posted July 18, 2015 11:35 AM            

July 18, 2015
Huff Po Announcement May Backfire
By Sara Goss

I read the statement from the Huffington Post regarding their stance on coverage of the campaign of Donald Trump for President:

“After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won’t report on Trump’s campaign as part of The Huffington Post’s political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.”

What was even better to read were the comments from this. If I may borrow some:

From alvmac:

"Now the low info voters will discover there’s going to be an election. Is that good news or bad news?"

From DEMSfightinwords:

"This will be great for Trump. The Puff Ho readers will think that Kim Kardashian is running as his VP. Think of all the progressive votes he’ll get."

From needsleepe:

"To the wonderful people at Huffinpuff. Bravo! Thank you so much for deciding to put stories about Donald Trump right next to stories about the Kardashians. Now we’re absolutely certain that all low information, Democratic voters will see them."

From RasputinX:

"This might actually help Trump continue to build momentum. The low-information voters are going to the entertainment section anyway, so at least it will get them involved."

From scottyrhodes:

"YOU’RE DOING HIM A FAVOR! He’s laughing at you! How many people read the section with the Kardashians vs. political news???"

I had similar thoughts when I read the Huff Po announcement. The Huffington Post, in its haste to trivialize Mr. Trump's campaign, has decided to put their coverage in the section that the low infomation voters read first: Entertainment. Perfect! I wonder if that had occurred to them before they made their ridiculous proclamation. I also wonder if The Donald's approval numbers will go up as a result.

I read the statement from the Huffington Post regarding their stance on coverage of the campaign of Donald Trump for President:

“After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won’t report on Trump’s campaign as part of The Huffington Post’s political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.”

What was even better to read were the comments from this. If I may borrow some:

From alvmac:

"Now the low info voters will discover there’s going to be an election. Is that good news or bad news?"

From DEMSfightinwords:

"This will be great for Trump. The Puff Ho readers will think that Kim Kardashian is running as his VP. Think of all the progressive votes he’ll get."

From needsleepe:

"To the wonderful people at Huffinpuff. Bravo! Thank you so much for deciding to put stories about Donald Trump right next to stories about the Kardashians. Now we’re absolutely certain that all low information, Democratic voters will see them."

From RasputinX:

"This might actually help Trump continue to build momentum. The low-information voters are going to the entertainment section anyway, so at least it will get them involved."

From scottyrhodes:

"YOU’RE DOING HIM A FAVOR! He’s laughing at you! How many people read the section with the Kardashians vs. political news???"

I had similar thoughts when I read the Huff Po announcement. The Huffington Post, in its haste to trivialize Mr. Trump's campaign, has decided to put their coverage in the section that the low infomation voters read first: Entertainment. Perfect! I wonder if that had occurred to them before they made their ridiculous proclamation. I also wonder if The Donald's approval numbers will go up as a result.

feralcat • 9 hours ago

After reading the HuffingtonPost, I have decided I won’t report on their attempts at political coverage. Instead, I will cover their blog as part of my Obituary section. My reason is simple: their blog is brain dead. If you are interested in what HuffingtonPost has to say, you’ll find it next to my stories on the Borg and the zombies.

Kroesus > feralcat • 8 hours ago

I have tried to read comments on some articles over there.....no positions......just talking points and hate speech

brendag > Kroesus • 2 hours ago

Yes, that's why Trump is correct in saying they are a blog. No serious debate/comments take place. Actually I think AOL will destroy what is left of the Huffington Post.

People who are interested in trump would not be looking at Huffo in the first place.

Aqualung > Kroesus • 16 minutes ago

Yes, I visited the site once and read an article (a hit piece on Liz Cheney) and then the comments. It's almost as if they all received instructions on what key words to include. There were no original thoughts, no true debates, no differing points of view, and suspiciously, most comments included the word bully or bulldog to describe Liz even though those words weren't contained in the article.

The Demon Slick > feralcat • 6 hours ago

Once a liberal friend posted an article from huffyoo about how only rich people have their voices heard... I said back "rich people like Ariana Huffington?" Priceless.

Kwan • 8 hours ago

That's right, obviously Donald Trump is not a serious candidate, seeing how he is talking about cleaning up the mess created by our worthless left-wing president Barack Obama, while the deaf, dumb, and blind morons at the Huffington Post think the Kenyan is doing a super-dooper job.

BBQman • 6 hours ago

Ha ha, that's rich, Trump is driving them bat crap crazy, the left has become even more unhinged as if that was even possible. Watch the left blatantly pull out every dirty trick ever written and end up stepping in their own excretement only to be tracked back into their own houses, Trump verses the trolls, are you not entertained?

t-minus10 • 7 hours ago

The entire HuffingandPuffington Post should properly be considered "Entertainment" so it doesn't really matter where they decide to put a "story". It is a rag written by Parrots, for Parrots and ultimately ends up in the Parrot cage where its true worth becomes evident.

searcherseeker • 2 hours ago

This is what happens when the smartest people in the room think they are smart because of what they believe.

Brenden Ken • 4 hours ago

Donald Trump's fame, is a by-product of his success.
Kim Kardashian's success, is a by-product of her fame.
In the backwards view of the left, they are punishing Trump for his success, and rewarding Kim for her fame. I bet KK could win over HRC or at least come close.
Of course they didn't see this coming.
The law of unintended consequences is the only law that the far left doesn't love. This is fuuunnneeeee

BubbasBBQ • 6 hours ago

But but but but, The HuffPo has the highest web traffic, you must take it seriously!!! you must you must you must WAAHHH!!!!

That is paraphrasing the typical LIV comment left at the WashTImes.

DrDan • 6 hours ago

And I'll keep the HuffPost in its most-appropriate location, namely my garbage can, after it's been used for its best purpose - puppy training.

Thank goodness puppies can't read. But they can aim.....

Aqualung • 11 minutes ago

Trump's campaign response:

"The only clown show in this scenario is the Huffington Post pretending to be a legitimate news source. Mr. Trump is not focused on being covered by a glorified blog. He is focused on Making America Great Again."

HoiPolloiBoy • an hour ago

Does this mean HuffPo will put Hillary's campaign coverage in the obituaries?

WriteWing • 2 hours ago

Where ever they put it, there had better be a trigger warning or all those effeminate liberals will completely melt down.

flappdoodle • 3 hours ago

That act alone is probably worth hundreds of hours of paid political commercials on TV. They're not progs because they have any sense.

Benton Marder • 4 hours ago

One thing for sure---Donald laughed so hard that he was grinning the rest of the day.

jeeperscreepers • 8 hours ago

At last.....a break! Hahahahahhaa!

BigTBoom • 11 minutes ago

The Donald should thank huffpo for the increased exposure of facts on illegal immigration to low information voters...

waltermom • an hour ago

The Donald perhaps will have the last laugh as most of the Huff Po addicts always read the entertainment section first anyway.

searcherseeker • 2 hours ago

Kim/Caitlyn 2016. The all-woman team!

brendag • 2 hours ago

Trump should buy the Huffo Post, turn it into a real blog site of ideas . Not a Leftist wasteland of cultural misfits.

GTR003121 • 5 hours ago

I didn't think that degenerate, joke of a woman/website could be any more ridiculous. I was mistaken.

Foolwhisperer • 5 hours ago

I'd bet that for an affordable price The Donald could get the endorsement of the whole Kardashian clan. With their daily tweeting of their love of The Donald we could fore-go the entire election and just have him move into Rainbow Villa, after fumigating it of course.

Avatar

The Demon Slick • 6 hours ago

posted July 18, 2015 12:06 PM            

quote:

---

"After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won’t report on Trump’s campaign as part of The Huffington Post’s political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.”

---

posted July 18, 2015 02:25 PM            

Come the primary shuffle will he be pushing for universal singlepayer, or what? Will his Great Wall of Mecico be high..or deep (since the worst immigrants tend to be tunnelers). Will he continue to act as if he can solve all our probs in a week thru sheer force of personality/brand, or will he have policies?

posted July 18, 2015 02:42 PM            

Let me set you straight.

Hitler was a murderous Socialist.
Trump is NOT a Socialist...of any variety.

Trump is also NOT an ideological conservative. He's really quite liberal on some social issues. Trump is very conservative on financial and economic issues as well as foreign policy.

posted July 18, 2015 04:19 PM            

Btw, America already has a "single payer" health care system.

posted July 19, 2015 10:18 AM            

While Trumps azz was deferred from Viet Nam, McCain was a naval pilot fighting for his country. Yet, Trump is dispicable enough to state:

quote:

---

The real estate mogul then took a swing at McCain, whom he said he had supported in 2008.

"He's not a war hero," Trump said mockingly. "He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured."

---

Acourse he tried to clean it up later:

quote:

---

He then changed his tune, adding, "He's a war hero because he was captured. OK, I believe — perhaps he's a war hero."

---

I can`t wait to see HOW his American supporters are going to defend this uglyness...

posted July 19, 2015 11:59 AM            

If McCain hadn't been shot down and captured in Vietnam, no one would ever have heard of him. He used his "hero" status to run for elected office.

Further, by McCain's own admission, the Vietnamese broke McCain in only a few days and turned him into a collaborator.

I used to have a high opinion of John McCain but having read some of his history, I'm past that.

posted July 19, 2015 02:30 PM            

I dont like McCain, never have, and I agree with Trump about Vietnam..however the fact that McCain was taken prisoner is hardly grounds for calling him a Loser ...apparently only Trump is allowed failures and thinks McCain owes him for throwing a party. That Trump has backed pretty much anyone he thinks might owe him a favour in future (mccain, hillary, who else?) Just reinforces the fact that he really has no compass except for where the next dollar or camera might be. Thanks but no thanks.

posted July 19, 2015 06:32 PM            

 http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/trump-attacks-mccain-i-like-people-who-werent-captured-120317.html#ixzz3gNY8HKcJ

Hes backpedaling now but yes, he did say it. How long do you reckon you would stand up to torture, Madeira? Fall on your sword first, would you?

Lets face it Mr Duck shoots first then wiggles out later. He should be running for police chief not president.

Still waiting for his challenge to Putin for bEar wrestling..few bears are impressed by oral exhaust

posted July 19, 2015 08:03 PM            

The article’s lead sentence states, “Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump slammed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a decorated Vietnam War veteran, on Saturday by saying McCain was not a war hero because he was captured by the North Vietnamese [emphasis added].”

Is this report accurate?

In fact, Trump’s actual quote is the opposite of what is presented in the Post’s first sentence.

When a panelist characterized McCain as a “war hero,” the Post is accurate in reporting that Trump initially said McCain is “not a war hero.” But then, Trump immediately modified his statement saying– four times– that McCain is a war hero.

For interpreting and characterizing Trump’s true quote in a way that is at best questionable, and for selectively using some quotes and leaving others out, the Post receives Two Little Devils." (SharylAttkisson.com)

posted July 19, 2015 08:49 PM            

The remarks, which came after days of back-and-forth between McCain and Trump, were met with scattered boos.

From the Politico story I linked ^^ not the Post; not an interpretation

posted July 19, 2015 09:53 PM            

Best practice, go directly to the source. That way, you can't be lied to by idiot partisans since you viewed it yourself.

posted July 19, 2015 11:32 PM            

You're not paying attention. You're headline reading instead of playing the actual video.