnerable to emotional manipulation, even if unintentional. And it creates an unfair playing field for those who might oppose a family member's ideas. Many have heard the famous words ("You're fired") after too many disagreements with a family member. For the Trump children, protecting the Trump business brand has to be a primary objective. Ivanka doesn't like being called a racist bigot and having her clothing line dropped over boycotts. Then there's the hotel business. Cooperation with local governments is crucial, here or abroad. So they prefer a more congenial approach and more centrist objectives than Bannon. None of this is the end of the world. Trump is a smart guy and should be able to figure it out.