So, like, okay, the Times is now explicitly anti-Biden. Where the hell does it go from here? You already blew the load and called for him to step down, there's a lot of campaign time left, the actual debate impact doesn't look that significant... like what's the plan here going forward?
So now we're supposed to just go back to assuming the Times is on the level about all of this? Just take the Seina and LV screens as in good faith? What the fuck is this shit anyway?
Its that Sulzberger isn't even good at the ratfucking that annoys me. Like its so ham fisted
Objectively, it's probably a good thing that our foes are mostly idiot nepo babies and angry car dealers.
Subjectively, it feels vaguely degrading to have to fight this hard against *these* guys. Like, come on!
Personally past assuming assuming the nyt is level about this at all. The editorial board's take strikes me as the highest form of the nyt's imperious delusions around both Biden and Trump and there is next to no way back.
Alternate theory: NYT eds are in such an echo chamber that they assumed the people calling for Biden to drop out were far more numerous/influential than they actually are, and they figured they’d better jump on the bandwagon – which is also really embarrassing.
AG Sulzberger has put in print that he has it out for Biden because Biden didn't play ball so I don't think we even need to bother thinking about that layer of management given how we know the Times newsroom to work
Trump gets sentenced on the 11th, Times gets a do-over then. Assuming there isn't a Lebanon war to distract them first! They said they'd still take Biden over Trump so they have an out if it comes to it
I know nothing about political comms [no one follow my advice] but yeah, leaning into his age is a good move now, right? Make that weakness a strength
bsky.app/profile/pfes...
"Anybody read the New York Times? Well, they say I'm too old to do this job [pause for boos] They say it matters more how you do on some test than whether your heart is in the right place. You know what I say? I care about American democracy, but my opponent doesn't, and the NYT doesn't either.
I think the "come at the King you best not miss" very applicable here. They attacked everyone, both Biden and Trump in personal terms and didn't hit anything.
They're going to continue to undermine the liberal project while projecting a mythical "liberal media" image to the credulous. In other words, business as usual.
I've said before, and this is just my opinion, that you can eeither support the goals of a healthy America or you can support the New York Times. You can't do both.
I say this a a liberal, but libs are the biggest fucking marks on the planet. The NYT spends years as a gleeful participant in Bannon and Rudy’s ratfucking, and when it pays off libs buy the keyfabe and subscribe en masse as an anti-Trump move.
No lie told, Ben. I'm assuming like all newspapers they went out of business thanks to the Internet. In order to not admit that fact, they turned to Russian money, and here we are: maybe we can call 'em NY Today, like a subsidiary of Russia Today?
I mean, New York flipped from Italian Mob control to Russian mob control under Giuliani, so you could say they know what New York Time it is. Can't fault 'em for knowing which criminals to obey.
