Whereupon We Pontificate About Poor Media Outlet Choices

A little hair dye and mustache trim and he’s there.

6 Likes

Yeah no way that haircut is an accident

NYT is just trolling everyone now.

…so ubiquitous as to be unavoidable even by those who see how broken it is. It’s just Facebook.

oh fuck me

https://x.com/jenhab/status/1809558552727417094

https://x.com/keithedwards/status/1809762975625933111

I thought the coalition that formed isn’t going to be particularly stable

(the tracker is here and has increased by 1 House rep since this image)

If The NY Times is the cause of this “panic” then they are the most important and essential publication of all time, ainec. Somebody has to at least draw attention to the fact that the emperor has no clothes before it is too late do anything about it.

If they did one for “How many Dems have said Biden totally can’t win but they support him anyway?” it would be a lot more interesting.

Thinking back, it’s pretty fucking astonishing how many high level GOP politicians at one point denounced Trump as unfit for the Presidency only to be slurping him weeks to months later. I guess Biden is just taking a page out of Trump’s playbook. Of course, the reasons why it worked for Trump don’t apply, but I can see how he could delude himself into thinking it might work for him too.

Establishment politicians being spineless, selfish pieces of shit seems to apply.

That is true and it helped, but I don’t think it is specifically why it worked.

It worked because Trump gave MAGA folk racism like no one else did. They liked it so much, that he had their undying support. It was strong enough that he could turn them against any foe.

Biden doesn’t have anything like that which he can threaten his detractors with, as spineless and selfish as they may happen to be.

He’s managed to whip the party pretty well in the last week while doing ~nothing to prove he’s mentally fit. Since they all know he’s going to lose, he shouldn’t really have any leverage on them but their cowardice is top notch.

This is, importantly, not true! In the Idaho EMTALA case, they intervened in January to allow the law to go into effect (removing a lower court stay) and their late June ruling basically punted back to the lower court, put the stay back in place, and said “oopsie, we shouldn’t have done that”, so on net their actions in that case restricted abortion further in Idaho for several months. The crank mifepristone case being rejected (important to note: for reasons of standing, not because the justices said mifepristone shouldn’t be banned) changed nothing from the status quo a year ago, as a stay against the ban was already in place.

It is factually untrue that the Court expanded abortion availability, but you have the fucking New York Times court reporter giving this ultra-conservative court moderate-sounding bona fides in the Paper of Record. Disgusting.

2 Likes

the “liberal new york times” :eyes:

And this shit works. If you poller voters, I bet 65% would view the NYT as liberal, 30% as moderate, 5% as conservative.

That’s because it’s objectively true that The NY Times and most other mainstream publications largely amplify the arguments and language of Ds:

Now, I would argue to a conservative that this is simply because reality has a liberal bias but it is just objectively not the case that the great peril we find ourselves in is primarily the fault of The NY Times, etc.

The primary causes are that a) Ds are led by a weak, ineffective, corrupt (not as corrupt as Rs, granted), narcissistic gerontocracy and b) the memory of WWII era fascism has faded and the ineffective, unresponsive, corrupt establishment we had/have was/is fertile ground for it to return.

In that same episode the Liptak guy said that the Supreme Court was open to gun regulation as long as it’s an act of congress. The language he used was something like “the conservative majority was surprisingly open to gun regulation as long as it’s a law passed by congress”.

Completely ignoring that if congress passes something (big IF), the conservative judges would find some nitpick in the language to say that, actually, the law is not specific enough so you get a machine gun and you get a machine gun, and everyone gets a machine gun because it was the founders intention that no one can stop you from owning a nuke to protect yourself from tyranny.

A complete joke of an episode, I turned it off halfway through.