Chuck Todd Gets It Wrong And Defends Cheating Ted Cruz For Buying His Own Book

chuck todd ted cruz new york times bestseller list

On Meet The Press, under the disguise of breaking down the publishing primary, Chuck Todd defended Ted Cruz as he left out key facts and called the exclusion of Cruz from the NYT bestseller list “conspicuous.”

Video:

Transcript via Meet The Press:

CHUCK TODD: Well, if you follow politics, you know there are lots of ways for candidates to measure success. One of them is how well their books are selling, books they may or may not have written themselves to introduce themselves to a public that may or may not care. As you can see here, we have a whole bunch of books here for the 2016 book primary.

So how are they doing? Well, Ben Carson’s latest book has proven to be the biggest of winners with 363,000 hardcover copies sold, according to Nielson. That’s not a typo. Americans seem to heart Huckabee, as well. Mike Huckabee has sold nearly 66,000 copies of his book.

But not all these presidential candidates are doing well. Marco Rubio and Jim Webb, both Rubio and Webb have sold only 8,000 copies each of those memoirs. Which brings us to Ted Cruz. This book here, A Time For Truth, sold nearly 12,000 copies in its first week alone, more than all but two nonfiction books, political or otherwise.

So it should put him at the top of the all-important New York Times Bestseller List, right? Wrong. Try to find it this morning. The Times conspicuously omitted it, claiming sales of Cruz book, quote, “Were limited to strategic bulk purchases.” Cruz’s publisher Harper Collins says The Times is wrong. They claim they were no bulk purchases at all.

Cruz’s campaign has its own idea of what’s behind The Times’s decision, suggesting it was, quote, “A naked fabrication designed to cover up your partisan agenda.” I’m not sure that’s going to help Ted Cruz get on The New York Times Bestseller List, or get The Times’ endorsement. Then again, I’m not sure Cruz thought he was going to get The Times endorsement. Coming up, the latest on those Iran nuclear talks. And then a look at the Republican candidate with a big edge that no one else has.

Chuck Todd ignored a ton of facts while defending Ted Cruz. First, about that Ben Carson book that Todd was gushing over. A Carson supporting super PAC has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars buying up copies of his book. Secondly, Todd was comparing the sales numbers for Carson’s more than year old book with other books that were published weeks and months ago. He was not making an apples to apples comparison.

It was clear that Todd was carrying water for Ted Cruz by calling the Times decision to keep Cruz off of their bestseller list conspicuous. There was nothing odd about the decision when it is taken into account that Republican candidates have been cheating their way on to the bestseller list for years.

Chuck Todd has admitted that he turns a blind eye to facts to keep Republicans coming on his show. Todd plays dumb on a regular basis because he needs Republicans to come on Meet The Press, but his refusal to acknowledge that candidates try to game the bestseller lists on a regular basis was dumbfounding.

The fact is that the Cruz campaign continues to whine about The New York Times, but they have not provided a single piece of evidence to back up their claims. For Chuck Todd, Republicans denying facts is good enough, but the rest of us want the proof. If Ted Cruz has proof that The New York Times is wrong, he needs to release it. Otherwise, any media member who supports Cruz in this empty crusade is either a blind partisan or prostituting themselves for access.

58 Replies to “Chuck Todd Gets It Wrong And Defends Cheating Ted Cruz For Buying His Own Book”

  1. I’ll buy an autographed copy of “Green Eggs and Ham” from Cruz for a couple of bucks. Hell, his reading of it only cost taxpayers a few hundreds of millions of dollars.

  2. Jason, your premise is deceiving. How about being a reporter and prove to us that Cruz bought his books by the bulk. And please understand I hope you can prove because presently your creditability is as bad as Cruz’s.

  3. MTP is unwatchable. There are many interesting and knowledgable people in the U.S. to host such a show, and Chuck Todd is not one of them.

  4. The New York Times sets their standards not Cruz. The Times must be proven wrong. Cruz made the accusation and did not back it up.

  5. I think chuck todd is the original dim bulb. While he calls himself a “political junkie”, his reporting is generally one-sided and often consists of nothing more than reading the republican talking points of the day. And his political “analysis” is puddle deep.

    I, for one, have absolutely no interest in Meet the Press while todd is host.

  6. Then he started gushing over Snotty Walker like he is the second coming. What a dope Chuck Todd is. He should take Scarborough and Andrea Mitchell and go to faux news.

  7. The New York Slimes refuses to provide any evidence of its scurrilous claims and is refusing to comment further on the matter. Since it is the NY Slimes that is denying Cruz a place on the list when on its face the sales indicate he belonged there, it is up to those scumbags at the New York Slimes to produce evidence of the so-called strategic bulk purchases.

  8. The New York Slimes refuses to provide any evidence of its scurrilous claims and is refusing to comment further on the matter. Since it is the NY Slimes that is denying Cruz’s book a place on the list when the sales numbers present a prima facie case that the book belongs there, it is up to those scumbags at the New York Slimes to produce evidence of the so-called strategic bulk purchases.

  9. I just received 14 thumbs down..Am I crazy or what? Jason Easley (the author of this article)wants Cruz to prove he didn’t buy something. What does he want a blank receipt?

  10. Once again- the Republicans demonstrate their own disdain for Standards. Well, they still get it in their heads that standards are what applies to everyone else.

    The New York Times is under NO OBLIGATION to print anyone under their ‘best seller’ lists. Such is a service that has been gamed before- and I’d imagine that they’re damned tired of it.

    So- they choose to leave off of the lists- anything that doesn’t meet their criteria.
    I believe that this has been referred to as: “The Invisible Hand of the Free Market”.

    Which apparently isn’t supposed to apply to Republicans.

    Y’all got a problem with it?
    You make the charge that the NYT’s is being unfair- PROVE IT!

    If it’s that important- sue em. Then when you lose- you’ll just demonstrate to the Rest of America what we Liberals already know.

  11. @ Bill, Cruz was accused of bulk buying and now and now he’s suppose to prove it? That is so ridiculous. Oh Yes and I’m as liberal as they come.

  12. Your legal arguments don’t hold water.

    It is hardly a case of professional misconduct.

    The New York Times Bestseller lists has been criticized ever since it’s inception. So complaints about it are nothing new.

    However- In 2013, Forbes published a story titled “Here’s How You Buy Your Way Onto The New York Times Bestsellers List.” [23] The article discusses how ResultSource, a San Diego-based marketing consultancy, specializes in ensuring books make a bestseller list, even guaranteeing a No. 1 spot for those willing to pay enough. The New York Times was informed of this practice and responded

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_Best_Seller_list

    In other words- the NYT’s is tired of the same old B.S.
    They’ve tightened up the rules, and are investigating dubious sales.

    You (Robert K) and Tez Crud, are both bitching about the fact that he got caught gaming the system. The NYT- is holding itself to a higher standard now.

    Tough Shit!

  13. Moongrim, I have always enjoyed your comments. But this one is over the top. How is he suppose to prove that? Have a tape of him NOT walking in the warehouse?

  14. No Mike D, Ted Cruz made the accusation- of misconduct.

    If he makes the accusation- then he can cough up the evidence. Harper Collins has it.

  15. Don’t try that bullshit with me Mike D.

    Ted Cruz claims the NYT’s is being unfair. Harper Collins has the evidence- let him cough it up, just like Jason Easley suggested.

    If Crud KNOWS that the NYT is erroneous in their assumptions, then Harper Collins will need to do more than just assert that everything is fine on their end. They’ve got the numbers- let’s see ’em.

    Cruz needs to show his hand.

  16. You’re crazy.

    Harper collins has one helluva lot more than a blank receipt. And they know it.

    They’ve got ALL of the paperwork on file. Everything they need for all the standards necessary to run a business.

    Including whether or not Cruz’s book sold individually, or in bulk batches that the NYT’s best seller list reporters assertions that they’re now standing by on.

  17. Yes, technically it is impossible to prove a negative. However, you can show it to be extremely unlikely.
    Nyt- has it’s Best Seller (B.S.?) list. They make the claim that TC’s books don’t qualify, citing bulk sales.

    Where did they get this info? My guess: Harper Collins, or something similar.
    Upon the lack of his book upon the BS list- Cruz and company go ballistic.

    Did they try to negotiate with the NYT to alleviate the error? Or did they go ballistic with TC pitching a hissy fit?
    The BS list comes with quite a number of perks to it. Just perfect for a man who wants to be POTUS. What a coincidence.

    The charge of unfairness can be answered simply. Harper Collins and their records. Of course any records they choose to release are going to be double checked.

    And when you’ve taken the time to make such a scene out of it- you can be assured that the reporters will want their names to be cleared.

    Would you accept the assertions of a Used Car Salesman? Or in wri…

  18. Or get the Used Car Salesman’s word- in writing?

    And right now- Mr. Robert K- you’re sounding one helluva lot like a Used Car Salesman to me.

  19. Your quote Moongrim

    “In other words- the NYT’s is tired of the same old B.S.
    They’ve tightened up the rules, and are investigating dubious sales.”

    If that’s not B.S. then what is? Your saying the are investigating dubious sales and yet they refuse to show us?

  20. That was great Moongrim I agree 100% of what your saying here… Then you had to go stupid on the Used Car Salesman..

  21. If you didn’t already know, major best seller lists rarely reflect reality.
    As just one weird example of how sales are measured, separate lists are kept for digital sales vs. print sales. Book launches that have sold more than enough copies to hit the best seller lists don’t make it because the numbers get split between digital and print. Wtf is the difference if someone buys the book in paper or digital? They still bought the book. But for some arcane reason, the NYT and WSJ lists think paper counts as a sale more than digital.
    Anyway, If I didn’t know better I would think those wise brains at the NYT were trying to boost sales of Cruz’s book. The entire “controversy” will do more to publicize and promote the book and it will probably end up on the bestseller list because of it.
    Cruz may very well end up with the last laugh.

  22. Chuck Sodd; one of the stupidest propagandists in the history of the world; he tells outlandish lies the people already know as lies; his propaganda only convinces morons.

  23. Perhaps you are correct- it’s a publicity stunt.

    Got proof of that?

    the problem with digital sales to ebooks and the like: it’ll still have a track record of who is doing the buying.

    Which would be an individual buying up their own in a ‘game the system’.
    Or a whole bunch of folks- which would fit the criteria of being a real best seller.

  24. I am not aware of their reasons why they’ve chosen to not cough up their evidence.

    Perhaps you do?

    The fact remains- it’s the NYT’s baby. They get to pick and choose who gets on it.

    What their motivations are- I can only speculate.

    Who knows? Maybe, just maybe- they’re demonstrating some journalistic integrity.
    As in: Do we allow someone who wants to be POTUS to cheat his way onto the bestseller list? And let him slide his way through like we’ve done so many others?

    Or do we hold the Man Who Would Be King- to a higher standard?

    Or maybe they’ve got it in for Cruz. It is a possibility.

    But as far as I’m aware, The American Judicial System is still predicated upon the notion that those who make the accusation still has to cough up evidence proving their assertion.

  25. The New York Times does not disclose all factors they consider in determining whether or not a book will hit the list. So it’s impossible to predict or plan. You can sell just as many, or more, books as someone who makes the list and not know why they didn’t pick you.

    http://goinswriter.com/nyt-best-seller/

  26. I’ve said before that this is a shell game to transfer campaign $$$ into a pol’s personal accounts. Legalized bribery.

    The Toadster is abysmal. Worse than Russert or Gregory, and they were both pawns.

    I’ve been mildly surprised by new host of FTN John Dickerson.
    Still would like to see Thom Hartmann, Rachel Maddow, or Keith Olbermann having an opportunity.

    Guess there’s no more Murrows’ though. Gotta be a comedian to have an audience.
    How’s THAT for a dumbed-down America ?

  27. Got proof of that?
    “““““““““““
    No proof of anything….just an observation of the ironic way that a book -by being kept OFF the NYT best seller list – could turn into a genuine bestseller.
    In publishing, every angle is played to get on that list and it’s very well known that people do buy their own book. Publishers collude with stores to beef up the numbers . Corporations buy books written that feature their CEO. There are even book “laundering” services available.
    And yes, political candidates buy books to send to their donors .
    A well-funded politician will write a book, then buy thousands of copies to give out as part of the campaign. That makes the sales number look good, and is certainly a legitimate campaign tactic in general, but is not the same as a book selling thousands of copies to individuals purely on its merits.

  28. Publishing industry pros will tell you the NYT over-samples adorable little independent stores and under-samples chains. And it REALLY under-samples non-bookstores that sell a lot of books, like Costco and BJ’s. Add to that, a hardcover of a book purchased on Amazon is weighted differently than the same hardcover book purchased at a brick and mortar store.
    At this point, I don’t think I really have to comment on what a disaster best seller lists really are.

  29. Theres not a day goes by that when I look at the usa and just shake my head! the OLIGARCHS are taking this country apart piece by piece! The GOP learned it’s lessons well! didn’t they?! Goebbels would be so impressed! Lesson NO.1 create a false enemy B-use phony nationalism to round up all the freighted SUCKERS! C-control the MEDIA! ram your propaganda down EVERYONES throat! D- try like hell to discredit EVERYONE who opposes your message! E-label YOUR opposition with the VERY things YOU’RE already doing! I’m SORRY! I usually don’t like comparing ANYTHING to HITLER! but the GOP has adopted MANY of the third reich mind control methods! NEWS FLASH! theres NO giant LIBERAL media! that’s another huge AS$ LIE republicans love to regurgitate! chuck todd for example! he’s david gregory, only with a goatee! gregory got FIRED because he was a republican schill! MTP response? HIRE another david gregory clone! corporate american media isn’t going to change! it’s ALL about BRAINWASHING!

  30. No, he’s correct. The GOP has his cajones. I’m starting to think that this guy is on the wrong network.

  31. Haven’t watched MTP since chuck was put on the show. and don’t plan to o watch any time in the near future..

  32. I agree. I’m surprised Todd is still hosting the show. To cry that rethuglicans will quit coming on his show is BS. They’ll take any free air time they can get.

  33. So, Amazon and Harper Collins both say there is no evidence for NYT, but looking at these comments, readers of politicususa don’t care. ‘He’s on the wrong network’? Seriously? Don’t want anybody on ‘your’ network that doesn’t say what you want? That is how our country has become so polarized.

  34. No Mike, that’s not it at all. We don’t like guys like Todd, who pretend they’re ‘journalists’ while always sucking up to the crazies in the GOP — just to get them on his show. He couldn’t ask a hard question if his life depended on it.

    Chuck Todd can’t even shine Tim Russert’s shoes. NBC would have been much better off giving a real journalist that position. Todd is laughable, and he’s caused the MTP ratings to fall even faster than David Gregory did.

  35. Mike, I can only feel pity for you. You wouldn’t know “truth” if it jumped up and bit you on the nose.

  36. I stopped watching when David Gregory took the seat.

    NBC is good at picking real losers to host MTP and Russert is spinning in his grave.

    (My dream is to see Keith Olberman and Bashir back as hosts of anything. NBC can’t seem to handle the truth being told.)

  37. So both Amazon and Harper Collins say there isn’t any evidence?

    Ok, let’s see what they’ve got to offer as evidence.
    If either Amazon and Harper Collins are gonna get so pissy about it- let them publish their own bestseller lists.

  38. Moon, you’re exactly right.

    I’m just a little old lady in Indiana who has long paid close attention to the political landscape of our country.

    Anyone with half a brain knows that these “authors” game the NYT Bestseller list by buying up huge chunks of “their” books to pump up the interest in people to buy. It became obvious a decade ago, with Palin, Huckabee and others buying in bulk to distribute to their fans, and pretending to be “bestselling authors.”

  39. Here’s another tip on ‘gaming the system’.

    The “I agree No Way” tabs here on Politicususa.

    I’ve discovered that I can up or down vote a commentary more than once.

    How?

    By logging in through a different computer.

    Same login, different server.

    Unlike Cruz- I’m honest about it. Well at least I am right now.

    Which is why I don’t really give a damn about up or down votes. As I’ve got the notion that I’m not the only one who figured this out.

  40. To me, it’s pretty simple. Harper Collins has a vested financial interest in selling as many books as they can, no matter who the author is.

    So, if Cruz wants to prove the NYT is biased against him (meaning his books were not sold “in bulk” by whoever) then he would encourage and authorize Harper Collins to release that information to prove his point.

    He hasn’t. Harper Collins hasn’t. That means that the NYT has a very good case.

  41. Buying by bulk is a common trick the gop uses when one of their own writes a book. David Brock who was right wing decades ago but then saw what the gop were doing brought their tricks to light and revealed that most of the gop’s books ARE bought in bulk by conservative foundations to get those books on the best sellers list & then tries to sell them at a much lower price.

    Cruz did nothing new.

    Keep in mind that Broke was very devoted to the gop for years until he saw too many things they did that he didn’t like.

  42. Have you heard? Tim Russert is spinning in his grave so fast they are gonna connect a few wires and power a large city…

  43. Like Cruz you are. I use to trust your judgement. I’m so disappointed in you Moongrim. Yes I know you’ll call me names make me look stupid. But you are one of the few I trusted.. So let me agree with you sir I’m stupid to trust such an .. sorry can’t call you names.

  44. About Chuck Todd have any of you considered just maybe he’s giving his guest enough rope to show America just how dumb he/she is? Once you see how dumb the guest is, you blame Todd. Lol you people sound as dumb as Trump and that’s dumb..

  45. Maddow is an expert when it comes to giving someone enough rope.

    Todd on the other hand is a brown-nosing shit head.

    I’m not surprised you can’t tell the difference.

Comments are closed.