50 years ago someone like Trump wouldn't have a way to obtain a platform from which he can amass a big enough public following. Anyone that wanted to play had to play nice with the establishment. 50 years ago, editorials mattered. Any messaging of a politician or candidate would be followed with context, analysis or discussion by journalists.
The establishment gave us the bay of pigs and then when that fiasco got them snubbed it killed the executive (or at least had something to do with it, I don't believe they literally did it). More recent examples include our adventures in the sandbox in the 20yr following 9/11. Or if you want to go further back you can look at the Catholic church in the 1500s.
I get that the establishment also sometimes does good things like create the EPA but it seems like those good things only ever happen after there's a huge amount of public screeching and that the default behavior is for the establishment to wage war and enrich itself.
The establishment should not be in bed with the media IMO. While the current fragmented media landscape is causing turbulence in the short term it is a good thing in the long term IMO.
Even more amazing when you consider that 50 years ago Trump was embarrassingly in the Enquirer quite often in situations not nearly as respectable as Stormy Daniels, and that was only the gossip they could corroborate. Much more was withheld from publication. People were mainly talking about the way he couldn't be trusted with anything. Plus him & Epstein were eventually running buddies at one point.
For decades the vast majority of those who even knew Trump existed were aware from the beginning he was a fake and it was just so curious to watch him take the pratfalls that he set himself up for. He only became widely known because he was such a complete failure compared to ordinary businessmen, and he would not shut up about how successful he was, it just emphasized how much he didn't have a clue and he was all PR. It was so cringeworthy people could not help but notice. Some things never change.
But under those media conditions he was merely a comic figure for the longest time. Bragging about how rich he is when he's actually bankrupt in more ways than one.
It just wouldn't have been very easy to build critical mass among people who would be willing to take him the least bit seriously. Especially about anything concerning money.
you really don't know what you're talking about. 50 years ago, Trump, or someone like him, being very wealthy outside of politics, could have just bought his own media source, or several smaller ones, and let em rip with yellow attack journalism while promoting his vision. Failing that, he could have made paid agreements with all kinds of supposedly "reputable" mainstream media sources to promote his politics. This is indeed exactly what a lot of dirty politics across the decades did and your vision of some golden age in which it didn't apply is completely false. This is particularly so considering how many mendacious lies and other garbage these same major media outlets sold to the public over decades on behalf of government. We should applaud their golden past? Get out of town.
Today at least, if anything, people have access to a vast plurality of views that despite many of them being absurdly mistaken at least through the mechanism of their existence let massive cracs rapidly open in any official or propagandist narrative. On the whole, this is what major media truly hates, while couching its complaints in fear mongering about misinformation.... Much of that fear mongering surged especially strong during the recent pandemic, while media at the exact same time promoted several major official narratives that were obviously politically motivated rather than being based on any thing resembling solid editorial standards.
