What if the major media players (who are known to favor democrats) are trying to influence who becomes the Republic Party candidate to face Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election?
Suppose they believe that Hillary will have an easier time beating Donald Trump than Ted Cruz and are “helping” him move towards the nomination by providing free air time.
It’s pretty obvious that Trump has been the beneficiary of almost three times as much airtime as either Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz – he’s become ubiquitous – he’s everywhere – and it’s free.
Virtually any time Trump wants to monopolize political discourse, all he has to do is call a press conference and he’ll get a massive in-kind contribution of free airtime by the national media and his words will be carried live by every television station.
Ask yourself whether you think that the media’s lopsided coverage of Donald Trump has the Republican Party’s best interest in mind? Could it be possible that they are assisting him because they perceive that he would be the weakest candidate to challenge Hillary Clinton?
The latest Real Clear Politics general election polls show that Hillary would beat Trump by 8 points while she would lose to Cruz by 1 point. Of course, it’s early and there’s no telling where the polls will be in even a week from now, but at the present, Hillary polls better against Trump than any of the other still active Republican candidates.
This could be why Ted Cruz has accused the national media of a “curious” reluctance to delve very deeply into Trump’s long track record in finance and business deals. Cruz is positing that they’re deliberately ignoring a number of potential “bombshells” until Trump wins the nomination and then, they’ll let loose the hounds of hell. Cruz says that reporters have told him that the media organizations have gathered opposition research materials in order to expose Donald Trump “when the time is right.” That sounds rather ominous.
Why would the national media be so silent about Trump’s tax returns (so far), or about that “off the record” meeting with the New York Times editorial board where he supposedly softened his stance on immigration. Aren’t those issues worth investigating? Or could it be that they prefer to “save” that ammunition until it’ll benefit Hillary’s campaign? And those are only two examples of issues that could be exploited to damage Trump’s chances in the general election.
It’s happened before; remember how John McCain was the media’s fair-haired boy up until he became the Republican nominee? Then the media jumped on him with both feet, publishing shabby smear pieces about sexual affairs and bashing him about not releasing medical records.
I know that this smacks of some sort of conspiracy by the media, but it doesn’t require cooperation between media entities to do what comes naturally – hold their fire until they see the whites of Trump’s eyes.