Home / General / Chastised for dickishness, Trump buoyed by invisible black friends in Flint

Chastised for dickishness, Trump buoyed by invisible black friends in Flint


fat-albert-the-junkyard-gang-stock1388It’s often not easy for black folks at a Trump event, though he occasionally spots a friendly face in the crowd and wonders for a moment if he might, in fact, actually own him somehow.

Yesterday, the racist corn dog currently angling for the White House dropped by a black church in Flint, where he cracked wise about Mexican water and got his knuckles rapped by the female pastor for being such an unbearably self-absorbed tool. This morning, nimble-witted as George Constanza, Trump finally came up with his best jerk store comeback and simply made up a bunch of shit that didn’t happen. (NPR, observing the Trump Rule, merely noted that he “misstated” the facts, which is more or less like claiming that someone “mispronounced” a word that does not actually exist.)

In any event, his appearance on Fox News this morning was revelatory. Aside from describing Rev. Faith Green Timmons as “nervous” when she plainly was not, Trump hinted strongly that wherever he goes, he is apparently joined by a crew of imaginary black people who cheer him on. Via TPM:

“It doesn’t bother me. I’ll tell you what really made me feel good, the audience was saying, ‘Let him speak, let him speak.’ The audience was so great and these are mostly African-American people, phenomenal people and they want to see change.”

Of course, video of the gathering disproves everything about Trump’s version of events. Indeed, NPR notes that several audience members, far from being hungry for Trump’s word, began questioning him about his treatment of black tenants during the 1970s. Regardless, we need to take very seriously the possibility that Trump has been accompanied throughout the campaign by invisible friends who just happen to be phenomenal African-American people with terrible jobs and nothing to lose, chuckling about his fucked up tweets, reminiscing about that time he went lynch mob on some kids, and shaking their heads over the goofballs at Stormfront who love him so. No wonder he’s going to earn 95 percent of their vote.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • brewmn

    Granted, I’m working with NPR on in the background and might have missed it, but the Newsweek cover story destroying Trump’s claims to being a great businessman has been (again, as far as I can tell), completely uncovered.

    I thought my cynicism about political coverage would leave me immune to shock and disgust this election cycle. I was wrong.

    • Alvin Alpaca

      If the giant orange turd does end up in the White House (shudder), I hope the first thing he does is shut down the NYT. Then, they might start to understand. Probably not, though.

      • West

        I share the sentiment, though he’d have a faster and easier track to defund the federal contribution to NPR, which I think is in the range of 10% of their budget. It would serve them right, too.

        However, he’d probably not shut down either of them, or any other major news organ. He is a highly skilled bully* and he’d instinctively understand there’d be more to be gained from leaning on them than from shutting them down. So he’d get in their face with all sorts of threats of cutting off their access to the White House, and he’d ruthlessly crush some minor newspaper that had the guts to write about him honestly, and the NY Times and NPR would fling themselves to their knees to commence fellating him even more vigorously than they have been doing so far. He could get way more use out of them by this approach than by shutting them down.

        *this is his one true skill, so far as I can tell, but he’s got decades of practice at it, and a disheartening percentage of Americans are desirous of having a bully for President, so long as he bullies “them”.

        • Alvin Alpaca

          All true, AFAICT. Imagine the reaction if the object of his Blood Libel against Mexicans were the more traditional recipients of said rhetoric. Would the media response be the same? Or would that be beyond the pale (no pun intended)?

          • lmontheinternet

            The problem with “but what if they said that about the Jews?” is that, quite frequently, they are, and it’s not being covered. Anti-semitism is really high right now, and it’s being ignored completely. Even when people I admire were covering the attacks in France, not one of them bothered to mention it was at a *Jewish* supermarket and that it was targeted specifically.

  • BiloSagdiyev

    It’s a perfectly cromulent campaign.

  • Karen24

    One poll confirms that we’re losing Iowa and formerly safe Virginia is withing the margin of error. I am fully Chicken LIttle now.

    • NickFlynn

      Me too.

      I’m on the ledge, someone want to mock me down?

    • wengler

      Just be thankful it’s 54 days out and not 4 days out.

      • Karen24

        It might as well be four days out. She’s never going to get fair coverage and the debates will be a farce. Trump will stand there and avoid drooling and she’ll exist in a female body saying something and he wins.

        • Rob in CT

          I’m still pretty confident she’s going to win, but my dream of a real blowout is gone.

          • delazeur

            Yeah, similar. Have there been any recent projections for control of the Senate?

            • NickFlynn

              There seems to a pretty strong consensus among the prediction sites of a 50/50 split. Which doesn’t get it done, if the Orange Menace wins.

          • NewishLawyer

            Here’s the thing. Trump has absolutely no GOTV/Turnout operation especially compared to HRC. We don’t know how this is going to play out.

            What is scary about this election is that it overturns a lot of conventionally held narratives or kid.

            So we have all these polls showing that the race is tightening but what if come election day, HRC still gets a blowout because she has the well-disciplined turnout machine.

            All the pundits are going to say that it was turnout and the Ds are clearly better at this than the Rs.

            Or what if Trump narrowly loses the election or wins without a turn out machine.

            Even the best case scenario is scary for the Ds because smarter Trump will run on white ethnonationalism and figure out how to have a turnout machine as well.

            • Karen24

              True. If Trump loses, Trump II will know to spend money on GOTV and be slightly less horrifying.

              On a somewhat brighter note, related to GOTV: this Is interesting.

          • Hmm. I don’t know.

            The polls tightened. But they tightened before, then widened out crazily.

            Now we’re in the period when traditionally things get more fixed, but we aren’t quite there yet. And it’s a weird race. I don’t hold it as a certainty but I think it’s a mistake to think that the race has settled. There’s been a lot of drip drip drip of email bullshit against Clinton. Two me of that will fade.

    • Colin Day

      If only Clinton had picked a running mate with extensive political experience in Virginia.

      Oh wait . . .

      • Richard Henry Lee


        • Colin Day


        • Bootsie

          OF THE KAINES

    • junker

      A second poll taken during the same time frame has her up by 6.

      Also, if I’m not mistaken the Clinton campaign has pulled resources out of Colorado and Virginia because they think both are safe enough that they can devote resources to previously unthinkable states like Georgia and Arizona.

      If Clinton +3 has you panicking, then a recent Trump +3 in Georgia, or Clinton +1 in Arizona should make you very happy

      • Karen24

        Those are encouraging. What’s the VA poll with the good numbers?

        • junker


    • As a friend of mine pointed out earlier today, all election coverage seems to go this way. The race tightens up before the first debate — either by hook or by crook, because the press will move hell to get the horserace narrative. And Trump will “win” the first debate, because they need the underdog to win for the narrative.

      Trump’s supporters are a clinically insane minority. He won’t get more voters than Romney or McCain. For god’s sake, the press wants you to panic and give up, because then they can get their ratings-bonanza demigod in the White House. The less you panic, the more ulcers Chuck Todd gets.

      • N__B

        I’m perfectly calm, yet Todd still lives. Your theory may be incomplete.

    • Redwood Rhiadra

      The idea that Virginia, heart of the Confederacy, was ever a safe state was ridiculous.

  • hinted strongly that wherever he goes, he is apparently joined by a crew of imaginary black people who cheer him on.

    Am I mistaken, or is this a major plot point in a Dennis Lehane book? (I’m a few chapters in and just remembered this point from the movie, and the way Lehane handles it in the book sounds exactly like this.)

  • rdennist

    Unfortunately for Trump, these followers are the target of voter fraud laws, so their votes probably won’t count

    • kayden

      He isn’t aiming to gain Black support. He’s trying to seem nice to Blacks to attract White voters.

  • Alex.S

    Imagine if… any other politician in America had done this.

    There’s video evidence. Reporters were in the room.

    But I guess since Trump has a long history of lying and making shit up (from sending investigators to Hawaii to seeing people cheering on rooftops in New Jersey to Iran released a video to embarrass the United States) it’s a dog-bites-man story to point out that Trump is making stuff up.

    • Rob in CT

      But because he’s “not a politician” (who is the nominee of one of the two major parties) he gets graded on a ginormous curve.

      On some level, everyone understands Trump is a bullshitter (I’d say more than that – full on con-artist). Roughly 40% of the electorate simply doesn’t care, and in fact prefers it.

      • brewmn

        I think this is key. And where the problem with the media comes in is that they are too concerned with offending the sensibilities of that roughly 40% rather then accurately reporting on the unprecedented nature of Trump’s campaign.

      • sibusisodan

        That’s what I don’t get about people saying Clinton is a weak candidate because she isn’t 10 points up on Trump.

        Trump has the support of at least 40% of the electorate. That support doesn’t marginally prefer Trump to Clinton on a rationale basis. He’s their guy. That’s all.

        • petesh

          Yeah, we may need to recalibrate that 27% rule.

          • LosGatosCA

            The Alan Keyes derived 27% rule applies to really just a cardboard cutout with a pulse.

            Trump has been vetted by Republicans through the national primary – they support him because they know him, they voted for him, they like him, they really, really like him.

            Getting 43-45% of the vote for a Republican presidential candidate is simply the larger Republican base going along with the activist base that pushed him through the primaries.

            That has no relation to the 27%, except that the 27% are obviously a subset of the 43-45%.

            • howard

              the key to this whole election was always whether trump could bring home typical gop voters who were offended by him but have been hating on the she-devil for years, and the answer right now is yes.

              still, i think that still most likely means we end up with a victory somewhere between 2012 and 2008 in electoral margin.

          • Bill Murray

            27% of the country’s adults is around 45-50% of the voting electorate

    • leftwingfox

      I remember when the “Dean Scream” was disqualifying.

      Trump has no qualifications. He has only disqualifications. But that’s never how it’s reported.

      • Solar System Wolf

        Shoot, I’ll see you a Dean Scream and raise you a Kerry Swiftboating and a Dukakis in a tank.

        • Colin Day

          Shouldn’t that be Kerry sailboarding?

      • Brad Nailer

        It is a puzzlement. Trump gets jerked from the lectern at a church in Flint, to the tune of catcalls from the audience, after violating the agreement not to give a political speech. Later, he phones into Fox News to talk about how well he was being received until the Nervous Nellie preacher-lady inexplicably pulled him.

        Liberals get the story as it was, with video, from Rachel Maddow. Conservatives get the self-serving Trump version on Fox.

        This is just one example. His disqualifications are being reported, but who has the bigger audience, Rachel or Fox?

        • Solar System Wolf

          But if this had happened to Hillary, every major news outlet would be trumpeting it for the next week as an example of how weak/elitist/unlikeable she is.

          • so-in-so

            This is the key point. It isn’t like anyone watching Fox or Rachel is going to change their vote, it’s what the theoretically non-partisan outlets make of it that reaches a wider audience.

  • so-in-so

    Maybe it’s time to start boycotting advertisers in the NYTs, and dropping support for NPR (with letters explaining why).

    • That might be a good idea. It’s how they’ve put the brakes on Limbaugh’s career.

      • Redwood Rhiadra

        Convincing advertisers to drop a single advertising slot (moving their advertising to a different show on the same channel) is fairly easy. Getting them to drop all advertising in the one of the largest national newspapers is impossible.

  • Alex.S

    NPR Editor: Our Job Is To Give You The Facts, Not Tell You What To Think

    Scott did that and we are proud of him. Now a number of people have asked us why we didn’t call Trump a liar. A professor named Jay Rosen actually asked why we didn’t call Trump a “lying son of a b****.” Others, like Amy Bradley-Hole, a fashion editor and blogger, asked the question more calmly.

    It is a fair question. So here is why.

    We want everyone to listen to us and read us. We want our reporting to reach as many people as possible. It is a well-established piece of social science research that if you start out with an angry tone and say something a listener disagrees with, they will tune out the facts. But if you present the facts calmly and without a tone of editorializing you substantially increase the chance that people will hear you out and weigh the facts. That is why the tone of journalism matters so much. We need potential listeners and readers to believe we are presenting the facts honestly, and not to confirm our opinions.


    Glad that’s all cleared up. Calling someone a liar is an opinion. Saying they misstated facts is not. Therefore, no one is ever a liar.

    • So that means it’s okay for me to say NPR editor Michael Oreskes has sex with porcupines.

      • BubbaDave

        You can say he has sex with porcupines, but don’t you dare call him a porcupine-fucker because that would be opinionated.

      • kayden

        Say it very calmly without a tone of editorializing and you’ll be just fine.

      • kenkohl

        I just dropped Oreskes a note expressing my disagreement with him. Fck him. And his porcupines…

      • (((Malaclypse)))

        Why does Oreskes refuse to address the porcupine issue? What can he be hiding?

    • leftwingfox

      Even if “liar” is a judgement, saying “Donald Trump made multiple false claims today” is a neutral factual statement as well, without the implication that they were unintentional, which “mis-stated” does.

  • Deggjr

    (NPR, observing the Trump Rule, merely noted that he “misstated” the facts, which is more or less like claiming that someone “mispronounced” a word that does not actually exist.)

    I had forgotten that Sarah Palin’s refudiate was named 2010 Word of the Year by the New Oxford American Dictionary.

  • Origami Isopod

    Meanwhile, Jimmy Fallon treated Trump like an old friend on The Tonight Show last night. Even ruffled his hair.

It is main inner container footer text