Madeline Albright made a rare error in her speech

[DFW]

She said that Donald Trump had “done damage just by running for president."

Not quite. All sorts of improbables have run for president, from Pat Paulsen to George Wallace. The difference is that this time, a whack job actually got his party's nomination. THAT'S the damage. Not that Trump ran, but that his party actually nominated him in a fairly run primary season. We, as a country, have to ask ourselves how it is that so many people from one of our country's major parties felt inclined to want this guy as their standard bearer? What have we become that envoys of several countries, allies of ours, were sent to Philadelphia to be reassured that our electorate would never elect Trump as president? How sad is it that we could not give them that assurance?

[NCTraveler]

1. When the President of another country drops an intentional F bomb in an interview..

When asked about Trump, before he won the nomination, that is damage. You see, more people south of the border are hearing their President and sound bytes from Trump than anything else. They are hearing about "us" wanting to build a wall with them paying for it. That they are rapist. All of these things damage us and all pre-nomination. These people wouldn't simply be able to unhear this stuff if Trump weren't nominated.

[DFW]

3. Yes but

It would make a huge difference in their attitude if they saw that Trump did NOT represent even a majority of the thinking of his own party. Now they see him as representing half the country. THAT is the damage that cannot be undone. Not right away.

Even if Hillary wins in a landslide, she has some damage control to do south of the border. Like you said, they can't unhear what Trump said. As a former Secretary of State, I would hope that she is well aware of that,, and will send Kaine down ASAP to reassure them in their own language "que no se preocupen, que no hay peligro."

[NCTraveler]

10. Your "but" turns it into a conversation of mitigation.

Not negation as portrayed in the op. Not a small distinction.

Albright wasn't wrong as you say. Your reply confirms that.

[DFW]

11. I don't see it that way

No one does damage simply by running. Anyone can run.

It's when someone who shouldn't get more than 5 votes outside of the Bundy ranch become the nominee that damage is done to the national brand.

[NCTraveler]

16. You are not presenting a plausible position.

Albright was clearly correct. My first reply cannot be dismissed and it will cause a generation of animosity. Trump wanting to ban whole religions from the US is damaging, win or lose.

[merrily]

2. I know what you mean, but I think Wallace did do damage just by running for President.

Paulsen did it for comedy so his run is not like Trump's or Wallaces's.

Wallace, poisoned the atmosphere and our airwaves with racist shet while running for the highest office in the country, which was covered as thought he was like any other candidate and he carried five states precisely because he was spewing racist shet. The message that sent? The mindsets that may have created, validated, inflamed, etc.? That hits my threshold for damage. I agree with Albright and I also agree with you that his party and, yes, the people who voted for him, were "co-damagers."

[DFW]

5. Wallace was never nominated by the Democrats, even if he may have helpd Nixon win

Trump is the first total extremist to be legitimately nominated by one of our major parties.

As one who lives in Europe and speaks 9 European languages, I can tell you there is a LOT of "WTF" being expressed over there.

[merrily]

9. Please get back to me if you have a problem with anything that I actually did post. Thanks.

The issue to which I responded was whether Wallace did damage just by running. I think he did. Do you?

When I replied, you had not yet raised the issue whether Trump's nomination was more damaging than other damaging runs.

[DFW]

12. Wallace did damage because his message resonated

I don't see that merely by running, that anyone does damage per se. Anyone can put a sign on their lawn.

It's when the extremists that deserve no resonance get lots of it that a danger is posed.

That Trump was even more than a footnote to this election is something I find appalling, and it's a fair bet that over 75% of the people on the continent where I live agree.

[merrily]

15. Running for the highest office in the land, the media coverage, national megaphone,

being treated like any other serious candidate, etc. Yes, I think all that does more damage that a Governor of a recently forcibly "un-Jim Crowed" state babbling in his own state house to the people who elected him.

I am not sure why you seem compelled to minimize it.

[Gothmog]

4. Trump has hurt the US with our allies

I disagree with your analysis. Trump is a nut case who will hurt us with our allies

[DFW]

6. Only if he is NOT soundly repudiated iin the election

Since Nixon, the Republicans have been suspect in European eyes (Ford and Bush Sr. were minor exceptions). Our Allies have seen their share of nut case leaders. But you have to get there first. They weren't over worried by Palin because it was clear from day one that she had no chance of becoming Vice President. If Trump becomes president-elect, the ground will shift beneath our feet over there. I live in a country that borders on ten others. ALL of them are watching.

[apnu]

7. How is expressing an opinion an error? (nt)

[DFW]

8. I didn't see it as expressed as an opinion.

It seemed like a straight-out statement to me.

[BumRushDaShow]

13. Trump is solely a media-driven entity

This is why the wild swings and gyrations of his "policies" and the bombastic utterances that would insult a polite society, have been purposely ignored by those who should be questioning them.

He is a master at manipulating the media and they are dependent on him for ratings. They colluded to enable, legitimize, and "normalize" his behavior, and that is why he was able to out-last another who was coddled (Ted Cruz), to make it through to the nomination.

[Haveadream]

14. Albright made no mistake

Trump's nomination is a crisis for the country but that in no way makes what Albright said an error because the damage of his campaign and that are not mutually exclusive. Even if he were to somehow lose the nomination we would still be left having to repair the consequences of his words and provocations. His hate speech rhetoric has increasingly unleashed and sanctioned the worst fascist and supremacist elements among the populace. They were formerly largely held back by public condemnation and now feel emboldened to act out upon their worst bigotries, grievances and impulses. What we have become is a country far too complacent about giving bigotry a pass and giving the entitled the idea that their needs and discontent can be used as a cudgel on the less fortunate.