All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Friday, August 30, 2019

Drudge tries to spook Trump voters again


Another Friday and another hamfisted attempt by the Drudge Report to undermine support for President Donald John Trump. A week ago, Matt Drudge was sure that the trade war with Red China was going to do The Donald in because the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down. A week before that Drudge had us in a recession not caused by Red China.

Drudge has linked and bannered stories about wars with Iran, North Korea and Syria, which never materialized.

I get that he has to link breaking news, but his continual selection of anti-Trump tripe trotted out by the Fourth Estate borders on desperation, and it diminishes and discredits Drudge. He needs to show a little more discretion.

Which is a shame because America needs an alternative to the corporate internationalists who aid and abet Red China in its quest for world dominance.

Today's Doomsday by Drudge was a link to a Bloomberg News story/column/report/fairy tale, "Trump Could Be the Next George H.W. Bush."

What fresh DNC debate is this?

President Trump could indeed be a one-term president. Voters will decide that next year. But one thing he will never, ever be: George H.W. Bush. President Trump won the presidency without riding on Reagan's tail.

In fact, he won despite George H.W. Bush and his son Fredo. I mean, Jeb!

Nevertheless, Michael Bloomberg -- the Napoleon of news -- gave Professor Karl W. Smith space to make this inane argument. And Drudge made it news.

Smith began his piece with a lie.

He wrote, "Donald Trump is dangerously close to becoming the first Republican president since George H.W. Bush to raise taxes."

What a liar.

Bill Clinton raised taxes before his inauguration by making his income tax hike of 1993 retroactive to that January 1 -- 20 days before taking office.

And of course, President Trump has not raised taxes. He cut them. Substantially, including a 40% reduction in corporate taxes.

But Professor Smith meant President Trump raised tariffs, as if no one else has. All presidents do because tariffs and other economic sanctions advance foreign policy.

Eight days into the Clinton presidency, the New York Times reported, "In a victory for American steelmakers, the Commerce Department imposed steep, temporary tariffs today on steel imports from 19 countries, after determining that foreign companies were illegally selling steel in the United States for less than they did at home."

In making a phony argument that President Trump's economic policy will do him in, Professor Smith ignored the success of Trump's economic policies.

Unemployment is at its lowest in 50 years.

Worker wages are rising faster than inflation.

Consumer confidence is at its highest in 19 years.

Worse, the professor ignored why Clinton defeated Bush.

1. Bush broke a promise not to raise taxes.

2. Bush got us in a war, then turned victory into a diplomatic defeat.

3. Bush ran against a centrist Democrat and the most viable third-party candidate in 80 years.

The purpose of all this nonsense by Smith was to undermine support for the president. There are powerful forces that seek to destroy President Trump, his family, and his supporters. By making America great again, we threaten the elitists.

It saddens me to report that Drudge is slipping over to the other side.

45 comments:

  1. 4. After 12 years of GOP administrations, people were ready for a change.

    5. The economy was not well ("Saddam Hussein still has a job. Do you?")

    ReplyDelete
  2. Drudge was once my wake up go to.

    Lucianne.com took Drudge's place over 3 years ago. It's certainly not as organized or pretty a site but the links are much more fair. I pat myself on the back for leaving Drudge before it became common knowledge he runs another fake conservative site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here. I read Lucianne all the time. I glance at Drudge to see what the opposition is saying today. But I don't spend time on Drudge.

      Delete
    2. Coffee, my morning workout, coffee, Lucianne Goldbeg & her witty LDotters and Mr Surber are my morning rituals before heading off to work.

      Delete
  3. Drudge is donkey porn for the muleheads.

    His page is a splattering of wet fart spray akin to a modern art work created by the artist's vomitus upon canvas.

    Not a single pixel worthy of attention.

    Drudge is the web version of pride parade debasement.

    And the profit drudge harvests are merely the gains of the whore.

    And a fugly whore at that.

    C'mon, Don, why post about this septic tank drudge sludge at all?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I stopped checking Drudge years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Drudge? Drudge? The name rings a bell. Seems like I used to go to a site with that name a few years ago. Became anti-Trump beat as I recall. Stopped going there. Thanks Don. Now I remember why.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why is it that G. H. W. Bush is treated like Jimmy Carter with his loss in the second term, when they ignore the large percentage of Republican votes that went to Perot? Had it not been for Ross siphoning off votes from Bush, in part because Perot offered an alternative to Bush's lack luster performance and his breaking the promise of "read my lips", but wouldn't have voted FOR Clinton. Clinton won because of vote splitting among the Republicans. Bush was only slightly better than voting for McCain and Romney, a hold your nose vote but still better than Clinton. Perot gave those truly dissatisfied with Bush's performance a way out. With NAFTA being another vote shift to Perot over Bush.

    I don't see any of these moron contenders who are looking to primary Trump doing much against Trump, and if they run "independent", I don't see them garnering much in the way of vote splitting.
    Of course Drudge has moved further left with each passing month. I wonder how well his click bait rates are with his move toward the leftists. They aren't the ones who gave him support through the years, and aren't likely to do so now. He is losing many of those who used his site to get news on the right side of the aisle, and he has ticked off many to where most comments regarding him that I see are disgust.
    Maybe his continual refresh rate, and the NeverTrumpers are helping his numbers slightly, but I think he must have gotten an infusion of $$$ from some leftist outfit which is pushing him left in his bias.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly right. No H. Ross, HW second term. Politics is funny shite, man. On the ground, it’s like almost every day is potential Armageddon. What’s needed is faith, both in the Deplorables and God. ANY believer in the God of our Bible, the One True God, knows that on abortion, property rights, free speech - you know, the “all men are created equal” stuff - we’re on the winning team. Walk like winners, my friends. We got this, because God’s got this.

      Delete
    2. "Had it not been for Ross siphoning off votes from Bush"

      Bzzzzzt! Wrong. Perot siphoned off votes evenly from Bush and Clinton. Had Perot not been in the race, the outcome would have been the same. Unfortunately, the GOP has a vested interest in perpetuating this little fable.

      Delete
    3. George HW Bush is the reason for NAFTA. You can include Reagan too, because he voiced the idea, but I am not aure he would have been pleased with the result.

      HW negotiated it, signed it, and submitted it to Congress. He then lost the election.

      HW Bush did not fight back. He felt it was beneath a president to do so. He was defined by media and opponents and made no real attempt to define himself and to counter others.

      HW did raise taxes going against his pledge.

      Sure, we ousted Iraq from
      Kuwait. I have a medal from that. However, Saddam claimed victory just for surviving with no push back from HW. This was one of the reasons OBL used to claim the US was a paper tiger and to attack the US on 9-11.

      The problem with HW was is his constant going back on his stated principles, his utter lack of capitalizing on his successes, and no effective public push back against the media and his opponents, which also became many Republicans for agreeing to many Democrat's demands.

      Delete
    4. Everyone, listen to Old Sarge. It was an even draw from both. I remember the sinking feeling I had when GHWB was nominated - a feeling repeated in 1996 with Dole - that the game was rigged.

      Delete
  7. I think that Trump is offsetting any cost of tariffs by getting rid of allot of regulations.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Drudge is the Bill Kristol of news aggregators.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Drudge circumstances eerily similar to Sal Mineo (if you know what I mean).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I do. I don't hope for the same ending though.

      Delete
  10. Yep, it has been over a decade since Drudge has broke any real news on his own. His regular phony attacks on Trump have lost me as a reader.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup! Me too!

      Do you think maybe SOROS has "BOUGHT" old MATT off?

      Wouldn't surprise me. Are ALL journalists whores at heart?

      Seems so. FOX is going bad too. Look more like FUX every day, excpt for Judge Janine Piro and Mark Levin. Tucker, Sean and Laura are so strident and overbearng I can't stand them anymore.

      Levin RULES!

      Delete
    2. It's good that he got over his self declaration of being a NeverTrumper.

      But, to kock the others while promoting him seems weird, especially since Hannity was cheerleading for Trump when Levin was working against.

      Delete
    3. I meant "knock", but the other works too.

      Delete
  11. I was on Drudge the other day. There was an article about Bernie Sanders' "plan for the press." I thought the article would be negative to Bernie. It was a MSM article, calling Trump all the usual names and praised Bernie for wanting to give the MSM even more power and voice.

    I already hated Drudge for his fearmongerin' and Ann Coulter fingerbangin'. I have a lot of free time at work so if I read all there is on my usual haunts, I go there. No more. Plus... Drudge needs to code his site better, scrub. Open a new tab by clicking a link.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ugh--I cannot stand Drudge. I switched to Whatfinger.com which is a million times better.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pardon me but your tense is wrong. "is slipping" should be "has slipped", as in a long time ago. You do see that every single time Drudge is brought up there are a bunch of comments about "I no longer visit that site because he went all liberal".

    ReplyDelete
  14. Knowing who and what the Democrats are, it seems likely Drudge is either being bribed by the Demonrats or blackmailed for millions or threats on loved ones. Remember, no vile act is beneath the Demonrats.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Drudge is no longer trustworthy. Apparently Trump is not sufficiently supportive of the LGBTQ agenda to suit him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Drudge the Sludge was never trustworthy.

      Drudge is the self pimping hustler you know will never not give you herpes.

      Just another maggot pretending to be a bumblebee.

      Delete
  16. I'm also a former Drudge guy. I come here first thing in the AM. Covfefe with Don.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If Kelly Ann's husband or the Mooch get up in the morning, open a window, and shout "Trump is Beelzebub"--they get a cite at Drudge.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm convinced that somehow Drudge is comped, and "They" are now telling him how to run his site. Remember how Glenn Beck became a hysterical never-Trumper? Drudge may not be hysterical (yet), but his trajectory looks like it's going to be similar.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I perceived that Drudge was anti Trump during the primaries. That perception was hardened during the general. He went from being my longtime go to site for news to my last choice. I usually check whatfingernews first, Townhall second and Infowars third. I haven't checked Drudge in two years.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It's good to see all these comments against Drudge, I left that site during the 2016 election because it seemed so anti Trump and I never went back. I thought it was just me as I don't know many who visit the site to ask what they think of Drudge....now I know. Thanks all!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Everything negative that was written about the Drudge Report is true. It saddens me to see his blog slip so far to the left. I also use whatfinger.com to get my news. Whereas I used to click on his blog numerous times per day, I now only visit it every now and then. When I do, it is with the understanding to see what the enemy is doing. Drudge is not only moving to the left, he is the left.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I wondered if I was the only one who thought Drudge was going over to the dark side

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am in agreement with everyone. I dropped viewing Drudge Report just recentlly. All Drudge publushes is DNC hyperbole.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Drudge is no longer an option for Conservatives; try Whatfinger!

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anyone know why Drudge went from nominally pro Trump, to rabid Never Trumper? Did Trump kill his kitten or something?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ever so erudite bobbywhatzit!!!!

      Kicking the bobbywhatzit game up a notch!!

      Delete
  27. I no longer go to Drudge as I seen the shift to anti-trump on that site/ I now go to Whatfinger

    ReplyDelete
  28. Don't read drudge its that simple. You will go insane reading his site. Try "Whatfinger" "Lucianne" "Citizen Free Press" Drudge is corporate media. Don't play the game

    ReplyDelete