Since they both often dress their news stories in similar pro-abortion garb, the New York Times and the Washington Post commonly seem like Bobbsey twins. But it is not uniformly true, and when it is not, the case, it can be very revealing.
For example, one day an opinion writer or columnist for one newspaper may reveal that the Emperor has no clothes—pro-abortionists are losing right and right and Democrats should not be measuring the drapes in the White House—and the very next day an opinion writer or columnist for the other newspaper will unintentionally exhibit the attitudes which help explain why pro-abortion Democrats are in big trouble.
To wit…
Whatever his politics, Philip Bump of the Washington Post not infrequently tells the truth. Wednesday, in “Two early warning lights are flashing for Democrats in 2020,” Bump threw plenty of cold water on the prospects of Democrats in general, the umpteen number of Democrats in hot in pursuit of their party’s nomination for President, in particular.
He writes
You may recall that, as the 2018 midterms approached, the results of special election contests were seen as a measure of Democratic enthusiasm. In contest after contest, Democrats were picking up seats and beating Clinton’s 2016 margins by double-digits according to analysis from DailyKos.
But
Since last November, though, the picture has been different. From November 2016 through March 2017, the site’s analysis shows, Democrats overperformed by an average of 9 points compared to 2016 in nine special elections. Since the midterms, Republicans have overperformed by an average of 1 point — and have picked up four seats that were held by Democrats.
Bump digs deeper. He looks at numbers from a recent CNN/SSRS poll which measured the all-important question of enthusiasm.
Respondents were asked how enthusiastic they were about voting next year, and more than three-quarters of both Democrats and Republicans said they were at least very excited about casting a ballot.
But Republicans were 11 points more likely to say that they’re extremely enthusiastic. [Underlining is mine.]
Over to the New York Times. A piece published Thursday and written by Tim Wu illustrates perfectly why a major component of the 2020 presidential election will be impatience with the condescending way Democrats typically act toward ordinary Americans.
Here’s the headline and subhead: “The Democrats’ Complexity Problem: Too often, progressive policies are difficult for Americans to understand, use and benefit from.”
Get it? You and I are… just…too…stupid to understand what our betters know is best for us. To quote Prof. Wu, most Americans “would prefer that the government solve problems for them”–or ought to, right?
Really?
One of the many reader responses perfectly captured how Wu perfectly illustrated the truth that Democrats are dreadfully tin-eared and elitist:
First of all, saying that people don’t understand the complexity of progressive policy proposals is a dog whistle for “you are stupid, we are smart, quit challenging your betters.” That is not a way to win hearts and minds. Secondly, the policy proposals like “postal banking” are things that nobody has heard of, thanks to all the oxygen in the room going to “vote for us or the earth gets it and you had better do it fast, like really fast, like NOW!”
Both articles here are very much worth reading.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
