You can have concerns about Biden's age, but still be absolutely appalled about editorial choices that convey the issue as more important than the Supreme Court offering a pre-emptive thumbs up to a criminal presidency
I just saw a thing on NBC talking about this and making mention of Hunter Biden coming to meet with him as if it was some sub-scandal. How incredibly unusual for a father and son to talk about a major life decision!
The New York Times: “After his disastrous debate performance it is of utmost importance the bumbling, senescent old President drop out of the race for the good of the country”
Historian classmate shared the below earlier today to express her disgust at how poorly the NYT has handled editorial choices in recent days. Today was clearly the tipping point. We've both subscribed for more than four decades, and today she called it quits:
They *know* the Supreme Court decision is more important. They’re in what’s called let’s save our own asses mode. It’s what obey in advance looks like.
The interesting thing about Biden‘s age is that he’s in better shape than Donald Trump, who’s 78! Donald Trump was a terrible President and Biden is doing an excellent job as President right now. I suppose a reason to vote for Trump is if you want a leader with 34 felonies who’s guilty of rape.
This feels like a precipice of a big break up between a lot of legacy news media institutions, typified by the NYT, and many Dems/libs. Like, I have seen a tremendous amount of pretty justified anger at their coverage choices over the past week that I dont think will be going away any time soon.
As long as this is the Biden camp’s response to SCOTUS going completely rogue, the “Joe is too old” stuff will stay at the top. The campaign has the power to make headlines and shape the narrative with bold actions and positions on major issues. They won’t do it.
They are so mad about the lack of access in his administration, and they are ready and willing to sink American democracy because Colin fucking Jost called them Wordle at the Correspondent’s Dinner.
pre-emptive for what comes next while simultaneously giving a thumbs to what prosecution is happening now and is (was) yet to happen for crimes already committed