Strangely, as of 4:08 Eastern time, the New York Times is asserting:
Representative Katherine M. Clark of Massachusetts, the No. 2 House Democrat, is set to become the majority leader in January, after her party won control of the chamber.
Ms. Clark, 63, a quiet, progressive power player in Congress, would make history as the first woman to hold that role…
“Set to become” with zero further substance on how that change came about, then backing away from that with indefinite “would” and not the definite “will.”
And for as grand as they make this woman sound – she’s a genuinely effective whip, for example, and has a trans daughter – she is clearly every bit as establishment Dem as Jeffries. “She’s left of Jeffries!” NYT keeps saying, and I’m over here thinking it would be hard to get a spark plug shim between them.
To be blunt, the whole article is coming across as desperate editorializing, wanting to sway readers with suggestion under the guise of informing with facts.
I no longer expect more from NYT after what I’ve seen with their Epstein coverage (great on facts, but desperate to negate any suggestion of his blackmail activities, for example) but jesus fucking christ, NYT, do better.
The billionaires are thrashing in their loss.
Archive link – there are known problems with the site, but it has the content. Use at your own discretion.
EDITED to correct misidentification of majority leader as Speaker of the House
Strangely, as of 4:08 Eastern time, the New York Times is asserting:
“Set to become” with zero further substance on how that change came about, then backing away from that with indefinite “would” and not the definite “will.”
And for as grand as they make this woman sound – she’s a genuinely effective whip, for example, and has a trans daughter – she is clearly every bit as establishment Dem as Jeffries. “She’s left of Jeffries!” NYT keeps saying, and I’m over here thinking it would be hard to get a spark plug shim between them.
To be blunt, the whole article is coming across as desperate editorializing, wanting to sway readers with suggestion under the guise of informing with facts.
I no longer expect more from NYT after what I’ve seen with their Epstein coverage (great on facts, but desperate to negate any suggestion of his blackmail activities, for example) but jesus fucking christ, NYT, do better.
The billionaires are thrashing in their loss.
Archive link – there are known problems with the site, but it has the content. Use at your own discretion.
EDITED to correct misidentification of majority leader as Speaker of the House