Since November 8, we’ve been treated to no end of explanation for Donald Trump’s triumph over Hillary Clinton. Certain segments of the media have branded these “excuses” “lame“, and point to their own preferred explanations. But I’m not here to evaluate the validity of various claims that are essentially unprovable; I’d rather focus on lame excuses that are more verifiably so: ones that self-evidently lack explanatory power to the degree that they could have only been offered to the public in bad faith.
It is difficult to produce an excuse for the race’s outcome that fell unambiguously into this category; political scientists and pundits may debate what actually happened for years to come. So, without further ado, I would like to focus your attention on a slightly different category: the lamest excuse offered by the Hillary campaign for something other than the race’s final outcome.
I’ve been trying to follow recent developments in the deliciously-named* Whitefish, Montana. Of course, I am concerned for the health and well-being of my co-religionists and other wonderful people who have been targeted there. But also — given that the town is less than a nine-hour drive from Seattle — it has occurred to me that the same skinheads bussing themselves in from as far away as the Bay Area** could probably also find their way here. Which is why I find it so frustrating when the esteemed journalists of the New York Times are derelict in their duty to, you know, journalize.
The New York Times reported Tuesday on the installation of a cross at the St. Nicholas National Shrine beneath the World Trade Center. The Times’ article included a most curious assertion:
During the election, media organizations were forced to create new and inventive ways to communicate Donald Trump’s new and inventive relationship with the truth. Here’s one famous example:
Such efforts went over so well that some people have clamored for the networks to deploy such correctives on a more regular basis:
I like Tim Egan a lot. So much so that when I had to write an essay about my favorite journalist (in order to enroll in a law school writing class), I chose him like some kind of pikachu. But something in his latest column for the New York Times left me scratching my head.
The central conceit of his column — titled “We’re winning!” — is that, well, we’re winning. “We”, in this instance, being America. “Winning,” in this instance . . . well, that’s what I wanted to talk about.
About a year ago, back before even one episode of the Late Show with Stephen Colbert ever aired on CBS, the network wanted to introduce its shiny new host to a broader audience. And so journalists like Dave Itzkoff found themselves with behind-the-scenes access as Colbert & friends frantically readied for their big launch. What they produced, generally speaking, was not journalism. Here’s a sample I found particularly objectionable:
The internet erupted in glee late last week when Donald Trump announced that Mike Pence — and not Chris Christie — would join him on the Republican ticket. The New York Times’ take on the implications for the New Jersey governor led off as follows:
“Black Thursday,” one of Gov. Chris Christie’s least favorite local newspaper columnists called it, under a headline that declared it his “worst day ever.” At the least, it was the New Jersey governor’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day.
Poor Chris Christie. All he wants to be is Trump’s VP. Or does he?
Conservatives and other media types are tripping over themselves to point out the absurdity inherent in Chris Christie’s recent endorsement of Donald Trump. And they’re right to do so. Whether he made the move out of spite for Marco Rubio or simply because he is angling for a cabinet position in the seemingly-inevitable Trump administration, Christie clearly has some ulterior motive.
But there’s no need to point to Christie’s past comments on the Donald as evidence for his sincerity deficit. Indeed, to prove his decision to back Trump falls somewhere short of wholehearted, one needn’t look past the Wall Street Journal’s coverage:*
I turned on my computer last night with the intention of watching an episode of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. But the internet alerted me that a Republican debate was in progress, so I tuned into that instead. Luckily, I came just in time to catch the exchange between Chris Christie and Marco Rubio that will live in infamy.
I don’t need to summarize what happened, but I will anyway. Slash, I’ll let Politico do it for me: