What I’m not getting about the NY Times’ coverage of the shutdown is how Democrats are being portrayed as radicals who are shutting down the government. Let’s ignore that Friday night’s continuing resolution wouldn’t have passed even if there were no filibuster.
What’s truly bizarre about the coverage is that the overwhelming majority of Americans, regardless of party, want to fund CHIP (healthcare for children); on DACA, it’s mixed (large majority support the Dreamers, but about half think funding CHIP is more important than DACA), while most Americans oppose the border wall. But it’s not radical to fight for policies many Americans want, especially when the consequences of those policies will affect millions of lives.
I think what might be happening is that the NY Times views its target demographic as gentry class and wealthier (see this NY Times ad to understand where they make their advertising money). Despite all of the Heartland Whisper pieces, a strong core of the Republican Party is and has always been the well-heeled. They like Trump. Compare that to the Washington Post, where much of the audience in the D.C. area is upper-middle class veering towards gentry class. That’s a different demographic and the Post’s angle on things generally seems to reflect that demographic.
mikethemadbiologist
When the right is okay with racists and Nazis, what’s the point of compromise?
When the right is okay with racists and NAZIs, there is no compromise.
Thanks for pointing that out, or rather, pointing out the Think Progress article. I noticed something funny about the headline but couldn’t quite process it. In fact, it almost parrots the hard-right GOP talking points I receive by email, all of which hammer the idea that the Dems “favor illegal immigrants over national security and America’s well-being”, etc. and so are entirely to blame for the shutdown.
As per the discussion about your earlier piece about the Times’ ads, I’m not sure I entirely agree that the paper writes its headlines to please the super-rich. But this one is odd – especially since I think the Times has been going out of its way to try to portray the president as he is, rather than protect him behind the standards of coverage past presidents have gotten (and earned).
If you take a look at the Wikipedia page on US government shutdowns – they started with Reagan, and have- every single one – been about Republicans not wanting to fund something. While DACA is a part of this one, so is not funding CHIP.
Why do we allow Republicans to pretend to be the party of fiscal responsibility?
Carter is the shutdown king, with 56 days of shutdown in a single term. Also, the Dems controlled both houses of Congress. ( https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/13/politics/us-government-shutdowns-budget-chart/index.html )
Until 1980, the government didn’t actually ‘shut down’ without a budget, but thank you for pointing out CNN’s misleading article. Prior to Reagan, the government continued to operate as usual, with the expectation that bills and paychecks would be distributed as usual.
Change the narrative, from my house today: It’s on you Greg Walden
Oregon Congressional District Two “representative”, Oregon’s Own Donald Drumpf, a trustfunder punk whose never done a day’s work and doesn’t even live in Oregon, the first kid that dies from this year’s flu – Shutdown Suspends CDC Flu Program In Record Influenza Outbreak – blood is on your hands. The first senior, mother, father, sister or brother that dies from the flu is your victim.
You shut down the government, racist pig, whatever happens is on you.
Except that most Americans DON’T oppose the border wall.
If by ‘most’, you mean 35%, yeah ‘most’ Americans don’t opposed the border wall.
Source (Question 26):
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-support-daca-but-oppose-border-wall-cbs-news-poll/
This matches numbers from last September:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/351752-poll-support-drops-for-deportation-border-wall