In a This Week discussion about the prospects for different Democratic 2020 candidates on Sunday, ABC’s faux Republicans Matthew Dowd proclaimed that the Democratic Party was much closer to what the rest of the country believed than the Republican Party was. On top of that, Newsweek and Daily Beast writer Michael Tomasky suggested that a candidate with low name ID like Washington Governor Jay Inslee could “very easily” beat President Trump.
Once a hero for Democrats and the left, Anthony Kennedy now is being reviled as a defective pawn of the liberal cause. On July 2, The Daily Beast published an article under the headline, “Anthony Kennedy, You Are a Total Disgrace to America.”
The New York Review of Books February 22 issue prominently displayed journalist Michael Tomasky’s blessing of two virulently anti-Trump books, Michael Wolff’s infamous Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, and the anti-conservative jeremiad Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republican by David Frum. The NYRB’s cover teaser read “Fire in the White House.” The review's title was “The Worst of the Worst.” Tomasky warned of the danger of Trump’s “incitement of private violence to radicalize supporters.”
You don’t have to have been president of the United States to qualify for the “Miss Me Yet?” meme, suggested Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky on Thursday. Tomasky contended that it’s “a tragedy” that Donald Trump became POTUS instead of Hillary Clinton and opined that Clinton would have been a “good” president, though he thinks Republicans might have prevented her from being “great” by holding “impeachment hearings…over far smaller matters than the things we know the Trump family has done. That would be rough, but I know this much…She wouldn’t be an international embarrassment.”
There is a conspiracy against Donald Trump, believes The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky, but it’s inanimate: a “conspiracy of facts,” not a “conspiracy of liberals” in the media. The facts, Tomasky claimed in a Tuesday column, “simply do not damn [Hillary] Clinton in the way that [Trump] and his supporters believe they should. Take the new story, about the FBI and State and the alleged ‘quid pro quo.’ As all the news stories state plainly, eventually, in the sixth or seventh graf, there was no quid pro quo.” Tomasky blasted both Trump's “ridiculous whining” about the media and the idea that “the media are in Hillary’s pocket. Lord. The New York Times has been after her since 1992”
As a rule, liberals think that most criticism of Hillary Clinton is invalid. Michael Tomasky has dared to put a number on “most.” In a Tuesday column, Tomasky wrote, “I’d say that around 80 percent of what you’ve read about [Hillary] over the years is simply false. It didn’t happen the way it was presented, or a lot of the time it didn’t happen at all. And she has long since even stopped trying to correct the record in many cases, figuring it’s just no use.”
On Wednesday, Michael Tomasky, apropos of a challenge the media face in covering Donald Trump, mused that “‘objective’ news reporting -- and this is a real crisis with no easy answers -- is ill-positioned to call a lie a lie.” On Thursday, Tomasky urged the media to upgrade their position by taking certain “drastic measures” that “Trump has forced…upon us” as a consequence of his lying “literally most of the time he’s talking.”
Complaints from liberal pundits about media bias against Hillary Clinton have snowballed during the past few days. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman had the most high-profile effort, which contrasted “the impression that [Donald Trump is] being graded on a curve” with “the presumption that anything [Hillary] does must be corrupt,” and some of the others have taken aim at Krugman’s newspaper for its Hillary-hounding. For example, Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo sniped semi-sarcastically that the Times “appears to be revisiting its 'whitewater' [sic] glory days with its increasingly parodic coverage” of the Clinton Foundation and accused the paper of having “a decades' long history of being [led] around by rightwing opposition researchers into dead ends which amount to journalistic comedy…especially when it comes to the Clintons.”
The New York Times is spending its Labor Day holiday plotting the Democratic takeover of Congress and the overthrow of "far-right conservatives." The Sunday Review devoted its entire front page and two inside pages (three out of the section’s ten pages) for “Getting America Back In Gear,” consisting of two essays by two liberals devoted to strategizing how Democrats can take over the House of Representatives in November, while mitigating the “far-right” Republicans already there.
According to Tomasky, Democrats shouldn’t feel lucky that they haven’t dealt with a loose-cannon celebrity candidate à la Donald Trump. Rather, they should be proud that their party wouldn’t come close to nominating anyone like that in the first place. “I feel for conservative pundits and thinkers to some extent, I really do,” wrote Tomasky in a Monday column. “I’ve wondered many times what I would do if the situation were reversed. But here’s the thing: The situation is not reversed. And it would never be reversed. The idea that the Democrats would nominate Sean Penn or, I don’t know, Alan Grayson...or Charlie Sheen or Susan Sarandon or whomever is totally insane.”
In an Internet meme from President Obama’s first term, George W. Bush asked America, “Miss Me Yet?” Even though The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky is a liberal, he does miss Dubya, after a fashion. In a Monday column, Tomasky called Bush “one of the worst presidents” ever but conceded that when he was POTUS, the Republican party was a mere “war-starting, economy-wrecking” outfit, while today’s GOP is far worse in terms of “open racism and paranoid sociopathy.” Tomasky sees Bush as well-positioned to spearhead the reform Republicans need: "After Trump (hopefully) loses, Bush should try to lead the GOP back to planet Earth…The best remaining way for Bush to salvage his reputation is to trash Trump’s.”
With developments including the Democratic sit-in on the House floor and Sen. Chris Murphy’s yeah-he-went-there allegation that “Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS,” it’s been a busy and highly theatrical week among anti-gun forces. Michael Tomasky thinks the tide on gun issues is turning in favor of liberals, but expects they won’t win decisively until there’s “a tragedy” -- a deadly mass shooting -- “that will make everyone, even the number of Republicans who’d be needed to break a filibuster, say ‘enough.’” Tomasky imagined that such an incident “would have to…click all the demographic boxes just right—a white man who bought an assault weapon with no background check and went on a rampage and killed many white people in a heavily Republican part of the country.”