As a long-time journalist, I can say that even powerful campaigns can't micromanage when leaks bubble to the surface. It can be like it is in the movies, but often it's not. There's something odd about waiting this long to find the tape. Access Hollywood said they were inspired to look after some AP stories about crude remarks Trump has made about women. It still doesn't pass the smell test. This could be great theater tonight. Trump may have worn out his appeal to the point that he's politically impotent. And Hillary Clinton may have some great zingers.
On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:49 AM, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Tom Wolper <twol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> 2. The campaign that Hillary Clinton is running is amazing. I think it is >> better than the campaign Obama ran in 2008 but I would need to see a >> post-election wrapup to decide. The campaign was put together in 2015 to run >> uphill against the traditional impulse to change parties in the White House >> after 8 years. That they got to run against a circus act with a fractured >> party behind him was a gift, but they still go full out to win. I have no >> idea how long the Clinton campaign has been sitting on this tape but they >> waited for the best time to leak it to the Washington Post and it was >> yesterday. In my Twitter feed last evening I saw a retweet from an anti-GOP >> consultant saying that there is much worse out there. So the Clinton >> campaign will release it in dribs and drabs over the coming month. And today >> on Twitter I see that we should expect to see ads showing GOP candidates in >> 2018 and 2020 announcing their support for Trump along with the worst of >> these leaks. > > > > I am not sure how literal you are being about your #2 here, but I have to > dispute it, in several ways: > > First, has it really been stablished that this story came from the Clinton > campaign in any way? The WaPo itself published a story yesterday that the > Access Hollywood people found the clip themselves (apparently everyone was > archives of Trump footage is going through it looking for material). NBC, > which apparently owns Access Hollywood, made them sit on the story for 4 > days while their lawyers worried over it (for no obvious reason, except they > had already been bullied by threatened Trump lawsuits). Eventually the WaPo > reporter got an anonymous tip about the footage, confirmed it, and they ran > the story within a day. NBC got wind that the WaPo story was coming, but > rather than putting its already produced story out first, let the WaPo break > it, then published their story on MSNBC.com immediately after. It is > possible the anonymous source that tipped WaPo was from the Clinton campaign > I suppose, but NBC seems to be assuming it is someone who works at Access > Hollywood. See: > https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nbc-delayed-publication-of-lewd-trump-tape-because-of-lawsuit-fears/2016/10/08/a3c6850e-8db9-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html > > Second, it is not clear to me that, even if the Clinton campaign did have > this story, there would have been any real reason to hold it until last > Friday. Their big lead melted away all through August and September; I think > it would be almost impossible for any campaign to hold a story like this > while in free fall, on the theory that it would be more effective at the > end of the first week of October. If anything you might think they would > have released it a few days before Debate #1, which was so very crucial for > the Clinton campaign. Indeed, the story (which a friend of mine is calling > "BushGate", which I find amusing but perhaps inappropriate) has created a > perfect storm in large part because of Hillary raising the Machado issue at > Debate 1, and Trump's almost suicidal response to it in the days after the > debate, and then Pence's absurd denials during the VP Debate. That is a > string of events that would have been pretty much impossible to anticipate > in the weeks or months before the first Debate. > > Third, I have not seen an anti-GOP consultant predict more and worse to > come; what I saw was Hugh Hewitt (a very influential and very conservative > pro-GOP blogger) tweet: "For the benefit of the country, the party and his > family, and for his own good, @realDonaldTrump should withdraw. More and > worse oppo coming". "Oppo" here implies "Opposition Research", or dirt dug > out and manipulated by political opponents; but again, I have not seen > evidence to support that this story came from Trump's opposition, or even > any reports implying such. > > Finally, I do not share your overwhelmingly positive view of Hillary's > campaign, and certainly would not put it in the same league as Obama 2008, > which will go down as one of the most effective campaigns in American > political history. I agree that all other things being equal the deck is > stacked against a candidate trying to win a third consecutive term for their > party - but if she was running against almost anyone other than Trump (the > almost is for Cruz), Hillary would very likely be behind right now. Her > campaign was slow and clumsy in dealing with Sanders during the primaries, > and even though they have known about her main liabilities (email, Wall > Street ties) for a long time, they were almost Jeb-Bushian in their stunning > inability to have a competent response to an overwhelmingly predictable > question. They did put on an amazing convention, which will go down as > having been a very important part of this campaign, and they prepared her > very well for the first Debate. But their ground game lags behind Obama 2012 > and 2008, and they are not terribly nimble or strategic in dealing with the > news cycle when it turns against them. I am not saying they are horrible, > but if Obama 2008 defined a grade of A+ (and HIllary 2008 a grade of C-) I > would give Hillary 2016 more like a B. > > I might up that grade to a B+ if they can manage the current cycle by > keeping the pressure on Trump without getting down in the gutter with him. > By all reports Trump is going to use tonight's Debate to unload on Bill > Clinton's sex scandals; this has been pretty clear for two weeks, and almost > certain since Friday night. Let's see how she parries that. It can't become > something like "sticking a cigar in a consenting 19 year old's vagina is > better than the non-consensual grabbing of a stranger's vagina". It has to > be something more like: "You are debating me, not my husband and your > constant attempts to bring him up are just another example of your inability > to treat women with respect". > > -- > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
