That’s not at all how he’s framing it. He’s saying that Republicans not liking it make it a problem. Never mind that the rationale for their opposition is transparently bullshit and for the purposes of preventing effective solutions and benefitting politically.
I understand your view of it. This is still just one person’s take in a section intended for a variety of different voices, not the news report. The original post here implied the writer still had some role in newsroom coverage. He does not.
I think “longtime editor”, even if former, and missing out that Trump is a similar age as Biden and Trump’s still being confused about NATO is not actually a focus on domestic strategy explains a lot about NYT political coverage.
I agree with that, and some do. But most of us here understand the difference, and think the Times is pushing a bogus and lazy both sides are as bad view point on its op ed pages and caused us to cancel our subs.
We're pretty firmly against both-sides framing, but it tends to be in the eye of the beholder. There's a lot of perception/cognitive bias in how people read news. You see the 20 stories that annoy you and you don't see the 50 that are critical of the other side and lay out the scary agenda there
