Another admission from the fake news! The New York Times surprisingly published an op-ed admitting that they were wrong about YOU...
This is great news and another sign that the Great Awakening is moving along...
I don’t agree with everything in the article, but it’s a damn good start...
(media.greatawakening.win)
📺 MEDIA PANIC
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (53)
sorted by:
Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/21/opinion/bret-stephens-trump-voters.html
PK, what’s the trick to getting by the login wall? Isn’t it something like adding a “k” in the url?
These people are still pompous and condescending. And they're completely clueless -- they have no idea who a Trump voter is.
Don't know the 'k' trick, but here's the article.
July 21, 2022 I Was Wrong About Trump Voters nytimes.com/2022/07/21/opinion/bret-stephens-trump-voters.html
The worst line I ever wrote as a pundit — yes, I know, it’s a crowded field — was the first line I ever wrote about the man who would become the 45th president: “If by now you don’t find Donald Trump appalling, you’re appalling.”
This opening salvo, from August 2015, was the first in what would become dozens of columns denouncing Trump as a unique threat to American life, democratic ideals and the world itself. I regret almost nothing of what I said about the man and his close minions. But the broad swipe at his voters caricatured them and blinkered me.
It also probably did more to help than hinder Trump’s candidacy. Telling voters they are moral ignoramuses is a bad way of getting them to change their minds.
What were they seeing that I wasn’t?
That ought to have been the first question to ask myself. When I looked at Trump, I saw a bigoted blowhard making one ignorant argument after another. What Trump’s supporters saw was a candidate whose entire being was a proudly raised middle finger at a self-satisfied elite that had produced a failing status quo.
I was blind to this. Though I had spent the years of Barack Obama’s presidency denouncing his policies, my objections were more abstract than personal. I belonged to a social class that my friend Peggy Noonan called “the protected.” My family lived in a safe and pleasant neighborhood. Our kids went to an excellent public school. I was well paid, fully insured, insulated against life’s harsh edges.
Trump’s appeal, according to Noonan, was largely to people she called “the unprotected.” Their neighborhoods weren’t so safe and pleasant. Their schools weren’t so excellent. Their livelihoods weren’t so secure. Their experience of America was often one of cultural and economic decline, sometimes felt in the most personal of ways.
It was an experience compounded by the insult of being treated as losers and racists — clinging, in Obama’s notorious 2008 phrase, to “guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”
No wonder they were angry.
Anger can take dumb or dangerous turns, and with Trump they often took both. But that didn’t mean the anger was unfounded or illegitimate, or that it was aimed at the wrong target.
Trump voters had a powerful case to make that they had been thrice betrayed by the nation’s elites. First, after 9/11, when they had borne much of the brunt of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, only to see Washington fumble and then abandon the efforts. Second, after the financial crisis of 2008, when so many were being laid off, even as the financial class was being bailed out. Third, in the post-crisis recovery, in which years of ultralow interest rates were a bonanza for those with investable assets and brutal for those without.
Oh, and then came the great American cultural revolution of the 2010s, in which traditional practices and beliefs — regarding same-sex marriage, sex-segregated bathrooms, personal pronouns, meritocratic ideals, race-blind rules, reverence for patriotic symbols, the rules of romance, the presumption of innocence and the distinction between equality of opportunity and outcome — became, more and more, not just passé, but taboo.
It’s one thing for social mores to evolve over time, aided by respect for differences of opinion. It’s another for them to be abruptly imposed by one side on another, with little democratic input but a great deal of moral bullying.
This was the climate in which Trump’s campaign flourished. I could have thought a little harder about the fact that, in my dripping condescension toward his supporters, I was also confirming their suspicions about people like me — people who talked a good game about the virtues of empathy but practice it only selectively; people unscathed by the country’s problems yet unembarrassed to propound solutions.
I also could have given Trump voters more credit for nuance.
For every in-your-face MAGA warrior there were plenty of ambivalent Trump supporters, doubtful of his ability and dismayed by his manner, who were willing to take their chances on him because he had the nerve to defy deeply flawed conventional pieties.
Nor were they impressed by Trump critics who had their own penchant for hypocrisy and outright slander. To this day, precious few anti-Trumpers have been honest with themselves about the elaborate hoax — there’s just no other word for it — that was the Steele dossier and all the bogus allegations, credulously parroted in the mainstream media, that flowed from it.
A final question for myself: Would I be wrong to lambaste Trump’s current supporters, the ones who want him back in the White House despite his refusal to accept his electoral defeat and the historic outrage of Jan. 6?
Morally speaking, no. It’s one thing to take a gamble on a candidate who promises a break with business as usual. It’s another to do that with an ex-president with a record of trying to break the Republic itself.
But I would also approach these voters in a much different spirit than I did the last time. “A drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall,” noted Abraham Lincoln early in his political career. “If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend.” Words to live by, particularly for those of us in the business of persuasion.
Summary at the end:
"Would I be wrong to lambaste Trump’s current supporters?" "Morally speaking, no."
So sorry not sorry, then goes on to say how differently they would approach us even though we don't morally deserve it, in other words lie.
Apology not accepted, fuck off deep state bitch.
Dang.
I could build an entire career writing about these dumbasses.
They are so arrogant. They really think they are smarter than everyone else.
But they have been hypnotized to believe that they are progressive and oh so modern.
They are about to have a hard landing when it finally dawns on them that they are the backward, fearful, authoritarian bullies they think we are.
Thanks for posting it. Wow - things must be moving along quickly for liberals to need to download the talking points of why Trump was right (now undeniable) while still not ACTUALLY being right.
https://archive.ph/ImDzk via archive.today
https://12ft.io/ works in a lot of cases, but it has been disabled for the NY Times.
Thanks u/solarsavior 🌞👈🏻
Lol...I'm not sure because I can access the article from my cellphone but not from my desktop...doesn't make sense...😏
Probably because they are tracking everything about you with your cell.
Install a Bypass Paywalls extension in your browser-
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
If you're on mobile, disable JavaScript if you can't figure out how to install extensions.
Your other option is to copy the link and archive it at https://archive.today
Here's this link archived -
https://archive.ph/s2sm1