Why does the NYT choose these five voters? Because the editors, and the publisher Sulzberger, want to present an anti-Kamala Harris point of view. That's it. There's no other explanation. At least one of these five voters voted for Trump twice. 1/2
Swear to god I thought this was an Onion feature just based on the “these five people and their headshots” format, until I remembered that that Onion format is a parody of HORSESHIT LIKE THIS.
I thought this was better, from WaPost. It included 25 undecided voters, 10 of whom entered the debate leaning Trump, 12 leaning Harris & 3 said neither. Of them 23 said Harris won debate, 2 said Trump. Some movement in voting plans towards Harris too. www.washingtonpost.com/elections/in...
Uncommitted voters in battleground states share their thoughts on the Harris-Trump debate with The Post.
MSNBC last night had an "undecided" focus group. Several were truly torn, and a couple had leaned toward Trump. The Trump leaners said they still leaned Trump, but would now be looking at Harris more closely. The others all said they were leaning more toward Harris. One woman was still undecided.
Moreover, let's have some real talk. If you are now "undecided" about how to vote, you're either a Trumper who's lying, or you're an idiot. We've been through 8 years of Trump and the GOP. Everyone knows what he is about.
The sentence, “The New York Times is a Pravda-style propaganda organ on behalf of the plutocracy” has both descriptive accuracy and predictive accuracy.
Particularly galling to me: Both Jeremy Peters and Patrick Healy are out gay men. Healy is married to a Latino man. They dabble in right wing faux-epistemology at their own peril. Though they are both white men, if gay.
giving strong "actually i wasn't able to vote today" vibes here
in its own way, the NYfT is as hinkie as AI narratives, but by the individual and group intentionality of human beings (rather than mechanically-vomited data). This shoddy and unethical journalism. They're just trolling the public.
As I say of such tiny silly panels, “Five.”
Thanks for the deep dive. I was generally aware what the NYT is doing, but your receipts are an eye-opening read.