The definition of “spin doctor” — a spokesperson employed to give a favorable interpretation of events to the media, especially on behalf of a political party.
Donald Trump is his own spin doctor. Yesterday, in the wake of Monday night’s presidential debate, nearly every pundit, every major mainstream media outlet, declared that Hillary Clinton won the debate and that Donald Trump showed himself to be the buffoon that he is. His constant interruptions, lack of preparedness, inability to answer questions, self-promotions, and most of all his blatant lies, cost him the respect of the vast majority of viewers. Yesterday, even Trump realized that Trump did not perform well against Ms. Clinton, as he grasped thin air for excuses, saying that his microphone did not work properly, that the moderator was unfair, and the questions were biased in Ms. Clinton’s favour. But today, two days after the event, Trump has regrouped and ….
Today, Trump claims that he won the debate. He says he was “holding back” because he did not wish to embarrass Ms. Clinton. He claims that “every poll” shows him winning the debate. He claims that his campaign received some $18 million in donations following the debate. The spin doctor is spinning out of control and his little lemmings are eating it up. Well, sort of …
“For it being [Trump’s] first debate and no experience, he did better than I thought.”
“It could have been better. It wasn’t [Trump]’s worst debate but it wasn’t his best … a few different times Trump could have capitalized but it didn’t make any difference to me.”
“[Trump] needed to come out and hit her harder than he did. He did OK but Trump can do better.”
The above are actual quotes, the names withheld so as not to embarrass the lemmings. The ‘praise’ sounds a bit lukewarm to me, but especially noteworthy is the last part of the second quote: “but it didn’t make any difference to me.” No, I am sad to say that nothing he says or does makes “any difference” to his supporters, his little lemmings. They will, as lemmings are known to do, follow him blindly, no matter where he leads them.
Let me briefly de-bunk Trump’s imaginary “win”:
- No, he did not “hold back”. He was rude, crass, and interrupted both Ms. Clinton and Mr. Holt on numerous occasions. By all counts, he interrupted Ms. Clinton at least 22 times during the first 26 minutes of the debate, and 51 times in total. And he talked down to her, such as when he said “In all fairness to Secretary Clinton — yes, is that OK?” Trump said. Clinton smiled and nodded. “Good. I want you to be very happy. It’s very important to me.”
- No, “every poll” does not show him to have won the debates. In fact, the only polls Trump cites are un-monitored internet surveys. Every scientific poll taken in the aftermath of the debate showed a majority of viewers believing the Democratic nominee had won.
- Quite possibly the campaign did receive donations totaling $18 million … I have no way of knowing. But according to The Washington Post, approximately 100 of the campaign’s top fund-raisers, as well as Trump’s family and running mate Mike Pence, had spent the day on Monday making calls, soliciting funds, so those donations are not necessarily tied to Trump’s debate performance.
What’s next? Well, a wise Trump would now realize that his greatest weakness is his lack of knowledge, and he would begin immediately trying to overcome that weakness. He would study, read, talk to former presidential advisors, and in general, work on his polish, his temperament. But … well, we all know that there is no wise Trump, so the real Trump will work on plans to be even more obnoxious, more devious, and expound further on the few themes in his repertoire. He has already said that he intends to “hit her harder in certain ways.” One of those ways, reportedly, is that he, the serial womanizer of the century, plans to bring Bill Clinton’s past infidelity into the conversation. I must ask the question …
WHY??? What in the world do Bill Clinton’s former affairs (some 20+ years ago) have to do with the qualifications of Hillary Clinton for the office of president? Well, as I ask the question, the answer is ever-so-helpfully provided by none other than former New York Mayor and current Trump advisor, Mr. Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani himself must be an expert in marriage by now, as he, like Trump, is on his third marriage and is known for his multiple infidelities. I will let Rudy explain why he believes it is right and proper for this topic to enter into the debates on policies and issues:
[Trump is] “ … too reserved and too gentlemanly to say what I would have said. . . . I sure would have talked about what she did to Monica Lewinsky. The president of the United States, her husband, disgraced this country with what he did in the Oval Office, and she didn’t just stand by him, she attacked Monica Lewinsky. And after being married to Bill Clinton for 20 years, if you didn’t know the moment Monica Lewinsky said that Bill Clinton violated her that she was telling the truth, then you’re too stupid to be president.”
If this is the sort of advice his “advisors” are giving him, it would stand to reason that he will fare no better in the 2nd debate than he did in the 1st. The problem with that line of thinking is, once again, the lemmings. The lemmings, no doubt, will cheer and applaud at Trump bringing such a titillating topic into the limelight. For you see, the lemmings understand sex far better than they understand such topics as education, social reform programs, economics, and foreign policies. Why do you think sleaze programming like the Kardashians, Jerry Springer, et al are so popular among the lemmings? Enough said.
Former President Bill Clinton’s affairs are nobody’s business except Bill’s and Hillary’s. They, obviously, worked through their problems and deserve kudos for having done so. They do not deserve to have arguably the worst time of their marriage dredged up before some 70-80 million television viewers. More to the point, it is not an election issue. Election issues are those things which affect the well-being and security of the United States and its citizens. Anybody who believes differently qualifies in my book as a lemming. Period. And it might behoove Trump to remember his own sordid history, as some of the mud he slings may very well come back and hit him smack in his face. On the one hand, I hope it does, but on the other, wiser hand, I just do not believe this topic belongs in this venue. Period.
The 2nd debate will be held on October 9th at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. It will take the form of a town meeting, in which half of the questions will be posed directly by citizen participants and the other half will be posed by the moderator, Martha Raddatz. The town meeting participants will be uncommitted voters selected by the Gallup Organization. The topics have not yet been announced.