Still, I’m going to venture out on a fairly sturdy limb today and predict that you may hear an awful lot in coming days about three state elections on Tuesday, April Fool’s Day.

Then again, you may not hear much at all about them.

The reason I can confidently make such a ridiculously safe prediction is largely because Trump’s powerful personality and controversial actions have caused the nation’s corrupt legacy media to weaponize the news like never before. 

They’ve been slipping away from an imperfect but honest attempt at objectivity for some time, but never with such distortions, lies, censorship, willful inattention, and outright deceits.

The media, both print and electronic, will closely watch the results in two special congressional elections in Florida and a vote for a Wisconsin state Supreme Court seat.

If the conservative court candidate and the two Republicans win, you’ll hear only brief passing mentions. If, however, media prayers are answered, and any of them lose or even struggle, the story will be launched as Breaking News, likely to endure for days.

And negative results will be touted as a “stunning” early verdict on the second-term work of President No. 47. Oh, and likely a very ominous sign for GOP candidates in the midterm elections “looming in just” 581 days.

(They could say “just 19 months” to make it seem shorter, or I could have written 13,944 hours to make it seem longer. It’s all the same.)

Media has been doing this kind of narrative-shaping for some time. It’s a running joke among conservative writers that mainstream media headlines routinely describe Democrat measures as new, hopeful, or promising, while Republicans “pounce” or attack.

We saw this during the past week after the embarrassing communications screw-up among some administration cabinet members involving a pending attack on Houthi terrorists. 

That quickly became “Signalgate” in media to associate it with a higher scandal level like Watergate, which forced Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974.

By the weekend, when online traffic typically sags, the story was inflated to “Trump’s Signal scandal” by The Hill.

An Atlantic writer, a determined Trump critic, says he found himself included in the group chat, He delayed publishing the full text of the messages so he could first hype the contents in a standalone post claiming the chat detailed attack plans, which it didn’t.

By the time news consumers could read the details for themselves, the scandal flames had been fanned to an unwarranted intensity. 

Curiously, such excited distortions do not happen when they involve Democrats. 

Remember during Joe Biden’s forsaken reign, the frequent, detailed news coverage of his disturbing descent into dementia, the muddled mind, his creepy voices on full display in virtually every public appearance? The president’s sudden, unexplained exits from a Medal of Honor presentation or D-Day Memorial service?

And remember the D.C. media’s diligent and determined investigations into the identities of the unelected people acting as commander in chief? And signing everything for Biden with an autopen?

No, you don’t remember! You can’t! 

That sort of honest journalism never happened. Mainstream media forfeited their constitutionally-protected role as government watchdog. Instead, media dutifully and repeatedly passed along their spoon-feedings, the repeated assertions by elected officials that Biden was “sharp as a tack.”

Some reporters were even complicit in the coverup. To obtain a few seconds of TV fame, they told the White House in advance what questions they would ask at press availabilities. It’s not unusual to alert press people what general subject you’ll ask about, but never the actual question beforehand.

That’s why Biden had a pre-approved list of reporters. And how he could have answer notes to read as if he was competent.

The collusion worked until karma and unfounded confidence came to the nation’s rescue late last June. Years of lawfare, hoaxes, and lies about Trump had failed to kill his political persona. Finally, an arrogant Biden was going to put Trump away in a nationally televised debate. 

Instead, that night, 55 million viewers saw the oldest president in U.S. history illuminated like a deer in the headlights of an oncoming truck, unable to answer coherently questions he had heard in rehearsals. 

He just had a bad night, you understand.

Then, despite months of totally false neck-and-neck news coverage of the campaign with what’s-her-name, Americans confirmed the historic, second-term victory that Trump won at that debate.

Now, let’s stipulate Trump is an exquisite showman, as his top-rated NBC reality show proved. He’s more disciplined this term, as the election and subsequent polls confirm. And he’s more experienced with a well-organized team of loyalists.

A large part of his attraction, which he knows and uses, is being accessible and unpredictable. Oh, look, news media loves unpredictable.

Trump 1.0 was fantastic for media, which, never forget, is a business. More viewers, more readers, more clicks mean more money. 

Did you notice the economic morass that Swamp media sank into in Trump’s absence? 

Ask the Washington Post if its online subscriptions surged while it was counting every day the alleged lies Trump told, totaling into the thousands. Trump-haters loved it. Trumpers loved hating it. Now, ask Jeff Bezos how subscriptions have gone over there.

Joe Biden told magnitudes of more lies, fables, and fictions. But who gives a fig? Or a beach chair?

Americans have figured it out, thanks in part to the Internet. As a result, Gallup finds Americans’ trust in news media stands at an historic low.

The web has put within reach of any mouse or cellphone a plethora of new news sources. Anyone willing to invest a few minutes to mix-and-match, to check-and-countercheck the accounts of various news sources, can generally assemble a balanced understanding.

That relies, however, on conscientious news consumers not simply believing the account that’s most exciting or colorful, which was intentionally written that way to attract the clicks, perhaps with less attention to truth. 

Or, as David Strom at our sister HotAir site posted, the overhyped post labeled Breaking News marketing its preferred anti-Trump narrative.

Now, about those Tuesday elections. Florida has two to fill House vacancies, including the Panhandle seat formerly held by Matt Gaetz, who was Trump’s nominee for Attorney General until he wasn’t.

Trump won the First District 68-31 in November, and Gaetz won 66-34 over Democrat Gay Valmont, who’s trying again. The GOP candidate is Jimmy Patronis, Florida’s chief financial officer.

Valmont has raised three times the funds as Patronis, a measure of Trump opposition. She’s using them to attack the GOP for DOGE-proposed cuts to the Veterans Affairs Department. That’s potentially a sensitive issue in a district with nearly 100,000 veterans and major installations, including Eglin, the largest Air Force base.

Mike Waltz, now Trump’s national security advisor, easily won the Sixth District around Daytona Beach, as did Trump in November. The president endorsed state Sen. Randy Fine, who faces Josh Weil, a progressive activist who has far outraised the Republican, as in the First.

The current GOP House balance is 218-213, with these two vacancies and two more recent Democrat openings from death.

Wisconsin was Trump’s narrowest win in November, less than one percent. The race for the Supreme Court seat will determine if liberals hold their 4-3 majority.

The allegedly nonpartisan race pits two Circuit Court judges against each other: Susan Crawford and Brad Schimel, endorsed by Trump with financial help from Elon Musk.

At $100 million, it is the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. But the winner gets to wear jeans to work under those cool judicial robes.