You mentioned the comment sections of NYT not being any kind of indicator- how true.
The comments sections of NYT columnists once was a place full of insights along a full political spectrum.
That all changed in 2015/2016, starting with when Bernie was filling arenas and gaining support.
Suddenly, columnists who once had interesting policy takes, started talking only about "Bernie Bro's", as if that were a thing - anything to stomp policy discussions.
Many commenters started leaving in disgust.
Trump got some of the same treatment, as Bernie, but was mostly not considered enough of a threat to bother with.
Then, Trump won.
Suddenly, lots of commenters showed up talking about being "woke" (as a complimentary self description), and "Intersectionality" (had to look those up).
At this point, any commenters disagreeing with any single policy plank of establishment Democrats was mostly ignored, and the rest of the heterodox commenters disappeared - and I followed.
I canceled my NYT subscription because of and during the 2016 D primary. I live in Vienna, Austria, which is 6 hours ahead of NYC. This meant (at that time - it changed later) I could see the online NYT columnists posting columns minutes after the postings, as I'm on a computer most every day for my job.
Every debate, all the columnists would gush that Hillary had destroyed Bernie. Every. Single. Debate. Then I "caught" them. The debate ended and 10 minutes later the columns started arriving that Hillary had again destroyed Bernie. It is not possible to write, edit, proof, etc., and then publish a column in 10 minutes.
There was also horrible curation of any pro-Bernie comments. The bias was completely obvious while the entire NYT stated they were just neutral observers. Thus ended my nearly 35 year relationship with the NYT.
Yup. I started emailing the reporters, mocking them, telling them what sad losers they were. Imagine flushing your integrity down the toilet for the likes of Joe Biden.
Lol, you’re smarter than me… I just argue with idiots on social media. Then I realize I’m arguing about subjects I’ve studied extensively with a child, a NGO employee, or a bot. I’m gonna start emailing the assholes instead!
I didn't (and don't) want to give them any more of my money. I had a subscription for a long time. I even bought and read a Paul Krugman book. One of my last posts was a "Krugman 2016 vs. Krugman 2005." I used his own words to show what a sellout he'd become. In 2005 he was railing on Bush for not implementing M4A. Of course once he was looking for a job in the Clinton administration in 2016 he had turned 180°. Pathetic.
Newspapers used to be licenses to print money because they provided information about goods, services and employment in a convenient manner. Reporting on the world was only part of the service.
Robo-- I just subscribe to cooking. You can get the crosswords for free (I get from Seattle Times.) Also many articles can be obtained by hitting "escape" key before paywall comes up!
Truth be told, everything is easily read from behind the paywall. It's a puzzle to me that they don't turn off the workaround. It takes about 10 seconds to see any article you want.
Thanks as did not know this!! I subscibe to a bunch of publications including tech pblications for my work. But just going in for an article or two over a long time period it is frustrating to get hit with the "pay wall" issue.
I’ve never forgotten the Associated Press posting an article the day before the California primary telling us all that between superdelegates, regular delegates, and (presumably) The Will of G-d Hillary had the Dem nomination locked.
The day before the CA primary.
“So, yeah, folks, no need to vote tomorrow. It’s all said and done. You had a good run, Bernie.”
Of course, not what was actually printed, but that was surely the implication.
I've been an active commenter on the NYT website. I would estimate that close to 50% of my comments are censored. Some of my comments that survive the initial computer screening round and gets posted immediately. But later when an employee reads it and disagrees with it, my comment is yanked. When I click the link on my email to view my comment, the following message appears on their website, "The comment you are looking for is currently unavailable." I've checked six months out and get the same message. Outright censorship. This is my latest comment that they yanked:
"Biden most likely would not have won in 2020 had the mainstream media not discredited the NY Post's story of the information contained on Hunter Biden's laptop as Russian Propaganda. After the election all the same people admitted the story was true. If the Republicans manage to investigate the matter before the election, I'm not sure Biden could win. The mainstream media ignored the report on the twitter files even though it documented that the CIA, FBI, DHS, NSA, DIA, State department and various "private" groups funded by the CIA and MI6 including the Biden WH sent spreadsheets to Twitter, Facebook and Google telling them which posts should be suppressed or accounts deleted. These agencies were inserting themselves into a Presidential election censoring our communications to protect Biden- especially the Hunter Biden story which again was all true. "
I am a Canadian in Ottawa, and used to comment a lot at CBC, our state funded broadcaster. They used to allow a wide variety opinions but those days are so gone. I get censored for stuff that shocks even me - innocuous comments that are not insults, or invective, or even super controversial.
Once they censored me, "this content has been deactivated" for saying to a guy who was spouting Russiagate bullshit, "Prove it!" Gone. My account is now broken, I cannot see my old comments or replies, although I can still, theoretically, comment, and they will not fix it.
This is our future everywhere, mind control and censorship.
See, you aren’t allowed to say that. Truth is no defense. For kicks try using the words “mutilate” and “children” in any comment pretty much anywhere, including the WSJ. We live in a world curated by our superiors, and your thoughts aren’t welcome. This isn’t the America we thought we lived in, but we can reclaim our right to be here and to speak our minds.
"The mainstream media ignored the report on the twitter files even though it documented that the CIA, FBI, DHS, NSA, DIA, State department and various "private" groups funded by the CIA and MI6 including the Biden WH sent spreadsheets to Twitter, Facebook and Google telling them which posts should be suppressed or accounts deleted."
Nothing like having a little election interference swept under the rug, eh? Nothing to see here, move on.
The NYT and WAPO are like psychotic ex-lovers. No matter how hard one tries to break up with them, one's inbox is daily made full of special offers to returning subscribers to regain their special insight into the truth and to help them as the last, final protectors of democracy. It is a sad, desperate feeling emanating from them for sure...
The Atlantic was always establishment and elitist. Harper's had a run in the 2000s as leftist, but became tamer after Roger Hodges left as editor in 2009. But I learned a lot from its writers during that decade. I remember one article in particular, "Everyone Loses When Politics is a Game." instead of looking at what works like the satisfaction of a plumber fixing your toilet and pushing that plunger down. There was another one about the Usury laws being voted out too in 1979 by a Democratic congress.
I still keep up with the NYT a bit. I agree that there's way too much uber-partisanship blocking what's left of good writing and reporting.
Over the last couple of years, I've often find that the commenters push back on the stupidest, craziest, most bitterly partisan shit in the comments section, but I've noticed that this has changed quite a bit in the last few months, and especially most recently.
The open message board and comment board section of the internet seemed to die with the election of Trump. Any YouTube video, or news piece, and music or movie review had a comment section was lousy with edgy, annoying teenagers eager to gleefully offend in the most profane ways, and we all just ignored it, and we were happier as a society then. Now, a midwit-engineered Substack hit piece can be published in the Atlantic based on a couple of accounts with maybe a dozen followers, and the media convinces themselves there's some sort of dangerous extremist sleeper cell in America — a near-majority of Americans even.
The New York Times seems to think that allowing their subscribers to share their honest thoughts and opinions is dangerous — in the opinion section of a storied newspaper, where opinions are becoming the bulk of their content, no less. Likewise, the "radical center"/scared insider branch of our political landscape seems to think that the only way to "save democracy" is to suppress the will, thoughts, speech — and preferred candidates — of the voters.
Sometimes I read the NYT Comments section in order to compile information for my work, and I continue to find few things more likely to cause indigestion. The average commenter is far to the left of the average NYT columnist, and usually the comments threads are the most concentrated distillation of the essence of "Hate Has No Home Here" Affluent White Female Leftist (and the penis havers who love them) opinion that you will find this side of Phillip Bump.
I have boycotted the NYT since Nov 2017 and all mainstream media not long after. Nevertheless enough people parrot their propaganda that I always know their latest scam second hand.
It’s obvious that NYT comments are moderated by an algorithm designed to reinforce the paper’s point of view, while it pretends to express the unfiltered voices of the readership.
Trumpmania (aka TDS), has reached comical levels. Remember Taibbi on the Maher show trying to inject reason into Russia-gated brains Some commenters can’t even bring themselves to write out his name, (e.g.: “Former Guy” “Orange Man”.
HOWEVER!
Yesterday I wrote a strongly anti Gaza War comment in a review of a restaurant owned by an Israeli, who proudly flies their flag. (Not the Skull and Bones...the blue and white one.)
To my huge surprise they ran it, and it garnered many recommendations. You can read and recommend it if you like.
On this subject at least I see a shifting tide, and I’m going to continue to offer my small voice to help it along. As much as I detest the Times, I detest tribalism more. As I type, I stare at the ceiling and think of Mario Savio.
Do I understand you to say you wrote a negative review of a restaurant because the owner is “Israeli” and had the temerity to fly the flag? And how do you know this person is “Israeli” unless you’ve seen their passport? So what you really mean is that the owner is Jewish and you left a negative review of their restaurant, but not because the food or service was bad?
No, I didn’t review the restaurant at all. I suggested that we shouldn’t be supporting businesses which align themselves with a genocidal government. Their nationality and sympathies were on full display.
I would have made the same comment if they had hung a KKK flag or a Swatztika. Why is it so hard for some people to understand the concept of boycott, divest, and sanction?
We’re witnessing in Gaza one of the greatest crimes of the past 75 years. I will not stand silently by.
My point was only about your characterization of your post. You said you did not post on the business. Yes you did. You said you were surprised NYT posted your review. Why on earth would that surprise anyone.
It’s not at all surprising that the Times posted your comment. It aligns perfectly with the majority sentiment among NYTimes readers on the subject of the Israel-Gaza war.
The NYT induces projectile vomiting in any normal human being who tries to read it. I used to read it every day until it became racist, unreliable, unreadable, and literally nauseating. The "paper of record" has become a Rorschach ink blot to instantly diagnose mental illness in those who believe any of its content is true.
Will read this tomorrow but I am so ECSTATIC to see Matt is back on the trail as he has been expressing interest in doing for quite a while now while talking with Walter! YES! Can't wait!
You’re our man on the front lines Matt! Way to go. Looking forward to every report. Provide truth serum for any reporter that says Niki Haley is the next president.
The behavior of Democratic Party apparatchiks* with their thumbs resting with various gradations of pressure on the debates and primaries in Iowa, Florida and other states is not confidence inspiring, to put it mildly. Yes, there's a history of cheating (for example, Bernie Sanders 2016) but they're now tilting the nomination process early, often and openly. The behavior of some elected Democratic officials, Colorado and Maine come to mind, to dress up what comes off as election interference in fancy legal tailoring is downright corrosive.
That's without even getting into the inundation of indictments against Trump.
One is left with the distinct impression that the Democrats are willing to do just about anything to keep the anointed loyal party members in power (and keep Trump from getting elected) while cynically insisting "we must save Democracy!" The irony of their behavior is obvious to anyone who isn't wearing blue-tinted goggles. In effect, they are sowing doubt and legitimizing claims of election interference.
*Using the term here by comparison, to denote a corrupt, unaccountable elite that is wildly out of touch with the people they're supposed to serve.
"Big picture" specialists - Mark Steyn, Victor Davis Hanson, Matthais Desmet - seem sure we are in the midst of at least an attempted political revolution - not exactly Marxist (are they ever, really?) - a permanent power grab by the international class of Those Who Know Better.
I am heartened when otherwise brilliant observers - Matt, Alex Berenson, Johnathan Turley - seem much less troubled by such a contingency.
My view is that the Democratic Party bosses will decide in summer who will be the nominee, just before their convention. In 2020 they waited until March to endorse Biden (done by Clyburn), but they may need to wait longer this year.
Isn't sad that we can no longer be sure that our votes really count? My Dead sister voted in NV in 2020. Will her ashes vote for Bidan again in 2024? Sadness prevails. :)
At least in Oregon, the county knows WHETHER someone voted, just not HOW they voted (if the system works as advertised). I believe that's public information, as is your registration.
That is the problem with campaign reporting now. The results have already been determined, so the only reason to write about the campaign is to entertain and provide an illusion that we actually have a choice.
Matt is clearly good to GO-TO-IT-NI'VISS! Tis the season brother - and will give you a sign of the times...
I just finished re-reading a copy of Norman Mailers - picked up at an estate sale in Sun City AZ for fifty-cents....MIAMI AND THE SIEGE OF CHICAGO. Amazing all these years later. These were a series of essay's he wrote for a bunch of top magazines at the time - skillfully edited into a fascinating snapshot of that dark but seminal campaign year of '68.
If ever there was a year to take your stab at FEAR AND LOATHING...surely Matt...'24 has the stars aligned....and all the necessary messy and exotic ingredients...
Looking forward to your campaign trail missives, Matt! In this topsy-turvy, through-the-looking-glass world of politics, we trust you to be the unvarnished truth-teller among the stenographers-to-power crowd.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro," as the late great Hunter Thompson said. No sacred cows and no allegiance to any candidate, only to the truth -- the rarest commodity these days from the so-called journalists. Wishing you the best!
In the immortal words of Yakov Smirnov "What a country!". Nothing is normal and nothing about this election is certain... including who the candidates will be. In stead of the 'Summer of Love' I remember after the 1968 campaign hell-scape, we are faced with a summer of chaos, and an election, regardless of outcome, where half the population will likely to lose their damn minds. I remember too the deer-in-the-headlights look on the faces of the reporters in 1968. As BTO sang not too long after that, I'm afraid "You ain't seen nothin' yet". Good luck Matt...
Good morning Matt and welcome to flyover country. Some of the comments mention the 1968 election and the parallels in 2024. Having RFK Jr. running for president with old media and the Dem machine treating him as a "fringe" candidate with no coverage and denial of secret service protection is telling. The Pentagon Papers revealed what we proles already knew and today we all know that we aren't winning in Donbas. I'm not sure what Grant Park in Chicago is going to look like in Aug. when the convention comes to town but Mayor Johnson ain't no Richard J. Daley.
For breakfast find a diner on the edge of town with a lot of pickup trucks and you'll get the news you can trust. Be sure to wear your ball cap : ) Safe travels and keep up the good work.
Native Iowan, left in 1988. Only visit to Sioux City was in 1980 on a surrogate campaign swing with Ethel Kennedy and two of her daughters on behalf of her brother-in-law Ted's doomed campaign to keep Reagan out of the White House.
Somehow she forgot to pack her nightstand picture of Bobby when we moved on and she didn't realize it until we were in Des Moines. The advance man dropped everything and drove back to get the picture. As I understood it, she had slept next to it every night since RFK's death. A very complicated family besieged on all sides by political maggots back then and still today.
An old story but there won't be any fresh ones this cycle, not on the Democrat side. The Iowa Caucuses have been stifled, and will remain on double secret probation forever. The DNC learned you can't herd caucus goers who in any event are still prickly from appGate.
The Iowa Caucuses ought to have been flushed into the Iowa River 30 years ago. Once considered a reasonably good idea---but then so was DDT, asbestos, and the Ford Pinto.
May you experience the "fear and loathing" up close and personal. As for me, I realized after 2020 how deep the scam goes. I put down my comic book, unplugged my TV and looked out the window. What I saw made me puke.
Last time Iowa never even finished the vote count. There was no Iowa primary 'winner' in 2020. What makes anyone think they will be less screwed up this year?
Thanks for that reminder, I remember seeing Buttigieg looking so happy after meeting with Biden’s group and wondering what he got promised for backing off in pursuing his presidential election campaign.
Black voters, especially men, are simply not down with pasty white homosexuals. That will change slowly, but will never be a positive unless the candidate is a rapper or a baller. That is just how it is.
That was in the Democratic caucuses, a true debacle. But all the attention this year will be on the Republicans. And, without getting into the weeds of it, suffice it to say that the Iowa Republican's process for registering and recording caucus attendees' presidential candidate preferences is much simpler, and quicker, than the Democrats'. So, unless the Republicans too have invested in some convoluted phone app for reporting results, they are less liable to screw things up.
So Nikki Fkn Haley is becoming. more and more acceptable to the "liberal" media? That figures, when a "liberal" these days is a cheerleader for never-ending war. For the truly deranged evil ones like the Clintons Trump is the gift that keeps on giving.
"Liberal" these days, also seems to mean: "Will not seriously challenge the corrupt uniparty".
They go after Bernie, Vivek, RDS, RFK with equal disdain.
IMO, it is not about left vs right, or any particular issue, so much as it is insider vs outsider. Issues are simply tools to divide voters, and keep outsiders and reformers out of contention.
True that there are some hot button issues that are third rail for the oligarchy. The oligarchy are pro war in the sense that they want to keep getting contracts for their expensive and less bang for the buck weapons - yet sabotage efforts to rebuild US industrial (and thus military) security. Willing to fight proxy wars to use up (and repurchase) military goods - and yet totally fail to address security risks regarding China. Willing to let big pharma & medical insurers write legislation.
Anyone honest and potentially effective are the establishment's biggest targets.
Truman had it right: It is impossible for an honest person to get rich in politics. We need someone both as tough and as honest as Truman was - regardless of positions on various issues. In the context of politics, going along with long established corrupt policies and procedures - and getting along with politicians who are clearly corrupt - is not consistent with what Truman would call honesty.
This is correct, you can see it in the almost auto-immune like response by the uniparty blob to any outsider threats -- Bernie, Trump, RFK, Ron Paul etc etc. They thought Trump was too much of a clown to bother with the fix, and now have had to expose themselves to make up for lost time. That is probably the single greatest virtue of Trump’s presidency, the exposure of the corrupt “you wash my back and I’ll wash yours” connection between the uniparty establishment and the unelected bureaucrats that actually run this country.
When Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell agree on so many issues, there is indeed a uniparty on those issues.
Very often, Mitch & Chuck hold the same position on an issue, which is exactly in line with donors, and exactly opposite to the preferences of a majority of voters. That is one description of what it means to have a uniparty.
Perpetual wars, open borders, unrestricted trade with low wage nations, government censorship of media, killing Social Security (though it will never happen, they will keep trying), donor control of party nominations and government policies - these are examples of uniparty positions.
You mentioned the comment sections of NYT not being any kind of indicator- how true.
The comments sections of NYT columnists once was a place full of insights along a full political spectrum.
That all changed in 2015/2016, starting with when Bernie was filling arenas and gaining support.
Suddenly, columnists who once had interesting policy takes, started talking only about "Bernie Bro's", as if that were a thing - anything to stomp policy discussions.
Many commenters started leaving in disgust.
Trump got some of the same treatment, as Bernie, but was mostly not considered enough of a threat to bother with.
Then, Trump won.
Suddenly, lots of commenters showed up talking about being "woke" (as a complimentary self description), and "Intersectionality" (had to look those up).
At this point, any commenters disagreeing with any single policy plank of establishment Democrats was mostly ignored, and the rest of the heterodox commenters disappeared - and I followed.
The NYT have made themselves largely irrelevant.
I canceled my NYT subscription because of and during the 2016 D primary. I live in Vienna, Austria, which is 6 hours ahead of NYC. This meant (at that time - it changed later) I could see the online NYT columnists posting columns minutes after the postings, as I'm on a computer most every day for my job.
Every debate, all the columnists would gush that Hillary had destroyed Bernie. Every. Single. Debate. Then I "caught" them. The debate ended and 10 minutes later the columns started arriving that Hillary had again destroyed Bernie. It is not possible to write, edit, proof, etc., and then publish a column in 10 minutes.
There was also horrible curation of any pro-Bernie comments. The bias was completely obvious while the entire NYT stated they were just neutral observers. Thus ended my nearly 35 year relationship with the NYT.
Yup. I started emailing the reporters, mocking them, telling them what sad losers they were. Imagine flushing your integrity down the toilet for the likes of Joe Biden.
Lol, you’re smarter than me… I just argue with idiots on social media. Then I realize I’m arguing about subjects I’ve studied extensively with a child, a NGO employee, or a bot. I’m gonna start emailing the assholes instead!
Heh, just be careful not to cross the line. The dumb ones are petty.
I only keep my subscription for the crossword puzzles, food, and travel coverage. Those parts of the NYT are still worth a subscription.
I didn't (and don't) want to give them any more of my money. I had a subscription for a long time. I even bought and read a Paul Krugman book. One of my last posts was a "Krugman 2016 vs. Krugman 2005." I used his own words to show what a sellout he'd become. In 2005 he was railing on Bush for not implementing M4A. Of course once he was looking for a job in the Clinton administration in 2016 he had turned 180°. Pathetic.
sad that a newspaper gets consumers for things not related to news.
Newspapers used to be licenses to print money because they provided information about goods, services and employment in a convenient manner. Reporting on the world was only part of the service.
maybe... but the part that is news...is garbage. and more and more people are leaving because of it.
Print money, start wars...
"You furnish the pictures, and I'll furnish the war" - William Randolph Hearst
"REMEMBER THE MAINE!"
Very true!! Had forgotten about that!!
Robo-- I just subscribe to cooking. You can get the crosswords for free (I get from Seattle Times.) Also many articles can be obtained by hitting "escape" key before paywall comes up!
Truth be told, everything is easily read from behind the paywall. It's a puzzle to me that they don't turn off the workaround. It takes about 10 seconds to see any article you want.
Thanks as did not know this!! I subscibe to a bunch of publications including tech pblications for my work. But just going in for an article or two over a long time period it is frustrating to get hit with the "pay wall" issue.
glad to share!!!
That "Connections" puzzle is awesome. It almost got me to subscribe.
Connections is often a lot of fun. I am still bemused that I tend most often to find the purple answers first, and then get stuck!
It is the only reason for my continued online subscription.
I don't subscribe and I get the puzzles! No need to give the old "Gray Lady" and more $$$ than necessary!!
Crosswords can be accessed separately.
Food and Travel is everywhere on YT, and in many instances GREAT.
Fuck the NYT,
Burn them.
For example:
https://www.youtube.com/@FrenchGuyCooking
https://www.youtube.com/@baldandbankrupt
https://www.youtube.com/@ItchyBoots
Thanks for sharing, jlalbrecht. So many of us have similar stories to tell re: the NYT.
I did exactly the same in 2016, for similar reasons. Your documentation supplies good evidence, which does support my subjective impressions.
I’ve never forgotten the Associated Press posting an article the day before the California primary telling us all that between superdelegates, regular delegates, and (presumably) The Will of G-d Hillary had the Dem nomination locked.
The day before the CA primary.
“So, yeah, folks, no need to vote tomorrow. It’s all said and done. You had a good run, Bernie.”
Of course, not what was actually printed, but that was surely the implication.
I immediately deleted AP’s app from my phone.
Ditto.
Glad to hear from an informed & a thinking citizen.
this sums up the NYT legitimacy. https://images.app.goo.gl/VMg5DcjgAT534qWY6
I've been an active commenter on the NYT website. I would estimate that close to 50% of my comments are censored. Some of my comments that survive the initial computer screening round and gets posted immediately. But later when an employee reads it and disagrees with it, my comment is yanked. When I click the link on my email to view my comment, the following message appears on their website, "The comment you are looking for is currently unavailable." I've checked six months out and get the same message. Outright censorship. This is my latest comment that they yanked:
"Biden most likely would not have won in 2020 had the mainstream media not discredited the NY Post's story of the information contained on Hunter Biden's laptop as Russian Propaganda. After the election all the same people admitted the story was true. If the Republicans manage to investigate the matter before the election, I'm not sure Biden could win. The mainstream media ignored the report on the twitter files even though it documented that the CIA, FBI, DHS, NSA, DIA, State department and various "private" groups funded by the CIA and MI6 including the Biden WH sent spreadsheets to Twitter, Facebook and Google telling them which posts should be suppressed or accounts deleted. These agencies were inserting themselves into a Presidential election censoring our communications to protect Biden- especially the Hunter Biden story which again was all true. "
I am a Canadian in Ottawa, and used to comment a lot at CBC, our state funded broadcaster. They used to allow a wide variety opinions but those days are so gone. I get censored for stuff that shocks even me - innocuous comments that are not insults, or invective, or even super controversial.
Once they censored me, "this content has been deactivated" for saying to a guy who was spouting Russiagate bullshit, "Prove it!" Gone. My account is now broken, I cannot see my old comments or replies, although I can still, theoretically, comment, and they will not fix it.
This is our future everywhere, mind control and censorship.
Scary. I am wondering how I suddenly, at age 86, woke up in a BladeRunner world.
Bladerunner was a documentary.
More like inspiration to some I think.
So like 1984 then? AKA "The Manual"
See, you aren’t allowed to say that. Truth is no defense. For kicks try using the words “mutilate” and “children” in any comment pretty much anywhere, including the WSJ. We live in a world curated by our superiors, and your thoughts aren’t welcome. This isn’t the America we thought we lived in, but we can reclaim our right to be here and to speak our minds.
"The mainstream media ignored the report on the twitter files even though it documented that the CIA, FBI, DHS, NSA, DIA, State department and various "private" groups funded by the CIA and MI6 including the Biden WH sent spreadsheets to Twitter, Facebook and Google telling them which posts should be suppressed or accounts deleted."
Nothing like having a little election interference swept under the rug, eh? Nothing to see here, move on.
Nice one, Bently. Good to tell and re-retell your experience with The Slimes.
Same.
The NYT and WAPO are like psychotic ex-lovers. No matter how hard one tries to break up with them, one's inbox is daily made full of special offers to returning subscribers to regain their special insight into the truth and to help them as the last, final protectors of democracy. It is a sad, desperate feeling emanating from them for sure...
Block them. Unsubscribe. Never go to their websites.
Done that for a while now. Won’t even check the 3 free stories you get per month
Tough love.
I subscribe to the Post and the Times: New York Post and Washington Times.
I get the form mail invites to return. I send back in their postage-paid envelope whatever crap I get in junk mail, like life insurance offers.
I used to have a subscription to The Atlantic. That was back in the '70's & '80's.
I tried again – briefly – in 2015, found the content grossly unenlightening.
Still find e-mails in my <junk> folder from 'em, never to be opened before trashing.
The Atlantic was always establishment and elitist. Harper's had a run in the 2000s as leftist, but became tamer after Roger Hodges left as editor in 2009. But I learned a lot from its writers during that decade. I remember one article in particular, "Everyone Loses When Politics is a Game." instead of looking at what works like the satisfaction of a plumber fixing your toilet and pushing that plunger down. There was another one about the Usury laws being voted out too in 1979 by a Democratic congress.
David Frum ruins everything. David Frum is why we can't have nice things.
Same on WAPO.
Except in the Opinion section. Lots of different views there, very refreshing.
I still keep up with the NYT a bit. I agree that there's way too much uber-partisanship blocking what's left of good writing and reporting.
Over the last couple of years, I've often find that the commenters push back on the stupidest, craziest, most bitterly partisan shit in the comments section, but I've noticed that this has changed quite a bit in the last few months, and especially most recently.
The open message board and comment board section of the internet seemed to die with the election of Trump. Any YouTube video, or news piece, and music or movie review had a comment section was lousy with edgy, annoying teenagers eager to gleefully offend in the most profane ways, and we all just ignored it, and we were happier as a society then. Now, a midwit-engineered Substack hit piece can be published in the Atlantic based on a couple of accounts with maybe a dozen followers, and the media convinces themselves there's some sort of dangerous extremist sleeper cell in America — a near-majority of Americans even.
The New York Times seems to think that allowing their subscribers to share their honest thoughts and opinions is dangerous — in the opinion section of a storied newspaper, where opinions are becoming the bulk of their content, no less. Likewise, the "radical center"/scared insider branch of our political landscape seems to think that the only way to "save democracy" is to suppress the will, thoughts, speech — and preferred candidates — of the voters.
It's more and more like the USSR with demented leader Brezhnev epitomizing corruption.
Sometimes I read the NYT Comments section in order to compile information for my work, and I continue to find few things more likely to cause indigestion. The average commenter is far to the left of the average NYT columnist, and usually the comments threads are the most concentrated distillation of the essence of "Hate Has No Home Here" Affluent White Female Leftist (and the penis havers who love them) opinion that you will find this side of Phillip Bump.
It's an interesting place to visit now and again. I don't know what world those people live in.
I have boycotted the NYT since Nov 2017 and all mainstream media not long after. Nevertheless enough people parrot their propaganda that I always know their latest scam second hand.
yes, 15 or so people will forward them to you.
It’s obvious that NYT comments are moderated by an algorithm designed to reinforce the paper’s point of view, while it pretends to express the unfiltered voices of the readership.
Trumpmania (aka TDS), has reached comical levels. Remember Taibbi on the Maher show trying to inject reason into Russia-gated brains Some commenters can’t even bring themselves to write out his name, (e.g.: “Former Guy” “Orange Man”.
HOWEVER!
Yesterday I wrote a strongly anti Gaza War comment in a review of a restaurant owned by an Israeli, who proudly flies their flag. (Not the Skull and Bones...the blue and white one.)
To my huge surprise they ran it, and it garnered many recommendations. You can read and recommend it if you like.
On this subject at least I see a shifting tide, and I’m going to continue to offer my small voice to help it along. As much as I detest the Times, I detest tribalism more. As I type, I stare at the ceiling and think of Mario Savio.
Do I understand you to say you wrote a negative review of a restaurant because the owner is “Israeli” and had the temerity to fly the flag? And how do you know this person is “Israeli” unless you’ve seen their passport? So what you really mean is that the owner is Jewish and you left a negative review of their restaurant, but not because the food or service was bad?
No, I didn’t review the restaurant at all. I suggested that we shouldn’t be supporting businesses which align themselves with a genocidal government. Their nationality and sympathies were on full display.
Here’s the link if you want the full story:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/02/dining/port-said-restaurant-review.html#commentsContainer&permid=130212920:130212920
And the restaurant is not a business? Surprised the NYT ran your negative comment on a business with an Israel flag? Really, please.
I would have made the same comment if they had hung a KKK flag or a Swatztika. Why is it so hard for some people to understand the concept of boycott, divest, and sanction?
We’re witnessing in Gaza one of the greatest crimes of the past 75 years. I will not stand silently by.
My point was only about your characterization of your post. You said you did not post on the business. Yes you did. You said you were surprised NYT posted your review. Why on earth would that surprise anyone.
It’s not at all surprising that the Times posted your comment. It aligns perfectly with the majority sentiment among NYTimes readers on the subject of the Israel-Gaza war.
All those rags are like for old men who still think $1 an hour is a good living wage
The NYT induces projectile vomiting in any normal human being who tries to read it. I used to read it every day until it became racist, unreliable, unreadable, and literally nauseating. The "paper of record" has become a Rorschach ink blot to instantly diagnose mental illness in those who believe any of its content is true.
I always wonder why anyone still reads the NYT. Even commentators who hate the paper use it all the time in their commentary.
Will read this tomorrow but I am so ECSTATIC to see Matt is back on the trail as he has been expressing interest in doing for quite a while now while talking with Walter! YES! Can't wait!
We need our 21st century Hunter Thompson, keeping it real.
Alan, thanks for commenting on the subject of Matt’s piece. From the comments, I would have sworn he had written a diatribe about the Times.
You’re our man on the front lines Matt! Way to go. Looking forward to every report. Provide truth serum for any reporter that says Niki Haley is the next president.
Our Man Flint!
Serious question: do you really take it for granted that the election will not be just rigged but also fraudulent? Asking for a civilization...
The behavior of Democratic Party apparatchiks* with their thumbs resting with various gradations of pressure on the debates and primaries in Iowa, Florida and other states is not confidence inspiring, to put it mildly. Yes, there's a history of cheating (for example, Bernie Sanders 2016) but they're now tilting the nomination process early, often and openly. The behavior of some elected Democratic officials, Colorado and Maine come to mind, to dress up what comes off as election interference in fancy legal tailoring is downright corrosive.
That's without even getting into the inundation of indictments against Trump.
One is left with the distinct impression that the Democrats are willing to do just about anything to keep the anointed loyal party members in power (and keep Trump from getting elected) while cynically insisting "we must save Democracy!" The irony of their behavior is obvious to anyone who isn't wearing blue-tinted goggles. In effect, they are sowing doubt and legitimizing claims of election interference.
*Using the term here by comparison, to denote a corrupt, unaccountable elite that is wildly out of touch with the people they're supposed to serve.
"Big picture" specialists - Mark Steyn, Victor Davis Hanson, Matthais Desmet - seem sure we are in the midst of at least an attempted political revolution - not exactly Marxist (are they ever, really?) - a permanent power grab by the international class of Those Who Know Better.
I am heartened when otherwise brilliant observers - Matt, Alex Berenson, Johnathan Turley - seem much less troubled by such a contingency.
"Heartened" but not convinced...
My view is that the Democratic Party bosses will decide in summer who will be the nominee, just before their convention. In 2020 they waited until March to endorse Biden (done by Clyburn), but they may need to wait longer this year.
The donors choose the nominee. They say this openly.
Nothing has changed and they completely got away with it.
Isn't sad that we can no longer be sure that our votes really count? My Dead sister voted in NV in 2020. Will her ashes vote for Bidan again in 2024? Sadness prevails. :)
How would you know if a ballot was cast for her?
At least in Oregon, the county knows WHETHER someone voted, just not HOW they voted (if the system works as advertised). I believe that's public information, as is your registration.
That is the problem with campaign reporting now. The results have already been determined, so the only reason to write about the campaign is to entertain and provide an illusion that we actually have a choice.
Rigged, fraudulent, what's the difference sir?
Rigged means CIA/Tech suppressing stories (Hunter laptop, etc.) and rule-bending like mail-in ballots.
Fraud means counting illegitimate mail-in votes and trucking in boxes of fake ballots to 5 or 6 key jurisdictions...
If, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, then in the journalistic land of the mad fraud, the sane man is the honest king.
Matt Taibbi is our journalistic King Arthur, pulling the Sword of Truth from the Stone of Lies.
If Matt is our journalistic King of Truth, than Sasha Stone is our Queen. I urge all to check out her latest work.
Matt is clearly good to GO-TO-IT-NI'VISS! Tis the season brother - and will give you a sign of the times...
I just finished re-reading a copy of Norman Mailers - picked up at an estate sale in Sun City AZ for fifty-cents....MIAMI AND THE SIEGE OF CHICAGO. Amazing all these years later. These were a series of essay's he wrote for a bunch of top magazines at the time - skillfully edited into a fascinating snapshot of that dark but seminal campaign year of '68.
If ever there was a year to take your stab at FEAR AND LOATHING...surely Matt...'24 has the stars aligned....and all the necessary messy and exotic ingredients...
Looking so forward to every dispatch...
thanks again for doing what you do...
Looking forward to your campaign trail missives, Matt! In this topsy-turvy, through-the-looking-glass world of politics, we trust you to be the unvarnished truth-teller among the stenographers-to-power crowd.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro," as the late great Hunter Thompson said. No sacred cows and no allegiance to any candidate, only to the truth -- the rarest commodity these days from the so-called journalists. Wishing you the best!
Please include RFK jr in your mission to give your loyal readers your un-filtered impression of his campaign!!!
In the immortal words of Yakov Smirnov "What a country!". Nothing is normal and nothing about this election is certain... including who the candidates will be. In stead of the 'Summer of Love' I remember after the 1968 campaign hell-scape, we are faced with a summer of chaos, and an election, regardless of outcome, where half the population will likely to lose their damn minds. I remember too the deer-in-the-headlights look on the faces of the reporters in 1968. As BTO sang not too long after that, I'm afraid "You ain't seen nothin' yet". Good luck Matt...
Good morning Matt and welcome to flyover country. Some of the comments mention the 1968 election and the parallels in 2024. Having RFK Jr. running for president with old media and the Dem machine treating him as a "fringe" candidate with no coverage and denial of secret service protection is telling. The Pentagon Papers revealed what we proles already knew and today we all know that we aren't winning in Donbas. I'm not sure what Grant Park in Chicago is going to look like in Aug. when the convention comes to town but Mayor Johnson ain't no Richard J. Daley.
For breakfast find a diner on the edge of town with a lot of pickup trucks and you'll get the news you can trust. Be sure to wear your ball cap : ) Safe travels and keep up the good work.
Native Iowan, left in 1988. Only visit to Sioux City was in 1980 on a surrogate campaign swing with Ethel Kennedy and two of her daughters on behalf of her brother-in-law Ted's doomed campaign to keep Reagan out of the White House.
Somehow she forgot to pack her nightstand picture of Bobby when we moved on and she didn't realize it until we were in Des Moines. The advance man dropped everything and drove back to get the picture. As I understood it, she had slept next to it every night since RFK's death. A very complicated family besieged on all sides by political maggots back then and still today.
An old story but there won't be any fresh ones this cycle, not on the Democrat side. The Iowa Caucuses have been stifled, and will remain on double secret probation forever. The DNC learned you can't herd caucus goers who in any event are still prickly from appGate.
If only there was good music
Pop music seems to have switched to all Woke, and everyone seems to sing with a fake Caribbean accent. Music much better in ‘68!
Take hope.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuhe1CpHRxY&ab_channel=KNOWERMUSIC">I'm The President - KNOWER</a>
That rules
Nuevo jazz fusion heh
"Double secret probation", a great line from a very funny film. :)
The Iowa Caucuses ought to have been flushed into the Iowa River 30 years ago. Once considered a reasonably good idea---but then so was DDT, asbestos, and the Ford Pinto.
Never know what the results really are until no one cares anymore. Goes for both parties.
May you experience the "fear and loathing" up close and personal. As for me, I realized after 2020 how deep the scam goes. I put down my comic book, unplugged my TV and looked out the window. What I saw made me puke.
Last time Iowa never even finished the vote count. There was no Iowa primary 'winner' in 2020. What makes anyone think they will be less screwed up this year?
Thanks for that reminder, I remember seeing Buttigieg looking so happy after meeting with Biden’s group and wondering what he got promised for backing off in pursuing his presidential election campaign.
I believe he received a free 1-year subscription to The New York Times.
Lil Pete never had a chance past Iowa and NH. Polled like 5% or maybe even worse in SC...
Black voters, especially men, are simply not down with pasty white homosexuals. That will change slowly, but will never be a positive unless the candidate is a rapper or a baller. That is just how it is.
Six that the anointed have to cater to the rubes just to put the gloss of democracy on them
That was in the Democratic caucuses, a true debacle. But all the attention this year will be on the Republicans. And, without getting into the weeds of it, suffice it to say that the Iowa Republican's process for registering and recording caucus attendees' presidential candidate preferences is much simpler, and quicker, than the Democrats'. So, unless the Republicans too have invested in some convoluted phone app for reporting results, they are less liable to screw things up.
They have screwed it up before. 2012 Santorum actually won but it was not announced until it did not matter.
Thanks for doing this so we don't have to, Matt.
So Nikki Fkn Haley is becoming. more and more acceptable to the "liberal" media? That figures, when a "liberal" these days is a cheerleader for never-ending war. For the truly deranged evil ones like the Clintons Trump is the gift that keeps on giving.
"Liberal" these days, also seems to mean: "Will not seriously challenge the corrupt uniparty".
They go after Bernie, Vivek, RDS, RFK with equal disdain.
IMO, it is not about left vs right, or any particular issue, so much as it is insider vs outsider. Issues are simply tools to divide voters, and keep outsiders and reformers out of contention.
True that there are some hot button issues that are third rail for the oligarchy. The oligarchy are pro war in the sense that they want to keep getting contracts for their expensive and less bang for the buck weapons - yet sabotage efforts to rebuild US industrial (and thus military) security. Willing to fight proxy wars to use up (and repurchase) military goods - and yet totally fail to address security risks regarding China. Willing to let big pharma & medical insurers write legislation.
Anyone honest and potentially effective are the establishment's biggest targets.
Truman had it right: It is impossible for an honest person to get rich in politics. We need someone both as tough and as honest as Truman was - regardless of positions on various issues. In the context of politics, going along with long established corrupt policies and procedures - and getting along with politicians who are clearly corrupt - is not consistent with what Truman would call honesty.
This is correct, you can see it in the almost auto-immune like response by the uniparty blob to any outsider threats -- Bernie, Trump, RFK, Ron Paul etc etc. They thought Trump was too much of a clown to bother with the fix, and now have had to expose themselves to make up for lost time. That is probably the single greatest virtue of Trump’s presidency, the exposure of the corrupt “you wash my back and I’ll wash yours” connection between the uniparty establishment and the unelected bureaucrats that actually run this country.
"Uniparty" = "Mermaid." Everybody can quickly describe them, all the descriptions are different, and neither concepts are real. Voila!
When Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell agree on so many issues, there is indeed a uniparty on those issues.
Very often, Mitch & Chuck hold the same position on an issue, which is exactly in line with donors, and exactly opposite to the preferences of a majority of voters. That is one description of what it means to have a uniparty.
Perpetual wars, open borders, unrestricted trade with low wage nations, government censorship of media, killing Social Security (though it will never happen, they will keep trying), donor control of party nominations and government policies - these are examples of uniparty positions.
Fearless and loathing on the campaign trail.