Monday Links and Open Thread

  • Stelter: Megyn Kelly doesn’t want to be seen as a victim.
  • Friday’s numbers: Chris Wallace-Megyn Kelly-The Five 1-2-3.
  • Goldberg: Some FNC viewers don’t want ‘fair and balanced’.
  • Sherman: Is Megyn Kelly the next Oprah? (via Brian Stelter)
  • Trump won’t be bidding on this.  Call me and I’ll be around.
  • Video: Outnumbered discusses PTSD, Megyn Kelly.
  • Kurtz: Debates use provocative questions to get pols off-script.
  • F&F video: take the Army’s physical fitness test.
  • Battaglio: Bret Baier’s debate prep and Ailes’s non-involvement.
  • McCarthy: Debate proves FNC is an arm of the Democratic party.
  • CNN’s Great Weather Contest has begun.  Bob Beckel makes book.
  • Video: Totally believable Trump supporters rail against Megyn Kelly.

146 thoughts on “Monday Links and Open Thread”

      • The poll does seem to support the consensus that Cruz, Fiorina and Carson benefited the most from the debate. Although I would have expected Rubio (who was also praised by some) to be in this group and he was not.

        • They still might. Poll numbers don’t turn on a dime. It can up to a week for the effects of an event to work their way thru the population. Also the big post debate news happened on a Friday night thus delaying the impact on the general public even further. If a week from now his numbers haven’t declined then there’s something going on for sure.

          • Good points.

            I am hoping this overnight poll is not a precursor to polls that come out in the next week to 10 days. Although I would think that at least Ted Cruz is pleased with the results.

      • Here’s my pre-hindsight perspective:
        National polls will be inconsistent regarding Trump. He’ll rise in some, stay steady in some, and fall in some others. The results for the other contenders will be more consistent, but less so than previous national polls. Rising – Fiorina, Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Christie. Staying steady – Huckabee, Paul, Carson. Falling – Bush, Walker, Perry. The poll results for the remaining candidates are insignificant.
        I believe the most significant polls, especially regarding Trump, will be the New Hampshire GOP primary polls.

        • Speaking of pre-hindsight I am reminded that some Trump supporters in the punditry class did not really budge that much.

          This should have been a clue to me that his poll numbers may not go down. I neglected to take this into account when predicting a decline in poll numbers.

          By this I mean they seemed less offended by Trump’s comments than I expected them to be.

          To wit:
          Mel Robbins (CNN)
          Joe Scarborough (MSNBC)
          Mark Halperin (ABC’s This Week)
          Greta (FNC)
          Ann Coulter (Fox Business)

          For some of these their continued support was subtle, muted or qualified. But it seemed clear to me that — for whatever the reason — they all seemed to defend Trump to varying degrees.

          • Are they defending him, or presenting another side? There’s nothing wrong with either.

            I think Trump’s numbers will stay high. We live in a world where even a small misstep inspires an avalanche of finger pointing and demands for an apology.

            People find bravado refreshing right now and confuse it for leadership.

          • Good question.

            In some cases they were in fact “presenting another side.”

            However, when Mel Robbins tweeted “I don’t believe it was a reference to menstruation,” I thought it was laughable. Especially in the context of some other Trump defenses she had uttered on CNN. A diehard Trump fan to be sure.

            Or, after a This Week panelist commented on Trump’s many misogynistic comments, Mark Halperin seemingly couldn’t wait to add, “But he says mean things about men also.” WTF?

            Admittedly, my biases are showing as well. But, of course, I have a monopoly on whose biases are accurate. ☺

          • I agree with Halperin to the extent that it shouldn’t be off limits to slam women in the way men are slammed. Women shouldn’t need special protection that men don’t need.

            It’s the gender specific aspersions (or aspersions tailored to gender stereotypes) that start to suggest another sort of mindset at play.

          • My husband would have phrased it like that too, Michael.

            I’m lucky and blessed to live in a world where men think and act as you two do.

      • Drudge is a rah rah Trump guy if you haven’t noticed his choice of headlines and placement of them. Trump has returned the favor.

  1. It would be fitting to commemorate the Michael Brown shooting anniversary with:
    a) peaceful protest like the beloved gentle giant
    b) gunfire
    c) charity Chis Hayes rock toss
    d) the truth

    • What they’re commemorating is the Eric Holder Justice Department report that said that Officer Wilson did everything correctly in that incident, and that there is no credible evidence or witness otherwise.

      • Yet a BLM spokesperson went unchallenged on This Week with GS when she said “Michael Brown was murdered.”

        • They could keep it to the DOJ report on the police dept. and be on firm ground. That’s not enough, they have to pad the meme.

        • And he had his hand up. Just had given a flower to a store clerk after picking up a thoughtful donation of cigars for his graduation party at the Christian Youth Center. Black Lies do Matter.

        • There was an attorney/radio host on CNN this morning (Mo something) who said the same thing. That there was no conclusive evidence, blah, blah, blah. When you have supposedly educated people continuing to spread the crap it makes complete sense that those who just protest & go from what they see on TV to continue the fishes narrative. Disgusting!

          • It’s the other way around. There were credible witnesses and there was forensic evidence that completely exonerated Officer Wilson.

            There was no forensic evidence nor credible witnesses that worked against him.

          • That’s the source of their power. Jessie Jackson and Reverend Al have for decades used this power to run their protection rackets. Crooks have done the same scam for a century.

  2. MJ this morning: 1hour 17 minutes until Bernie Sanders and the Black Lives Matter deal this past weekend came up. They moved on very quickly. Then the woman from Echelon Insights brought it up again in a few minutes & Joe immediately went to Hugh Hewitt with a totally different question!

    Think Dems don’t want to talk about Dems being called “racists” or “white supremacists”? Totally obvious on MJ this morning.

  3. Did it strike anyone as curious that when our vacationing commenter was pressed to point out examples showing me to be a CNN hater, the only thing he could come up with was a one word wisecrack I used on twitter? What’s curious is that our vacationing friend said in an earlier comment: “I’m sorry I missed the Twitter fight. Probably would have enjoyed it, but I don’t do the Twitter thing.”

      • A reference to one of that day’s links. I don’t remember now what it was as that was a few months back. He shows an amazing recall of what’s said on twitter for someone who never looks at it.

        • Well, he came back here hoping to engage in his favorite pastime during the debate, which is gleefully putting a finger in someone’s eye.

          Instead he got tossed around like a frisbee and had to face near universal acclaim for the handling of the debate.

          Of course he got a little testy. He’s a nasty piece of work if there ever was one.

          • It was just so painful for him. He began his latest visit bragging up the virtues of PBS only to have their liberal Mark Shields praising Megyn and the FOX team to the high heavens for their debate performance. As he was getting the rug pulled out from him, the troll was left standing on his nasty bare floor.

      • Agreed.

        I may have to re-think my muted criticism that Bret is too bland for me and I would prefer John Roberts as the host of Special Report. ☺

  4. Judging from what I have seen this weekend, Bernard Goldberg is unfortunately correct. Thought the questions were fair.

    • Where Bernard goes wrong is failing to take in account the other perspective. It’s not that they don’t want Fair and Balanced, it’s that they thought some questions were unfair. Bernard is a journalist. Most of the complainers are strong supporters of one candidate or another. All perspectives contain bias, even Bernie’s.

      • I actually thought Trump’s remarks in the debate complaining about the questions were pretty good defenses. In my opinion, he should have left it there and let his fans make with the insult reactions. Which they did. But Trump is Trump and this incident has the virtue of emphasizing that. He will have wonderful insult matches with South American dictators and the little North Koean one. Don Rickles as President? That what you want?

      • will you please stop lying!!!!!

        seriously. since we now have a day of space between a conch first and i do find him boring. opinion, personal, not an insult. amusingly, as the exile would say, i noted that in his column, then he came here to say he fell asleep reading mine and accused me later of repeating his criticism … i did not bother to respond to the inane post. i am fine with people liking him and my request has zero to do with him or the human chicken. numbers to the ranking are hardly unimportant. does 1st blow out the others. are 1st, 2nd, 3rd, very close etc. the added depth is not unimportant to the ranking itself. true?
        now. if the total numbers are embarrassing, or a source of great income$$$. i can understand that and would fall back to “hey, how about simple %s?” with x% of the clicks blah blah blah is ranked 1st, 2nd etc. now i am told i have an “insulting nature”, unlike other kind and compassionate blog denizens, however my request was pure curiosity. please consider. ty.

  5. Re: “Goldberg: Some FNC viewers don’t want ‘fair and balanced'”: Great column.

    UPDATE: …especially after reading the Patricia McCarthy post.

    • There are some viewers that would be fine with a conservative version of MSNBC, but cheapening the brand would be a terrible mistake.

          • Remember when Levin, Limbaugh and other right wing talk radio folks complained bitterly that McCain and Romney weren’t conservative enough? Now they’re hawking tRump, the fake conservative.

          • It’s interesting that you have one side saying that Fox shouldnt try to destroy a Republican candidate who might win, and another side saying that Fox should destroy a lousy Reoublican candidate who can’t win.

            Which arm of the GOP are they supposed to be? Right or left?

            In the meantime Fox wants to cover Trump like the other media all want to do.

          • That was their mantra. Not conservative enough. Laura Ingram and Ann Coulter the same. Yet they think Trump is the answer for all the disgruntled and disaffected voters. SMH.

          • Based on what Ingram said on Special Report last night, I don’t believe she thinks “Trump is the ANSWER for all the disgruntled and disaffected voters.”
            I’m probably getting too deep in the weeds looking for a nit to pick. 🙂

      • I agree with Ramjet. No one likes to see their candidate roughed up. Especially when it comes to issues involving personal traits or failings.

        It takes time for people to acknowledge that these things are salient with elections too. It’s not like what was done with Romney over an alleged incident in high school.

        Treatment of women is something that Megyn Kelly has long shown an interest in, to the point of challenging a conservative media personality and challenging too a fellow Fox personality.

        I don’t know why it surprises Goldberg that Trump’s supporters are bent out of shape, or how he thinks they’re aghast at Fox as being anything but unfair to their thinking when they expected better.

    FOX NEWS ALERT: watch @foxandfriends Tuesday at 7am ET as GOP frontrunner @realDonaldTrump talks about his relationship with @FoxNews

    Roger Ailes just called. He is a great guy & assures me that “Trump” will be treated fairly on @FoxNews. His word is always good!
    11:35 AM – 10 Aug 2015

    • If that’s true and not Trump trying to finesse followers for going back on Fox, then by calling Trump, Ailes has caved.

        • It’s too bad it wasn’t an announcement that Megyn would briefly address the Trump brouhaha tonight.

          SHE needs to give closure to her being the news story.

          It would have been the smart thing to leave it at that.

          • Out of her hands now. What Carly F. said on the Trump comments, basically calling him a liar about the meaning of his blood sport, and Trump’s counter attack, guarantee more to come.

          • Problem is the bone of contention is about what he said about Megyn. She’s the rope in the tugofwar.

          • That may happen tonight. I don’t know. I get the impression that she doesn’t want it discussed, argued, or anything else, part of not wanting to be seen as a victim. She said in her Kurtz interview that she didn’t want her co-moderators coming to her defense, and that may be how she feels now too. We’ll know soon enough if she addresses it tonight or not.

          • They shouldn’t come to her defense. If Trump is supposed to take the heat in the kitchen, so is she. It’s her job too. It’s not Fox’s job to act like they are her family and she’s the maligned daughter.

            Let Red State do that stuff.

        • Wonder if this was supposed to be Trump’s weekly convo on the curvey couch and some mediating started.

          F&F bookers, goosers: Please come. Trump folks: He’s not happy. Doocey calls: Tell him he knows we love him. Trump’s people: He’ll come if R. Ailes assures him he won’t be ambushed….etc…

        • Ailes should have never initiated a call with Donald Trump.

          Taken a call from…okay. Initiated it, no.

          • I have to think that the number of regular viewers they seem to have alienated — and do not want to lose permanently — has to be a factor.

            The flip side is where else would these ‘angry’ viewers go?

          • It’s potential viewers too. As Joe Concha pointed out, you don’t double your ratings from the last presidential debates without Trump being a force among the non-politically aligned too.

            You want to be able to interview all the candidates. Especially, one with Trump’s buzz. I draw the line at Ailes initiating contact with Trump.

            I think it’s a more likely scenario that he got involved in negoticiations that were going on after Trump (a frequent Fox flyer for years) asked him to talk.

            That’s pure speculation, of course.

          • Consider that Fox News Sunday rejected a Trump appearance this weekend because he wanted to phone in (FNS doesn’t allow that). Reports said that they were discussing a future appearance where he would be on camera. Those discussions might have been the entré that got Ailes talking to Trump.

          • Probably. It’s hard for them to win here. They’re either biased because they intentionally sought to destroy a candidate or craven because not trying to destroy a lousy candidate.

            They’re trying to cover him…which is what all the other media outlets are doing.

  8. Today’s most popular links:
    5 won’t be bidding
    4 the next Oprah
    3 arm of the Democratic party
    2 don’t want
    And the most popular link in today’s links…
    1 Bob Beckel makes book.

    • Maybe Beckel will find his way back some day, but there are things I’m guessing we just don’t know. Somebody should write a book.

      • “@realDonaldTrump: .@ericbolling you can do much better than you did tonight on @oreillyfactor. Better luck tomorrow!”

      • He used to have a newsletter that would note if he was taking off, but no longer. The only times I’m certain he’ll take off are Memorial Day Weekend, Labor Day Weekend, Thanksgiving, and Christmas/New Year’s Day.

    • Probably a smart move (in the wake of all the angry Fox viewers) to have two of three people (Bolling & Coulter) — both avid Trump supporters — in the opening segment.

      But I’m bummed Mr. Bill will be gone all week. I was thinking of a road trip. Perhaps now’s the time. [shrug]

    • Take a look at this –
      Clinton, “…Rubio…in terms of where the Republican party is today as anybody else on that stage and it is deeply troubling *and it should be to the PRESS, not just to those of us who have been doing this work for so long.”

      *A call to arms.

        • That’s possible and there’s nothing wrong with that.
          But to assume the press “should” take her side on an issue against an opponent goes to her sense of entitlement.

Comments are closed.