Tucker Carlson made poor Ted Cruz grovel and beg. It was cruel. Tucker Carlson loved doing it.
Tucker Carlson is running for president.
The clip below is television worth watching. Every pundit who dislikes Ted Cruz--and there are many of them across the political spectrum--showed it gleefully and commented. It will be a landmark in our political history.
 |
| Fox News: seven minutes |
Ted Cruz's error, as Carlson saw it, was to have said: "The attack at the Capitol was a despicable act of terrorism and a shocking assault on our democratic system." Tucker Carlson found the quote and objected. Ted Cruz begged for mercy. Please, please accept my apology, please let me explain away my error, you are right, so right, please don't cast me out into the darkness of your contempt.
Most of the commentary has been about the self-humiliation of Ted Cruz. The comments put it into the context of Cruz's support for Trump notwithstanding Trump saying Cruz's wife is ugly and his father plotted to kill JFK. The pundits wonder and chuckle: Is there no bottom whatever to the humiliation Cruz will accept?
Trump understands domination and hierarchy. As acutely as anyone in America, Trump understands that Tucker Carlson has stepped out of place and has become a rival, not an asset. Carlson did not directly challenge Trump. On its surface he defended Trump. But Carlson took over Trump's job defining the riot to the GOP electorate. Trump had been the guy who humiliates and dispatches rivals: Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Pocahontas. He just watched Carlson do it here, and saw the pundits' delight. Carlson is usurping Trump and doing it better. The assistant made the sales pitch and landed the client, and did it in public. That stings for Trump and it should. It is a threat.
Trump is not done being the center of attention and boss. Trump did not choose Carlson. Carlson chose himself, acting on his own ambition and skill at giving the populist message the base loves. Worse, Fox sponsors and empowers him the way Fox did for Trump in the past. Trump sees the handwriting. He is the account executive watching his biggest client get solicited by a very able competitor. Carlson has the bigger, better platform: 4.8 million Twitter followers and the most-watched show on Fox. Trump has a little-read website and a start-up media company with stolen software.
Another tack for the commentary was about message and meaning of the riot. Pundits saw it as another example of GOP politicians getting clear that January 6 was something to be proud of, not ashamed of. Carlson defines the January 6 riot as a broadly legitimate protest by patriotic citizens. Carlson upbraided Cruz: "You called this a terror attack, when by no definition was this a terror attack. That's a lie. You told that lie on purpose. I wonder why you did that."
In Carlson's view those protesters were nearly all good people, representative of the 73 million people who voted for Trump. He said a few false-flag Democrats and deep state FBI provocateurs joined them. Those bad apples deserve the blame for any distasteful things seen on camera. Besides the damage and violence was over-hyped and misrepresented by the media. The real story is how the Democrats did it and are getting away with it.
I propose a third meaning for the takedown on Fox. This is Tucker Carlson's campaign announcement. Carlson did what a political leader does. A leader defines the political terrain and explains to the public what they are seeing. Carlson said we are seeing good versus evil and the good guys are the Trump-supporting, election-doubting citizens. The villains are Nancy Pelosi who failed to protect the Capitol, the unknown provocateurs, and Democrats and the biased media calling it terrorism, with Cruz's help.
I propose a third meaning for the takedown on Fox. This is Tucker Carlson's campaign announcement. Carlson did what a political leader does. A leader defines the political terrain and explains to the public what they are seeing. Carlson said we are seeing good versus evil and the good guys are the Trump-supporting, election-doubting citizens. The villains are Nancy Pelosi who failed to protect the Capitol, the unknown provocateurs, and Democrats and the biased media calling it terrorism, with Cruz's help.
A political leader claims and sustains dominance within a party. “I don’t believe you,” Carlson told Cruz, said with dismissive disdain. "Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don't buy that," Carlson interrupted, when Cruz tried to explain and backtrack. Carlson was decisive and certain. Cruz submitted, thus confirming their roles. Carlson is the boss.
We are at a moment of uncertainty. Carlson is now heir apparent. He stepped in front of Cruz in the hierarchy. Cruz had been saying he had been number two in 2016, so he was the natural heir. No longer. By humiliating Cruz, Carlson became senior to Don Junior, Ivanka, Nicki Haley, Mike Pence, Josh Hawley, John Kasich and everyone else roaming the country giving speeches. The uncertainty is Trump.
We are at a moment of uncertainty. Carlson is now heir apparent. He stepped in front of Cruz in the hierarchy. Cruz had been saying he had been number two in 2016, so he was the natural heir. No longer. By humiliating Cruz, Carlson became senior to Don Junior, Ivanka, Nicki Haley, Mike Pence, Josh Hawley, John Kasich and everyone else roaming the country giving speeches. The uncertainty is Trump.
 |
| 2016: Trump in the middle of the stage |
Trump understands domination and hierarchy. As acutely as anyone in America, Trump understands that Tucker Carlson has stepped out of place and has become a rival, not an asset. Carlson did not directly challenge Trump. On its surface he defended Trump. But Carlson took over Trump's job defining the riot to the GOP electorate. Trump had been the guy who humiliates and dispatches rivals: Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Pocahontas. He just watched Carlson do it here, and saw the pundits' delight. Carlson is usurping Trump and doing it better. The assistant made the sales pitch and landed the client, and did it in public. That stings for Trump and it should. It is a threat.
Trump is not done being the center of attention and boss. Trump did not choose Carlson. Carlson chose himself, acting on his own ambition and skill at giving the populist message the base loves. Worse, Fox sponsors and empowers him the way Fox did for Trump in the past. Trump sees the handwriting. He is the account executive watching his biggest client get solicited by a very able competitor. Carlson has the bigger, better platform: 4.8 million Twitter followers and the most-watched show on Fox. Trump has a little-read website and a start-up media company with stolen software.
The old generation in political power hangs on as long as they can. They do not give up power willingly. It is wrested from their clutch by younger, stronger hands. We are seeing it happen.
10 comments:
The idea of a nasty, knock-down dragout fight in public between Dishonest Don and The Tuckster thrills me to no end. A battle in which those 2 monsters damage each other and divide their cult like followers loyalty would be a huge boon for those of us who would like to continue to live in a democratic republic and not be in the road to an Orban-like Hungarian autocracy (at best).
My fingers are crossed that you are right about it, however I doubt that Tucker would actually *want* to be President and stop doing what he's doing now. Here's hoping they go at it!
It wouldn’t surprise me if Peter is right. Tucker Carlson has everything today’s so-called conservatives are looking for in a leader: he has no experience, he’s a pathological liar and delights in fomenting fear anger and hatred. On the other hand, they already have one who meets those qualifications.
Anyway, scam artists are in it for the money. I doubt if the presidential salary could tempt him to give up the $6 million a year he makes at Fox Noise.
The real question is: who names a kid "Tucker"? I mean, the rhyme...?
Your premise is valid, I don't see this campaign. The adoring crowds? The party endorsement, etc., etc?...most of all, he'd have to give up his show, and risk becoming Mike Huckabee. I don't see it. No, humiliating Ted Cruz is just sport; the equivalent of Don Jr. on safari.
Intriguing tho...I just see it as currying favor with Trump and keeping Cruz in line.
I think the most intriguing thing is whether Trump runs again. For instance, let's say a "Tucker" gains some traction, stands up to the bullying and peels off even 10% of the MAGA base. Trump now knows he can't win, but stays in anyway for the money, at the last minute, and I mean Halloween night, endorsing his rival. Can you see Chris Christie's wet dream? Him at the podium with Trump behind him?
Now that's some entertainment, you betcha!
Tucker: The Man and his Dream? It’s an amusing idea, but as the regular here who is perhaps most conversant with Fox News I would be shocked if that Dream included the remotest thought of public office, let alone the Presidency itself. Carlson was a middling TV journeyman for many years, and right now his ratings aren’t just the best on Fox, they are better than the combined audiences of all evening CNN and MSNBC anchors. My take, and I sense here I’m not alone, is that he’s content to be the key, sought-after right-wing opinion-maker and hatchet man in the vein (vain?) of Bill O’Reilly at his peak or maybe Walter Winchell or Heywood Broun back in the day. I agree with Rick that he wants to be seen as bringing Cruz into line, though I don’t think it’s for Trump per se so much as rejecting on behalf of the 1/6 rioters he himself has openly defended the increasingly vague, overbroad and intellectually-inconsistent application of “terrorist”.
I’d say Tucker didn’t have a chance, but then, that’s what I said about Trump.
Sympathetic to Low Dudgeon’s point that he wouldn’t want it. Why trade a great gig for the worst one in the world?
Anyway, I thought DeSantis was the Republican heir apparent.
Separately: I consider 1/06/21 neither a “legitimate protest” NOR a “coup attempt.”
Sally –
Coup d’etat: a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.
Had election officials in some states, or Mike Pence, done what Trump demanded, that’s what would have happened. The fact they didn’t is why it’s only a "coup attempt." We’re worried about the next time around.
I don’t think it’s going to be Tucker Carlson. My current bet is on Dan Crenshaw.
Dan Crenshaw? Not a chance. He admitted Biden won the election. That's getting too close to being rational for Republicans to relate.
Tucker? No. It's wishful thinking.
Seems the sport here is to tempt the Progressives and Democrats with potential candidates that will keep them entertained rather than face the reality of having to accept the heir-apparent, likely Democratic candidates for 2024 - Harris and/or Biden.
We would all benefit by exploring the policies that are needed to improve things in Oregon and the US.
For other entertainment, there's the speculation on what the media - print, video, and audio - will be doing to pay the bills. With readers, viewers, and listeners disappearing, what will advertisers do with their dollars? Those million dollar salaries won't be paid if the numbers continue to decline.
Instead of speculating about who the candidates will be, perhaps exploring who should be the candidates would be more purposeful. We can always dream, and get away from the current populism.
Exploring who should be the candidates is a great idea, but unless we also explore how to actually make them candidates, it's just another exercise in futility. Our current primary system gave us a choice between Trump or Biden. If we keep doing the same thing, we're likely to keep getting the same results.
Post a Comment