By Rafael Ponce de León

Image credit: Efe

 

Donald J. Trump’s election as president of the United States came at a time when the world faces an existential crisis. This crisis is not a new phenomenon, but Trump’s election has served to make it known.

Undoubtedly, we have entered a new era, characterized by growing uncertainty, fears, divisions, and other polarizing influences that fuel the flames of discontent and lack of public trust in our leaders and social and governmental institutions. For many, the future of democracy, freedom and justice is precariously in the balance.

Since the November 2016 elections, there has been an obsession with Donald Trump and everything he stands for. Some people to this day are still in shock because Trump won. While many of the national polls showed that the race was tied or too close, some media sources chose to report only on polls that showed Hillary Clinton as the clear leader.

No wonder some people were surprised on election night. Nor is it surprising that some people didn’t bother to go to the polls that day.

The fixation on Clinton’s assured victory, coupled with the impossibility of imagining a Trump victory, resulted in a complacency that worked against him.

Some people find it difficult to interact meaningfully with those who have different points of view. And that is the case for many members of the Democratic Party’s political leadership.

In these three years we have seen how the president has been sabotaged and attacked from all possible sides, achieving a not so encouraging result. Although Trump is not perfect and has made mistakes, none of those mistakes so far has been so important as to attract massive public attention, not even the show that has been taking place these days with the process of “impeachment”.

Let’s see how negative press coverage of the first 100 days of President Trump’s administration was. To begin with, it got much more coverage than Barack Obama, George W. Bush or Bill Clinton, according to a new report by the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University.

Several Harvard scholars analyzed the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and major CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC news during Trump’s initial tenure. They discovered, to no one’s surprise, that Trump absolutely dominated news coverage in the first 100 days. And then they discovered that the news coverage was totally negative: 80 percent negative among the media studied, versus 20 percent positive.

Leaving accusations of bias aside, it is simply a fact that several negative things happened in the first 100 days of Trump in power. The Russian investigation, for example, was the source of endless criticism from Democrats and other opponents of Trump.

The executive order for a travel ban caused intense discussions and losses for the administration in the courts. The health debacle created more negative coverage because it was a major mistake and setback for both Trump and the House Republicans.

That said, some news organizations’ coverage was so negative, according to the Harvard study, that it seems difficult to argue that the coverage was even close to a neutral presentation of the facts. In evaluating the news coverage, Harvard researchers found that CNN’s Trump coverage was 93 percent negative and seven percent positive, similar to what happened for CBS, NBC, ABC and MSNBC.

All the Democrats had to do was not go after the president like crazy, and they couldn’t even do that right. They began by demanding that Donald Trump not be “normalized” as president, and then proceeded to act as abnormally as possible. Strangely, this strategy seems to be counterproductive and is more than seen to favor the president broadly.

History indicates that those who have lost elections in the United States have usually accepted defeat, thus demonstrating their loyalty to the American system, and have endeavored to show voters that they were worthy of being elected next time. That means working with the other side as much as you can, to show that the good of the country is being prioritized, as well as acting sensibly and responsibly the rest of the time. That has definitely not been the approach the Democrats have chosen.

What they have done instead is belittle and attack Trump whenever they can, showing tremendous impatience to the extent that they seem to be driven by their impulses and do not think quietly and slowly about what they are doing.

The elections are less than a year away and as of today it seems as if the Democrats are playing another party, the party of losing on purpose, the party in which they do not show clear ideas to help improve the policies of the country, they have only been vicious with President Trump and if we continue like this we will undoubtedly see another resounding triumph of the current president.

 

 

——————–
Political Hispanic is not responsible for the content of opinion articles, each author being responsible for their own creations.

Déjanos tu opinión