Today's Headlines: Trump, Trump, Trump, while Hillary's Foreign Policy Speech Reduced to Trump-bash

[berni_mccoy]

If Hillary was seeking to take the headlines yesterday with her Foreign Policy speech, she failed miserably. The big problem with her foreign policy speech: it didn't discuss foreign policy. It only bashed Trump's statements on foreign policy. Any good marketing person worth their salt will tell you you don't talk about the competitor. When you do, you admit they're the front runner. To reflect this lesson, today, not one media outlet has her speech as a headline on it's front page. But guess who does get headline coverage? Yup, Trump.

The rest of the MSM are covering mostly Trump stories, but not in relation to Hillary's trump bash.

NYT: "Trump Could Threaten U.S. Rule of Law, Scholars Say"
WaPo: "Chaos unleashed in San Jose as protesters attack Trump supporters"
CNN: "Olympics: Rio 2016's 'perfect storm"
MSNBC: "Trump's Takeover Now Complete"
CBS News: "Crews search for soldiers missing in Texas flooding" (they do have a sub-headline for Trump though)

In other words, no one gives a shit besides Hillary supporters if she bashes Trump. They are worried about their health-care, they are worried about paying their bills, they are worried about making a living wage, they are worried about the quality of their water (fracking), they are worried about losing their jobs as companies outsource because of unfair trade deals, they are worried about their kids educations that they nor their kids can afford, they are worried about the effects of climate change (floods, droughts, fires, etc, etc) and the impact on this planet as we leave a huge mess to clean-up to our children and their children.

While her fan club here cheers her on, they should look at all the republicans who failed to take down Trump with speeches (Bush, Rubio, Romney, etc, etc, etc). This speech doesn't show anything about Hillary other than she can put up some zingers on Trump, which hasn't done much for anyone, let alone the voters. If she wanted to show some strength, that she could earn the credibility she needs to with progressives, she should have delivered either a real speech on foreign policy or discussed the many issues that most of America is really stressing over.

One thing is for sure, the more she keeps talking about Trump, the more Trump is going to win.

[NCTraveler]

1. You could be no more selective in making your severly flawed argument.

It is a step up from your fear of the "word cloud". So I guess we have that as a silver lining.

Foolishness destroyed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512113881

[msanthrope]

2. I'm guessing the word cloud didn't pan out for you? mt

[Sivart]

3. I don't understnad what she was trying to accomplish.....

Its like she took Romney's speech and tweaked it a little.

We saw during the republican primaries over and over what happens when Trump is directly attacked. his poll numbers go up, and the person who attacked him ends up looking silly for trying to out trump Trump

I'm not saying he should not be attacked.....but most of her attacks were ones already tried by Bush, Cristie, Rubio, etc. This stuff just doesn't work on Trump...the insults and making fun of him over his TV show....it has never worked against Trump.

The media likes it because they can't wait for Trump's reaction.

I agree with you.....this speech changes nothing. All it did was give a stage for Trump to respond and do his thing. Its like she is stooping to his level.

Hope she knows what she is doing.

Edited to add that it was a great attack against trump.....but we have been watching people do this over and over for months and months and months and months.

[YouDig]

4. A great sign it was a home run is that you are this upset by it.

[leftynyc]

7. +1000

It was pathetically predictable.

[One Black Sheep]

5. Yep, that is why Hillary is such a weak candidate. Attacks like this by conventional and

establishment politicians don't work against Trump, as the field of multiple vanquished GOP candidates can attest.

The problem is, most Trump supporters are fanatically loyal to their candidate, and write off attacks like this just as more lies and distortions by a corrupt establishment and a "liberal media".

And Hillary as the messenger just plays right into these reinforced perceptions, since she is an elite, long time establishment politician.

Hillary could literally say Trump is the anti-christ, or Hitler reincarnated, and all those Trump supporters would just shrug it off.

[leftynyc]

6. Leave it to you to

post the most pathetic OP of the day - ALL the morning shows were talking about Hillary's speech and donnie's pathetic twitter hissy fit about it. When they weren't talking about that, they were talking about his histrionics about the judge in the Trump U case. You know who never merited a mention? That would be Bernie because he's done.

[frylock]

8. Wow. I was lead to believe this was the new Gettysburg Address.

[Xyzse]

9. I did mention something of that sort recently.

One word of warning for her however.

She talked mostly about foreign policy, he talked about economics, trade and jobs. They both talked about how awful each other would be.

As dumb as he sounded, I felt the topics that the two had were reversed, and I tend to think the message about economy and jobs as the stronger motivator in comparison to the fear of foreign policy and how much of a disaster he would be

Her speech was polished and done well for what it was.

It really was crafted to provide a contrast. It definitely burnishes her foreign policy credentials. However, I consider foreign policy as a tertiary matter in comparison to the other matters the country is facing at this time.

1 - It was eloquent but that is not always what people pay attention to. Unfortunately, the days where that mattered are numbered.
2 - It was interesting to see the difference between the subjects. Her on Foreign Policy, he was talking about the Economy. Which is a reversal between Democrats and Republicans. She definitely is far more credible than Trump in regards to this. However, that message is not the strongest one.
3 - Both bash on each other, so the object of the game is to figure out who to vote against.
4 - She did finally go after building up the infrastructure, yet not placing its relationship with the economy was an oversight. Sadly, for many, she lacks credibility in this.

Stating how terrible Trump is, though true, is still a losing campaign strategy as everything else she is advocating is keeping the status quo. That though she gives lip service to the idea of improving infrastructure, it sounds hollow as the rest of the speech tends to merely try to convince that America is fine the way it has been coasting, using bygone imagery.

She will need to improve on the economy, jobs and trade. What is sad to note, is that, that was what Trump talked about more during his speech. What he said was platitudes that don't make sense and would be a disaster in the making, but that is what he concentrated on.

So, well delivered speech. Hopefully it will resonate beyond those that already support her.