I'm not sure what you're talking about here. The NYTIMES/Siena poll only shows an uptick of 6% in the question "rate economic conditions today" compared to July (not November). That's basically nothing.
Link to poll.
2024 U.S. Elections
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Link to poll.
It is not "basically nothing", its a decent upswing, actually.
Probably will be another few percentages up come autumn.
Probably will be another few percentages up come autumn.
It is closer to "basically nothing" than to "massive uptick."
The poll also shows that the % who think the economy is poor has increased since last time.
The poll also shows that the % who think the economy is poor has increased since last time.
I know you're being sarcastic but I agree this statement more than not. I'm genuinely impressed with how well the Biden administration has navigated the absurd minefield that is the current American political landscape.
Clearly talking about "the glory of Joe Biden" is a bit much, but for an ancient centrist he has actually done some good things.
Fever dreams are difficult for some to quell.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Okay, Junior, you basically admit that you like hanging around very shady people.
Between him compared to the rest of the Kennedys and Stephen Baldwin compared to the other Baldwin brothers, I can't tell who is a worse black sheep to a famous family.
Literally all of them say the same thing - Derschowitz, Pinker, RFK et al
So that’s a yes.
Guess that explains some of his shady views
I have no idea what he is trying to say here. It's an awful soundbite
The US is [redacted]
Thankfully she is 80.
Reluctantly pulling the lesser-of-two-evils lever for Donnie.
Last edited:
This is an illuminating exchange on Reddit: We’re Michael Bender and Maya King, reporters for The New York Times covering the 2024 presidential election. Ask us Anything.
NYT pretending not to get it. Their readership isn't the GOP, it's the whole population. Framing Biden in terms of that population but Trump only in terms of his party sets a clear double standard.
NYT Answer: I think what you're reacting to is that, at the moment, Biden is an unpopular president seeking a second term while Trump is a popular figure inside his party who is winning primary races. I wouldn't necessarily compare the two.
Objection: Half of the country hates Trump and the other half hates Biden. Yet you continue to portray Trump differently and more favorably then Biden as the comment above shows. "Biden is an unpopular president", "Trump is a popular figure". To a large percent of the people Trump is an unpopular ex-president seeking a second term. Yet you don't say this.
NYT retort: Aww, RoadsideBandit. That's not very fair. I said Trump is a popular figure inside his party.
NYT pretending not to get it. Their readership isn't the GOP, it's the whole population. Framing Biden in terms of that population but Trump only in terms of his party sets a clear double standard.
If this is your assessment of the NYT, what do you think their real 'agenda' is here? They're obviously not under the illusion that their readers are all GOP diehards.
Are you suggesting NYT are going easy on Trump?
RFK jr is downright brutal for RFKs legacy as the greatest what if president.
I went to the New York Times website and clicked on "2024 elections." The third article, written by one of the two journalists in that AMA, Michael Bender:
How Trump's Crushing Victory Masked Quiet Weaknesses
Even though he easily defeated Nikki Haley, the primary results suggested that he still has long-term problems with suburban voters, moderates, and independents.
How is that 'favorable.'
Here is a decent article on why so many people in Trumpistan think that he will give them what they want.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/07/donald-trump-voter-liberals
It's depressing that these voters have so much power over what happens to the rest of the planet beyond their red states.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/07/donald-trump-voter-liberals
It's depressing that these voters have so much power over what happens to the rest of the planet beyond their red states.
It's not so much an agenda as that they're married to an outdated concept of what constitutes journalistic fairness in the context of presidential primaries/races and are consciously unwilling to let that go. President must run on his record - he is therefore judged by the country. Would be challenger gets primary season to establish their credentials and vision within their own party and is therefore judged through a narrower lens. Ordinarily I think that this would be the best way to go about it because it goes some way to diminish the value of the presidential pulpit.
In this instance, though, Trump is every bit Biden's equal; both in terms of what their party and the wider electorate knows about them. Everybody and their dog know Trump is gonna be the Republican nominee. Half the equation the NYT uses to weigh its coverage (establishing credentials) is missing. For a couple of months now the GOP primaries have largely been a pulpit via which Trump is making his pitch to the nation, not just to primary voters. If that pitch is largely evaluated in terms of its resonance among primary voters rather than the wider electorate then its popularity gets overplayed and the perspectives from which criticism might come gets narrowed. Trump's getting a bit of a free tilt.
I think the NYT editorial team knows this, but hasn't really established a cogent alternative to the coverage they're providing, so they'd rather ignore it.
It doesn't seem particularly favourable, but then providing relatively favourable coverage doesn't mean your presentation is entirely one eyed; it just means that on the whole Trump's primary successes are heralded comparatively more and any failings comparatively less than Biden's personal and legislative equivalents.
If we look at your highlighted article then sure it's a critical piece and decent enough. Still, though, his victory was "crushing", his support "daunting", the field "vanquished." A lot of space in that article is given over to his successes. Which is fine, but where is the equivalent Biden article? Is it the one that focusses on his adversaries: Uncommitted Effort to Protest Biden Will Shift Its Focus to Washington State, or is it under one of the subheadings in 5 takeaways from Super Tuesday: Trump Wins and Haley Exits where "An unstoppable Mr Trump Continues to Roll" while "Democrats Bruised Biden - Again"? I mean at least in the latter we also have "There are warning signs for Trump in the Haley vote" but you must see that the limelight here is dominated by Trump.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Has she lost her mind? That is basically how you destroy your own political career.
That statement only proves people right when the majority thought she would not be a suitable candidate for US Senate.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Trump has also said they need very few of the Haley voters, i hope they don't reach out to her voters at all, great strategy.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Undecideds are starting to come down, and as a result, the race gets closer, as was expected.
If Tester can pull this one off, he is a miracle-worker.
She talks like she ever actually had a chance of winning against Schiff.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Completely different reality.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
She must be good at handling mushrooms
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So much for pivoting.
What else is she supposed to say ? She's reliant on the MAGA base to win her Senate race and that means continuing the lie or else lose Trump's support.
Well nothing, just funny she was trying to be all cute with the McCain-republicans like a week back, grifter much?
MAGA-base alone won't give her a senate seat btw, so, she has to come up with something, next few months.
Her Only Fans account is up and running.
Haley still getting 15% of the GA vote in a race she’s no longer in. Can’t be good for Trump.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date