So, you’re on deadline for The Washington Post. You’ve got no pitch ideas for your editors. No leads. Nothing of interest. Nada. Zero-point-zero.
Then you find out there’s a site called Trump.Dating (link at bottom of article so you can see for yourselves). Grab your MacBook Pro, brave WaPo journalist! Your prayers have been answered — it’s time for a hatchet job.
Alas, in the end, the joke was all on you: Apparently, all it did was function as free advertising.
Yes, there is a site called Trump.Dating, and yes, The Washington Post decided to run a piece on it. Writer Avi Selk spends over 900 words talking about it, mostly starting with a bunch of controversies surrounding it that are relatively minor in the whole scheme of things.
So, after all that, we actually get down to criticism of the site.
Conservative Tribune Daily Email
Breaking news updates and daily headlines from a news source you can trust.
Thanks For Subscribing!
“Like, what are we to make of kyschyanne, a 21-year-old user from Garland, Tex., whose bio line is ‘white power’?” Selk writes. Yes, because nobody’s ever broken the terms of service of a dating site literally ever. Or gone on a dating site to troll. Nothing of that sort has ever occurred in the history of dating sites.
All right, so what are the other complaints? “Pink News, an LGBT site annoyed by the site’s exclusion of LGBT people, went exploring with its own fake account and found a match named “Gayintruder555,” which it figured was a troll,” Selk writes.
“While it’s unclear how many real people use the site, Trump.Dating now describes itself as ‘mega-viral,’ and at least some of the profiles look authentic.
“Like Footlettuce, 23, from Tuskegee. ‘Love of god Great at basketball.’ Sounds nice.”
Would you join a site like Trump.Dating?
Yeah, I don’t think that sounds all that bad, either. I’m not quite sure what the point was there, but whatever. Oh, and then came the charges of implicit racism, which of course you knew were coming.
“Whether the matches Trump.Dating makes are any good is another question,” Selk writes.
“The Post had trouble getting the site’s preferences to work correctly. It kept offering us page after page of white people, even after we’d asked to match only with ‘Thai women,’ which for some reason is its own special category in the ethnicity menu.”
No reasons for this are given, only the fact that only white did you hear me only white no I don’t think you heard me ONLY WHITE PEOPLE showed up on a dating site. be racism! Never mind that, as you can see from the Internet Archive, the site only went live a month ago, which probably should tell you that it’s in beta mode or early in development at the moment.
However, if the WaPo thought they were closing down Trump.Dating before it even began, you’re wrong. An anonymous source who works with the site told Conservative Tribune that their membership had skyrocketed since the Feb. 20 Washington Post story. And, as you can tell from their Alexa internet popularity ranking since then, that’s not at all an exaggeration:
As you’ll notice, it explodes in popularity right as the WaPo story is published. And while its run up the charts is slowing slightly, that’s still not a bad climb. Apparently, there are a lot more Trump fans willing to read The Post than we thought, and a lot more willing to sign up for a Trump-based dating site than they thought.
So, good work, Washington Post! Maybe you’ll be able to find the Thai women you were looking for after all now that you’ve driven more people to the site.
Here’s the site: https://trump.dating/. See, we weren’t lying. It’s real!
Please like and share this story on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts about Trump.Dating.
What are your thoughts about the WaPo’s hit piece on this dating site?Scroll down to comment below!