Just look at all of what was said. He talks about his famous wall, about people having to come into the country legally, all about border security and illegal immigration immediately before and after those questions and specifically in response to some of them without missing a beat. Yet you and plenty of others seriously want to believe that right in the middle, he broke stride and talked about something completely unrelated to those subjects for two sentences.
Ever watched a press conference on something that's not currently the #1 story the media is droning on and on about? Reporters always try to change the subject to the thing their networks are droning on and on about.
If you can't figure that shit out when it's happening, in real time, then you ain't gonna be a very good President.
That's pretty damn foolish if you ask me. The media is known for taking comments out of context and trolling with them. Hell, it's an inbred part of politics it seems. And yes, I'm refering to brother and sister becoming mom and dad because it always seems to be the same ones trying to smear the same people or types of people who are not part of their family. It appears you are caught up in it hook, line, and sinker too.
Of course it's the same people. They always do it to the front-runner because "front-runner is DOOOMED! DOOMED I TELL YOU!" is inherently more ratings-worthy then "Bobby Jindall once again implies he does not love his mother."
It goes in cycles. For awhile it was new (and thus ratings-worthy) to bash the hell out of Hillary. Biden was going to come in and steal her lunch money. "Feel the Bern" was more then an impotent expression of white liberal rage. There was a lot of smoke to the Benghazi scandal. Polls that indicated she might lose the whitest states in the country were huge news, despite the fact the exact same poll showed she;'d wipe the competition out in the next two states.Then that got old, and not ratings-worthy; so as soon as that idiot implied that Benghazi was political, and she didn't stink up a debate, she started walking on water again. In about a month two or three relatively trivial other things (probably related to her continued weakness in the white/Iowa/New Hampshire vote relative to Sanders) will be merged with some other random piece of vaguely anti-Hillaryish infotainment and she'll be doomed again.
In Trump's case he actually prefers the negative attention, because the guy who said that 15-20% of the potential ratings points are "rapists" despite all evidence to the contrary, is never gonna be embraced by the media.
Either Trump's not smart enough to figure out that he is answering a totally different set of policy questions then the reporter is asking, in which case he should be pilloried in the media for not understanding the requirements of the job he is trying to get.
This is most likely it. It is completely supported by his answers. Look at his answers to the MSNBC reporter...
It's definitely possible.
It's just as likely he knew exactly what he was answering, and he knew that his supporters would watch the video and then go into paroxysms of pro-Trump rage against the biased media, and therefore he did it anyway.
But given the aforementioned Mexican immigrants are rapists thing,* I'm not gonna give him the benefit of the doubt on any ridiculous ethnically-based statement.
*Which was just stupid. If you're a criminal of any type in Mexico, especially a rapist, why the fuck would you leave? You can kidnap 16-year-old girls, have your way with them, murder them, bury the bodies in the hills and nobody with arrest powers cares. Granted state-side we get our share of ethnic Latino criminals, but most of them are at least raised in the US, they tend to be from Central American countries that are not Mexico, and they aren't any rapier then us natives.