Cameras.
8-track tapes.
Stand by for number three.
The editorial boards of the Washington Post and the Boston Globe both penned condemnations of Donald Trump this week, urging the Republican Party to reject him.
On Tuesday, the Boston Globe published a scathing editorial
titled "Massachusetts voters must stop Donald Trump." The authors wrote
that "stopping Donald Trump is imperative -- and not just for his
fellow Republicans."
And on Thursday, after Trump's resounding victory in the Nevada caucuses, the editors of the Washington Post followed suit.
Under the headline "GOP leaders, you must do everything in your power
to stop Trump," the paper's editors exhorted the Republican Party to
repudiate the man who is increasingly likely to be their nominee in
November.
"GOP leaders, you must do
everything in your power to stop Trump," the editors warned, cautioning
party leadership against warming to Trump for the chance at the White
House.
"History will not look kindly on
GOP leaders who fail to do everything in their power to prevent a
bullying demagogue from becoming their standard-bearer," they wrote.
"The unthinkable is starting to look like the inevitable."
In
the Globe editorial, the authors called on unenrolled voters, who are
able to participate the Republican primary, to back Ohio Gov. John
Kasich, whom the Globe has endorsed. They also criticized Texas Sen. Ted
Cruz and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson for being "right wing," and
knocked Florida Sen. Marco Rubio for a lack of experience.
The
left-leaning editorial board noted that since the Bay State awards
delegates proportionally, not winner-take-all, a vote for a non-Trump
candidate won't be wasted.
The Globe
editors also cautioned Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters and
officials against strategically rooting for Trump with the assumption he
would be easily defeated in a general election, warning, "That's
playing with fire. Just remember how few pundits believed Trump would
ever make it this far."
"The best way
to stop Trump is to stop Trump now," they wrote. "But as the race turns
to Massachusetts, the answer to John F. Kennedy's question -- 'ask what
you can do for your country' -- has rarely been clearer: unenrolled
voters should pull a Republican ballot and vote for John Kasich because
it's a vote against Donald Trump."
Throughout modern history, the support and/or endorsement of major newspapers has been, to presidential candidates, the next best (or even better) thing to (than) a massive injection of good old fashioned dollar donation.
Faithful readers of this Daily or that Gazette or this Herald Tribune relied a lot on the wisdom, be it profound or simply perceived, of these front porch parchments when it came to determining who they were going to vote for come election day. After all, newspapers were the primary (sometimes, even, sole) means available to the average Joe or Jane Citizen of acquiring information, knowledge, facts about who was running and where they stood. Throw in a splash of the aforementioned insightful or imagined wisdom and advice offered up each day on the op/ed pages and thousands, actually, probably, millions of minds were swayed one way or the other leading up to the closing of the curtains and the burgeoning of the ballots.
In a world bereft of the opportunity to judge the merits of a man (or woman) up close and personal, the newspapers of the nation landed on front lawns from sea to shining sea to assist American voters in making up their minds by, pretty much literally, making up their minds for them.
Enter cable television.
And the Internet.
And the world of twenty four/seven 365 day a year live news, live interviews, live debates, live town hall meetings, between the beginning of it and the end of it, presidential campaigns offering up, literally, hundreds, if not thousands, of opportunities for Joe and Jane there to see for themselves what the candidates look like, hear for themselves what the candidates have to say, make up their own minds as to whether to take the hand reaching out for their vote or turn away and move on to the next office seeker standing in line for a chance to say hello, how are you, what's it gonna take to put you in that voting booth for me today?
And as happens when cultural evolution occurs, that which was once powerful begins to lose power, that which was critically necessary becomes useful, at best, but, ultimately, unnecessary.
There is a case to be made, of course, that there are still a sizable number of folks who want to know what the newspapers have to say. And even though the presentation has also evolved, with fewer people each day fluffing open the printed pages at the breakfast table or on the commuter train as opposed to clicking the mouse or swiping the pad to see what's what and who's who, the various publishers and editors and commentators are still right there publishing and editing and commentating.
There will always be people who passionately believe in freedom of choice in the form of being told what and who it is they should choose.
God bless em' and America.
But for a growing number of voters, come each new election cycle, the bygone days of deciding on a presidential candidate by waiting to read who the Washington Post or The Boston Globe or The Mayberry Daily News, for that matter, had decided upon are exactly that.
Bygone days.
And anyone dubious about the notion that newspapers simply don't carry the clout they used to when it comes to herding the masses in this ideological direction or that need only go back and re-read what the Post and Globe are up to these days.
Not so much a "here's who we've decided it's best for you to support" as "for the love of God, are you out of your freakin' minds supporting Donald Trump?"
Proudly waving a banner in advocacy of someone and panickingly waving people off someone aren't even remotely close to the same thing.
And millions of people storming past the news stands and their disregarded op/ed pages might not be a sign of the end of the Post or the Globe or the Tribune.
But it's absolutely a sign of the times.
Smart phones take studio quality photographs and videos.
IPods and MP3 provide studio quality music.
And you can't swing a dead cat, or a wireless mouse, without getting all the up close and personal you need when it comes to deciding who you want to see given the automatic garage door codes at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Three things contemporary culture has pretty much made obsolete.
Cameras.
8 track tapes.
Newspaper endorsements.
No comments:
Post a Comment