This blog was originally published on Forbes as Trump: The Interrupter Interrupted on Sunday, April 3, 2016.
Frontrunner Donald Trump has dominated the entire run-up to the presidential election by every measure: the primaries, the polls, the broadcast media, social media, and his opponents—and particularly the latter in the 12 debates the candidates have had. He did so mainly by dint of his forceful personality, honed by years as a reality television performer, and by repeatedly interrupting his opponents and the debate moderators.
But he met his match last week in the wake of what Gail Collins of the New York Times yesterday called a “merciless” interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. Mr. Matthews is the acknowledged King of Interruption, the black art perfected by that Grand Inquisitor, Mike Wallace during his tenure on CBS’s “Sixty Minutes.” Mr. Wallace always fired his heat-seeking missile questions with a sharpshooter’s precision accuracy, but Mr. Matthews takes the intensity up a notch with the rapid fire of a machine gun.
You can see Mr. Matthew’s staccato technique throughout the YouTube video of the interview, but about halfway through, a key sequence occurred that may become the most pivotal moment in the entire campaign. It began with a question from a young woman in the town hall: “…what is your stance on women’s rights and their rights to choose in their own reproductive health?”
Trump responded that he is “pretty much” pro-life.
Matthews wanted more specifics: “What should the law be on abortion?”
Trump stayed unspecific: “Well, I have been pro-life.”
Matthews pressed on: “But what should be the law?”
Trump shunted into a long statement about conservative and liberal judges until Matthews interrupted: “Should abortion be punished?”
Although Matthew’s question was about Trump’s own position, Trump shunted to the general again, referring to the Republican Party. So Matthews’s drove it back to Trump: “How about you?”
Again, Trump ducked: “I would say that it’s a very serious problem. And it’s a problem that we have to decide on.”
Matthews would not be deterred: “But you’re for banning it?”
Trump answered the question with a question: “Are you going to say, put them in jail?”
Answering a question with a question is red meat for a veteran interrogator like Matthews: “Well, no, I’m asking you because you say you want to ban it.”
Trump then tried to divert even further afield by asking Matthews whether he is Catholic. This led to a furious exchange volley during which Matthews kept trying to get back on track, having to remind Trump five times that it was he who is running for president.
Matthews finally asked point blank: “Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no as a principle?”
Trump could equivocate no longer: “The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment.”
Matthews went for the jugular: “For the woman?”
Trump blurted: “Yes, there has to be some form.”
Although the Trump campaign issued a walk back from that statement within hours, it didn’t stop the firestorm that erupted. It came from women, politicians, the blogosphere, Trump’s opponents—even his supporters—and has been and continues to dominate the nation’s media and attention. Much of that verbiage contains dire predictions that that single statement will put the brakes on Donald Trump’s campaign if not become his Waterloo.
If so, his opponents will have Chris Matthews’ relentless pursuit to thank.
This blog was originally published on Forbes as Trump: The Interrupter Interrupted on Sunday, April 3, 2016.