- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
from #NewYorkTimes #NYT
[gift article - link can be shared. Expires in 30 days.]
By Erica L. Green
Erica L. Green is a White House correspondent. She reported from Washington.
Feb. 3, 2025
You must log in or register to comment.
Undercurrent?!
This is a prime example of how the MSM serves and normalises fascism for its owners benefit.
Surfaces?
It’s been there all along - it’s just been routinely ignored by the legacy media.
That said - there is a sort of interesting meta-topic here.
It’s arguably likely that there’s a relatively powerful and serious opposition to Trump coming together, simply because the NYT is so craven and cowardly and ethically bankrupt that there’s basically no way that they’d publish something like this unless there was somebody other than Trump that they could suck up to by doing it.
For whatever that’s worth.
Oh wow, NYT. That’s a super deep insight. Nobody else picked up that maybe, just maybe, 47 was a teensy bit racist.
No, it just surfaced now and the NYT discovered it. Before now no one saw that attacks on DEI were just thinly disguised racism. Conservatives would never use a three letter acronym as a substitute for racism.
Such investigative journalism. Wow.
The issue plays into deep tensions among Americans about the role of race in society and helped supercharge Mr. Trump’s political comeback. Many voters, conservative and not, hoped to see a correction to what they saw as progressive politics gone too far.
Ohhh, yes, definitely, it was non-conservatives who wanted to “correct” the problem of wokeness that got Trump elected. That’s clearly the correct message to draw from Harris’s oh-so-woke campaign losing. I was worried the NYT’s beloved centrism might be implicated in some way.
