The New York Times saw Red-state racism everywhere it looked, in Tuesday’s “Attacking Immigrants, Trump Keeps His Base Fired Up for the Midterms.” Reporters Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman went beyond the current border controversies to lump in the national anthem as a racist issue: "Mr. Trump’s broadsides against Hispanic migrants, like his criticism of black athletes who will not stand for the national anthem, may resonate in the deeply red states where the battle for control of the Senate is playing out."
After rustling the feathers of foreign elitists at the G7 summit in Canada over the weekend, President Trump hopped on Air Force One and shot over to Singapore for Monday’s historic meeting with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un. Of course, the liberal media was foaming at the mouth over Trump’s ability to push back against allies and the thought of something getting done with North Korea. The host of CNN’s Inside Politics, John King eagerly joined that bandwagon on Sunday and even said Trump was making Putin happy.
The front of Sunday’s New York Times featured political reporter Jonathan Martin’s tribute to the ailing Sen. John McCain: “At Home, McCain Shares Memories and Regrets.” It has some charming moments, but comes off hypocritical, given the paper’s back and forth feelings for McCain, praising him when he was a threat to more conservative Republicans during the 2008 party primaries, condemning him when he threatened the saintly Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential election campaign. It also used the veteran moderate Republican as a convenient, pointed rebuttal to President Trump.
Taking a clear anti-gun stand, the New York Times sent a platoon of reporters worldwide to cover the anti-gun March for Our Lives for Sunday’s lead slot. On Monday, the paper pivoted to the November elections, with Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin pressuring Republicans on the front page: “Gun Protests Leave Republicans Scrambling as Midterms Loom.” It’s the same gun-hostile, NRA-obsessed wishful thinking the Times has indulged in for decades, fueled by slanted reporting and expressing regret at past political failures.
As usual, the media and the New York Times appear to have overhyped hopes for a Texas takeover in Congress this November. The paper’s familiar anti-conservative labeling pattern was present in the paper’s live updates of results from primary elections in Texas, with “far-right” Republicans pitted against benign-sounding “progressives” – not “far left,” not even “liberal.”And Beto O’Rourke, the newest Democratic savior of Texas, whom the paper fawned over last month, underperformed substantially, coming out on top in a challenging three-way Democratic primary.
In the wake of the killings in Parkland, Fla., the New York Times is pressing for gun control and targeting the National Rifle Association. Reporters Richard Fausset and Tiffany Hsu reveled in a purported split between the GOP’s supposed natural allies, big business and the influential gun-rights group, in a front-page story Wednesday, “N.R.A. Battle Pits Business Against G.O.P.”
Michael Calderone at Politico is reporting on the new book by Fox News Mediabuzz host Howard Kurtz titled Media Madness: Donald Trump, the Press, and the War Over the Truth. "I have always believed in the mission of aggressive reporting and holding politicians accountable," he writes, "But the past two years have radicalized me. I am increasingly troubled by how many of my colleagues have decided to abandon any semblance of fairness out of a conviction that they must save the country from Trump."
NYT reporter Carl Hulse managed to find good news for Democrats in the party’s abject surrender on the government-shutdown front, in his “news analysis” for Tuesday’s front page, “Hope for Bargain in a Swift Surrender.” The jump-page headline: “With Swift Surrender, Democrats Hold Hope Of Reaching a Bargain.”
The Republican tax plan may have passed Congress and been signed by President Trump, but that’s not stopping the New York Times from slamming it as a fairy tale that will doom the GOP in the 2018 congressional elections. On the front of Thursday’s Times, Patricia Cohen insisted that President Trump’s “Rosy Forecast for Economy Defies Evidence.” Friday’s front page featured reporter Jonathan Martin, who rarely has an encouraging word for Republicans, staying true to form: “For G.O.P., Tax Law Is a Salve, But Hardly a Cure-All for 2018.” And there was a woeful dispatch from a Maryland town built on socialism, er “egalitarian pillars”: “Egalitarian Town Worries About What’s Next."
The Republicans are doomed in the New York Times, once again. In Tuesday's edition, Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns gathered to giddily shovel the dirt over the GOP’s hopes in the 2018 congressional elections under the harshly titled: “House Control Is at Stake as G.O.P. Suburbs Recoil at President.” The text box: “A mounting backlash could turn some red-hued districts blue in 2018.”
Monday’s New York Times featured a prominent story by reporter Jonathan Martin on how Republicans are closing the gap in the Virginia governor’s race thanks to “racially tinged” tactics inspired by Donald Trump. Martin’s story led the paper’s National section, and the editors gave it the full-page treatment with the help of two large photos. Virginia’s Republican gubernatorial candidate Ed Gillespie has made headway by attacking his Democratic rival Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam for refusing to prohibit sanctuary cities in Virginia, revitalizing the murderous Central America-based street gang MS-13. Martin was not happy with the success of that attack, and neither was the editorial page.
Republicans are doomed, once again, this time on the front of Thursday’s New York Times: Split in Party After Remarks on Racial Past -- Political Class Recoils; Voter Base Cheers.” The online headline is blunter: “Trump’s Embrace of Racially Charged Past Puts Republicans in Crisis,” reported by Jeremy Peters, Jonathan Martin, and Jack Healy. None of those reporters are renowned for giving Republicans an even break, and they take glee in shoveling dirt on a party that their paper has consigned to the ashbin so many times before (including before the last election), using some of the same Republican voices that were wrong then to do the work.