By Robert Laurie
Let’s face it. If you work for CNN, you’re part of a machine that’s pushing a very specific agenda. Your goal is to attack, demonize, and bring down the presidency of Donald Trump by any means necessary.
You can do this the Jake Tapper way, where you pretend to be a “serious newsman” but ignore stories that don’t support the approved CNN dogma. You can do it the Wolf Blitzer way, where you make an absurd assertion and try to corral guests into agreeing with it. And, of course, you can do it the Jim Acosta way, where you stamp your feet, scream, and demand your histrionics be taken seriously.
All of these methods are failing, as proven by ratings that are dwarfed by those of the Food Network. However, none have imploded quite as badly as the strategy employed by Chris Cillizza.
Yesterday, in the run-up to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, Cillizza seemed to think Trump would select Amy Barrett. He offered his opinion via a sleazy tweet that was heavy on sexism and light on substance.
Of course, we now know that Cillizza was dead wrong. His reasoning, which seems to have been “Trump will pick Barrett based on her looks,” says a lot about how Cillizza thinks and was almost immediately proven to be incorrect.
So how did Cillizza respond?
That’s right. Just a few hours later, Cillizza was calling Trump’s pick “remarkably predictable.” Maybe that’s true, but if it was so predictable, why was Cillizza so sure Barrett would get the nod “based on image and appearance?”
Here’s a nickel’s worth of free advice for Chris Cillizza: Stop trying to predict things. You’re not good at it.
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) November 7, 2016