- The Washington Times - Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Well, that was quick. Looks like President-elect Donald Trump doesn’t get a cordial honeymoon with the press, despite the fact that he gave a gracious acceptance speech and has called for good will and unity in America. But this is nothing new. Mr. Trump faced a jaunty, hostile news media throughout his 16-month campaign — and wrangled them accordingly. Meanwhile, the press has already framed an instant narrative for Mr. Trump’s significant White House victory, framing world reactions to his win in near catastrophic terms. A few sample headlines from major news organizations in the last 24 hours:

“Anxious world confronts the reality of Trump as U.S. president” (Bloomberg); “Across the world, shock and uncertainty at Trump’s victory” (New York Times); “Putin gains Trump card in geopolitical poker game” (Reuters); “Allies scramble after ‘huge shock’ of Trump victory” (Politico); “An American tragedy” (The New Yorker); “World gasps in collective disbelief following Trump’s election” (Washington Post); “Total global disbelief as Trump is elected president” (USA Today); “Fright night: The world reacts to U.S. election results” (CNNMoney).

Ironically, many news organizations appear to ignore the fact that they essentially called the election wrong, as did the majority of pollsters.

“The public now knows it is not getting news from the news media. It’s getting leftist propaganda,” says Brent Bozell, founder of the Media Research Center, a conservative watchdog which has tracked unfair press bias for decades,

“The liberal media were the second-biggest losers on election night. But as opposed to Hillary Clinton, their loss continues. Their credibility is shot, quite possibly for good. It is unfortunate for the honorable, professional journalists working — yes, they do exist — but it’s an incredible win for the American people,” Mr. Bozell adds. “”The leftist media did not decide this election. The American people did.”


SEE ALSO: Senate Democrats begin postmortem of election debacle, look for path forward

Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus has been a tough, consistent and nimble force in the GOP, and was invaluable to Donald Trump‘s successful campaign for president. And now the buzz grows: Mr. Priebus appears to be on the short list to become a senior presence in the Trump White House.

“He is very likely Chief of Staff. Trump legit listens to him,” an inside source tells Zeke J. Miller, a political reporter for Time Magazine who also notes that Mr. Priebus “a Wisconsinite, is a key ally of Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.”

NBC, Bloomberg, Reuters and U.S. News & World Report are floating similar stories, some with some further speculation.

“If Priebus leaves the RNC, two close Trump allies could be considered to take his position. Trump’s team is talking about former campaign manager and current CNN contributor Corey Lewandowski or current deputy campaign manager David Bossie as possible options,” NBC said in its own analysis.


Following Donald Trump‘s victory, there was some hysteria on the stock market for a while — but some promising news for the defense sector.

SEE ALSO: Gun restrictions tightened in western ballot initiatives

“The new commander in chief’s promises to rebuild the American military are helping defense stocks buck the wider market plunge,” writes Marcus Weisgerber, global business editor for Defense One who notes that stocks are up at Raytheon by 6.2 percent, at Northrop Grumman by 5.1 percent and Lockheed Martin by 4.8 percent — to name a few.

“While markets opened down, stocks belonging to the makers of ships, fighter jets, tanks and armored vehicles were all up,” Mr. Weisgerber continues, comparing the phenomenon to similar trends that emerged during the Reagan administration.

He also cited a memo from Cowen and Co., a New York-based investment services firm.

“The Trump victory, combined with the impressive GOP retention of Congress, means our low-probability, high-impact scenario for defense spending over the next four years becomes the base case. We expect defense spending will go up significantly, at least double the projected 2.5 percent growth rate in the now-superfluous Budget Control Act,” advises analyst Roman Schweizer.


Now that we are 48 hours post-election, thoughtful analysis has surfaced at The Heritage Foundation, which will showcase a noteworthy quartet on Thursday to talk over the greater impact and long-term implications of the presidential election.

“What do the results mean for our constitutional republic?” organizers ask. “What can we expect for our foreign policy posture? How will the results affect the economy and jobs? What judges, including the next Supreme Court Justices, might be nominated in the next presidential term?” they ask.

On hand to answer: Jim DeMint, president of the foundation; Michael Mukasey former U.S. attorney general during the George W. Bush administration and a Federal District Court judge; John Yoo, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley and a Heritage fellow; syndicated columnist and National Review senior editor Jonah Goldberg, plus Byron York, chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner.

A smart and feisty bunch, indeed. See their 90-minute discussion live online at Heritage.org; the time is high noon, ET.


An estimated 72 million people tuned in on broadcast and cable networks to monitor election night, according to preliminary data from Nielsen Media Research. Among the cable giants, Fox News Channel was the most-watched for election night coverage, delivering the network’s highest-rated election night in history. At its peak, the network drew an audience of 15.4 million people, compared with 14 million for CNN and 6.8 million for MSNBC.

FOX News enjoyed a consistently engaged audience through the very long night. In an intense seven-hour span co-anchored by Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly, Fox averaged about 12.7 million viewers between 8 p.m. and 3 a.m. on Tuesday night into Wednesday morning. CNN drew 11.5 million and MSNBC 5.2 million.


63 percent of U.S. employers say military veterans have a “disciplined approach to work.”

62 percent say vets work well on a team, 59 percent say they have integrity.

54 percent say vets perform well under pressure, 52 percent say vets have leadership.

47 percent have hired a vet in the last year.

37 percent plan to actively recruit vets in the next year.

Source: A CareerBuilder/Harris Poll survey of 2,587 U.S. human resource managers conducted Aug. 11-Sept. 7 and released Wednesday.

Nays and yeas to jharper@washingtontimes.com.

• Jennifer Harper can be reached at jharper@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2022 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide