Trump is losing at the polls, losing in the courts, and constituents are taking to the streets en masse. But based on media coverage, you’d think his administration is doing just fine.
This article was made possible because of the generous support of DAME members. We urgently need your help to keep publishing. Will you contribute just $5 a month to support our journalism?
We are a little more than 100 days into his second term, and already President Donald Trump is historically unpopular. His actions and policies, even more so. The American people oppose his actions on immigration and tariffs. They despise his dismantling of government assistance for libraries, museums, and national parks. They loathe his junk drawer of a cabinet and his unelected adviser/wrecking ball, Elon Musk.
As the administration continues to plan and implement large-scale reductions across federal agencies, 59% of Americans say it is being “too careless” in how it makes these cuts. And the public is more likely to see the cuts having negative, rather than positive, effects.
- 51% say the cuts will make the government run worse, while 36% say they will make the government run better.
- 48% expect the cuts will cost Americans money in the long run. Fewer (41%) say the cuts will save money.
Every weekend, in cities and towns from Boston to Boise, Idaho, people take to the streets to march against his regime. Every weekday, there is a new setback in court for Trump’s attempts to fire federal workers, demonize trans people, and disappear legal American residents overseas.
Three different federal judges delivered legal setbacks and slap downs to President Donald Trump in the span of an hour and a half on Tuesday in a series of cases challenging controversial moves taken during the early days of his second term.
The rulings from judges in Washington, D.C., and Washington state are the latest to pump the brakes on Trump’s agenda, underscoring the critical role courts have taken on for foes of Trump looking to frustrate his actions.
He angered conservative Catholics with a daydream about being named the next Pope. He outraged Jews and Muslims with his stated plan to pave over Gaza and build resorts there. White evangelical Christians are his strongest supporters and even a quarter of them are unhappy with him.
Most White evangelicals (72%) say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president. White nonevangelical Protestants and White Catholics are much more divided, with 51% in each group approving of the job Trump is doing.
On an hourly basis he says something nonsensical, proposes something illegal, or denies the existence of reality in some way. His cognitive decline is obvious and his sociopathy is undeniable.
So why isn’t this adding up to a picture of a failed, lame-duck president? Why is he not described as “embattled,” covered, as former President Joe Biden was, as beset by difficulties within and without, his administration on the verge of collapse?
Why doesn’t his every word-salad utterance or clueless press conference or incoherent social post not prompt a thousand op-eds about his intellectual decline?
Why are members of his party not being asked why they continue to support him and make excuses for his failures?
Why is he not being treated like the pariah he, in most of the world and much of the United States, is?
There is an entire industry devoted to covering just the politics “vibes” in this country on a seemingly hourly basis. This was the machine that cranked into emergency mode when Joe Biden flubbed some answers at a debate and looked elderly and exhausted. This was what made Hillary Clinton’s email server into a federal case.
Front-page “news analysis” pieces quoting anonymous sources or declaring that “questions have arisen” are a staple of modern political journalism. Commentary shows take on topics they decide are the most controversial, the most timely. And none of them have toplined Trump’s failures the way they did Biden’s.
The agenda is being set, but it apparently doesn’t contain an accurate picture of the resistance to Trump.
Some of this is due to journalistic convention, which treats all news as local, and all protests are covered as events in isolation. Every rally is described individually: Protest Held. People Chant. Everybody Goes Home.
The view from above is something that should be provided by national news organizations, that can synthesize local coverage into an overall picture of the whole country and characterize those protests as something more than weekend gatherings.
However, of our national news organizations, the Washington Post has been taken over by a greedy billionaire and his pet right-wing operatives, and the New York Times leadership steadfastly denies it has any role in driving public opinion. CNN spent Trump’s second presidential campaign platforming his lies, so it’s not a surprise their protest coverage is cursory.
Trump’s dismal poll numbers get downplayed routinely. NBC News went out of its way to describe Trump’s dismal polling as “par for the course” for him, as though comparing him to previous presidents was somehow inappropriate or unfair:
Trump’s most outlandish ideas get covered as though they’re serious policy goals with legislative backing. One day he says he wants to reopen Alcatraz, the notorious California prison shuttered in 1963? Axios tells us how it could happen!
They’d also have to transport fresh water, food and other supplies every day, establish a sewage removal process (it was dumped in the bay back in the day) and build new staffing facilities—all without tourism-generated revenue, [Alcatraz historian Joan] Babyak commented.
Even if, paragraphs down, “experts” or “critics” make it clear that something like reopening Alcatraz is an unrealistic, absurd idea, the headlines of “here’s how it would work” grant him the credibility of any normal politician. The same goes for his attacks on higher ed, like his decree to end federal grants to Harvard University.
The Associated Press reported a tit-for-tat between Trump’s frothing rage at liberal professors and the sober, serious Harvard leadership that opposes him:
Harvard’s suit called the funding freeze “arbitrary and capricious,” saying it violated its First Amendment rights and the statutory provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
It’s plainly unconstitutional, but reducing it to “Harvard says” versus “Trump says” in a political dust-up preserves the administration’s viewpoint as dignified and worthy of consideration, at the expense of the observable facts.
Something as small as adopting the administration’s framing that legal U.S. residents are being legally “deported,” rather than kidnapped and disappeared to Central American or newly announced Libyan prison camps, lends weight to Trump’s side of things.
What’s going on? Why aren’t news organizations using plain language to describe what’s in front of everyone’s faces?
Part of the answer lies in the power of right-wing media in convincing, not just the general public, but members of other news organizations, that Trump remains popular and generally … in his right mind. Fox News is a powerful force in an industry that sometimes feels like 5-year-olds playing soccer: One goes after the ball and everyone follows.
Fox will remain on the Trump train well after it derails into a ditch, and then transfer its whitewashing efforts to the next Republican leader who can ignite a fervor in the GOP base. Its “journalists” excel at obsequiousness and they’re rewarded with cabinet positions.
Journalists may also be waiting for Republicans to turn on Trump, just as they waited in vain for four years during his first term. Republicans in safe GOP districts also have little incentive to buck Trump no matter how unpopular he becomes, especially in the wake of a decade of congressional gerrymandering.
Lastly, what contributes to the reluctance to portray the reality of Trump’s administration is simple cowardice. Trump’s supporters, professional and amateur, have attacked any critics by threatening, doxxing and in some cases personally harassing them at their homes or workplaces. While journalists should be inured to this type of intimidation, it’s natural to be reluctant to invite Trumpist wrath.
But the hundreds of thousands of people in the streets should signal that there is a deeper story here than just the usual political disgruntlement, and coverage should reflect the intensity and scope of what’s happening here.
Longtime GOP reps are cancelling their planned public appearances, moving them online, calling the police to arrest and assault their own constituents, and contracting with professional goons to attack people who ask them basic questions about government services. They’re running scared, and they should be.
Media that treat these protests and uprisings as one-offs, which relegate them to disparate “local protest held in town square today”–type events, ignore the bigger picture and therefore any deeper meaning at a time when people desperately need to understand what’s happening in this country. People who are afraid to speak up, to fight back, fear that they’re standing alone against a president and a hateful movement that is depicted as unstoppable.
But Trump and his administration are not unstoppable. Their hate is not unstoppable. Every day, he’s being stopped—by the American people, by the courts, and sometimes even by lawmakers.
The more people see that, the more they realize how many options they have to defeat this anti-democratic administration, the better our chances of saving this country, and ending Trump’s attacks on the public for good.