The NY Times: It Don’t Mean a Thing If It Ain’t Got That Swing

I typically avoid reading impressionistic pieces by journalists who visit places to find swing voters (In Diners™), and a recent NY Times article “Elated, Furious, Wary: Impeachment Divides Voters, Like Everything Trump“, would have been no different. Life is too short to read yet another account of a Cletus Safari. But Matt McDermott examined some of the supposed swing voters, and they’re … not very swingy. These voters include:

      A woman who has attended 23 (that’s not a typo: twenty-three) Trump rallies and wrote a book which was a collection of (some of) his tweets. By her own admission, she has read each tweet about “fifty times.” Not a swing voter.

These aren’t swing voters. This isn’t an isolated incident. The NY Times has a history of doing downplaying political attachments, including a GOP convention delegate and a longtime political activist and PAC founder.

This is bad journalism and bad editing. Maybe the NY Times should hire some more editors and ditch a couple of columnists? I can’t wait for the 2020 campaigns to start…

This entry was posted in Fucking Morons, News Media. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The NY Times: It Don’t Mean a Thing If It Ain’t Got That Swing

  1. mrtoads says:

    “The NY Times has a history of doing downplaying political attachments” – oddly, it only seems to work in one direction. Probably a variant of Murc’s Law.

  2. Bern says:

    ddowah doowah doowah doowah doowah

Comments are closed.