Why does it even matter? I have no idea why you’ve been beating this dead horse. Who cares if Trump recognized him?
The point is that Ramos was not out of line, he was trying to do his job, which includes asking questions of the candidate. He tried to do it through means that would be acceptable, culminating with Trump shitting on him by posting Ramos’ hand-written note and mobile number on Instagram, and now you’re outraged that Ramos interrupted a news conference. Boo fucking hoo that Ramos is fighting back instead of lying down and taking it like a good little boy.
If Trump actually cared about media protocols and decent behavior, he could have simply politely replied to the numerous interview requests that there was no way Ramos was every getting an interview. Then the people mad that Ramos was impolite during the press conference would actually have a leg to stand on (as long as they ignored every other public instance of Trump’s boorish behavior).
It was Ramos’s boorish behavior that resulted in his getting escorted out of the press conference while the other, actual, reporters asked questions of Trump.
Ramos, the boorish asshole, was later readmitted to the press conference and allowed to question Trump. I don’t remember any other rude, boorish, assholes being readmitted to press conferences they had been kicked out.
People in this thread accused Trump of lying when, after Ramos was escorted out, he said that he didn’t know who that was, but he was obviously a very emotional person.
Are you saying that Ramos feels that he is entitled to an interview? I don’t think he is.
Ramos was told, numerous times, by Trump’s campaign, that there was no way in hell he was getting an interview. Ramos apparently didn’t get the “hint” and persisted. So Trump, in his usual fashion, escalated by posting the “personal note” Ramos sent.
As someone who detests Trump, and all his immigration “proposals,” I have to agree that Ramos was out of line. It’s hardly a major offense, but many candidates would have removed someone refusing to “wait their turn” at a press conference. The fact that Ramos apparently concluded he would never get a turn is besides the point. He is free to report far and wide that Trump won’t take his questions, or consent to an interview. Shouting questions at Trump makes good theater, but has predictable consequences. I think everyone got what they wanted out of the exchange.
I guess I have to question what a “bloc” really is then, if 71% doesn’t constitute one. I see no evidence that Hispanics are going to break towards the GOP in general, nor Trump in particular, even with Cesar and callers to talk shows.
No, they tend to support Clinton. Who will very likely be the Democratic candidate (say ~90% odds).
Nov 2016 is a long ways away, but I would be very surprised if the GOP candidate breaks 35% of the Hispanic vote unless it’s Jeb.
You’d better be specific. There’s a lot there, and I suspect that stuff that you consider evidence of activism strikes me as the reaction of someone who is human.
“Right now Donald Trump is, no question, the loudest voice of intolerance, hatred and division in the United States” - is that something a professional journalist should “report”?
“Can you imagine building a fence for the 1,900 miles between Mexico and the United States? It is absurd!” - is that “reporting” or activism?
“When you call 11 million people in this country ‘illegals’ — and no human being is ‘illegal’ — isn’t that spreading hate?” - is that a journalist or an activist speaking?
Obama: “And those, like you Jorge, who suggest that there are simple, quick answers to these problems…”
Ramos: “I never said that…”
Obama: “Oh yes you do! Because that’s how you present it. When you present it that way it does a disservice.”
Is that Obama speaking to a reporter or to an activist? “Disservice” to what? The cause? Is it journalists that have political causes or is it activists?
After Obama signed the executive orders, Ramos explained that Obama was “paying a debt to the Latino community… President Barack Obama felt the pressure, no question about it, from Hispanic leaders, from Latino organizations, from journalists”
Are “journalists” supposed to apply political pressure on politicians? Or is it activists?
I’d say that if you think journalists should never offer opinions, you haven’t read the op-ed pages of a newspaper anytime in the last couple hundred years.
It’s one thing if a journalist puts opinion in straight news stories. It’s another thing if the opinions are being represented as commentary. The idea that journalism has zero place in commenting on public policy issues is, of course, silly. Especially coming from someone who will surely crow about Trump getting any endorsements from newspaper in New Hampshire or Iowa.
My point being that demonstrating that someone who claims to be a reporter is a political activist doesn’t prove he’s not a reporter.
You can show he’s a bad reporter by showing how his activism keeps him from asking the questions a good reporter should be asking of public figures, for instance. But giving examples of his activism doesn’t prove anything, unless you demonstrate that one cannot be both, just like one cannot be both a neurosurgeon and a Presidential candidate.
By the way, it’s pretty funny that your cite is a magazine made up of journalists who do nothing but offer political opinions on the news. I guess when Bill Buckley has opinions, he was an important check on governmental liberalism, but if Ramos has opinions, he’s a disgrace to the profession.
ETA: and I’m saying this as someone who simply has no interest in Ramos’ opinions.
“National Review” is definitely not “made up of journalists”. The writers are political activists. Bill Buckley was a political commentator, not a journalist. So is Ramos. He is pretending to be a journalist. He isn’t.
Ramos is nothing more than a political shill for illegal aliens. I’m surprised that Ramos isn’t required to register as a lobbyist.
*Jorge Ramos may be the award-winning celebrity anchor of Univision’s premier news broadcast, but “the Walter Cronkite of Hispanic News” long ago revealed himself to be less a journalist than another perpetually indignant immigration activist. His devolution into outright heckler was only a matter of time.
It would be difficult to overstate Ramos’s immigration radicalism. When Central American children were pouring over the border last summer, Ramos announced as a solution, “First, we treat children like children, as if they were our own.” When, in their 2012 interview, Newt Gingrich told Ramos, “I’m not going to let you define what ‘immigration reform’ is,” Ramos replied, “It’s very simple: to legalize 11 million undocumented immigrants.” And when, last November, President Obama lawlessly granted amnesty to some 5 million of those immigrants, Ramos touted the measure as “a triumph for the Latino community.”*
