We need to start thinking of articles like this as a kind of misinformation. The distinctions between Republicans and Democrats on nearly every issue are extremely clear, yet the Times insists on blurring them. Just tell voters about the choice they're making! www.nytimes.com/2024/08/24/b...

Can the G.O.P. Really Become the Party of Workers?

A new generation of Republicans is learning to love labor. It’s not clear if labor will love them back.

Well said! In 2016 I just considered these kinds of things false equivalencies, but it’s gotten to the point of disinformation. It’s as if media outlets are incapable of processing the actual crazy-weird of the Trump GOP & keep translating it into language they understand as if that’s reality.

Trumpian golden hard hat?

There's a rule of thumb: if a headline asks a question, the answer is "no".

Sure, in the same way the Nazis did.

It is quite clear to anyone with a brain that MSM is campaigning for the party that is actively involved with voter suppression, endorses a convicted felon, and supports subjugation of women. The question is why?

The headline says GOP but the article focuses on Vance and Hawley and I believe those two are sincere in their desire to prioritize "the workingman." Gilead doesn't work if a man can't support a tradwife and quiverfull kids.

There’s no research in main stream media anymore. It’s all high level talking points and speculation that leads to the same end…advertisement for their investors

Finally cancelled our @nytimes.com subscription, readers for more than 40 years. Just fucking absurd, that paper has become. I mean it has been for a while, but it has so reached the apex of false equivalence that it's pretty useless.

Does the article make any mention of Alexander Acosta, Eugene Scalia, and/or Wilbur Ross?

Workers are economically anxious and need less woke in the workplace.