I also unsubscribed from the Times this week after being a reader for 30+ years. It is disappointing (and was an odd hit to my day to day life as I rely on the Times cooking app for most of my recipes) but I no longer felt comfortable supporting what is indeed amounting to the left equivalent of Fox News, except executed more chaotically. The only mild objection I have to your piece is saying that any other candidates are unqualified. While Biden is my candidate, I would certainly not describe alternates as unqualified - indeed, I would be delighted should Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, or even (perhaps) Gavin Newsom were to be president, and they all have more than enough experience to do the job. We need to be thinking about the long-game, not just this election, and I want to be lifting up the party's future, not denigrating them. Besides that, this piece is exactly what is needed and I'm glad to read the Philadelphia Enquirer is doing it's actual journalistic responsibility.
Kat thank you so much for your thoughtful response to my post, and you make some great posts. Perhaps I was too harsh in saying the other candidates were unqualified. However I would still say that Gavin Newsom, while a strong candidate, would not be able to successfully follow in Biden's footsteps, despite his strengths. Although he is pretty well-known, he still does not have near the national name recognition thathe would need to inspire voter confidence from coast to coast, and five months isn't nearly enough time to get it. Also, there isn't near enough time to built an entirely new campaign infrastructure, including raising enough money to pose a serious race, within five months. Remember that Gavin cannot use Biden's funds, and his campaign staff is committed to Biden. You can't just transfer them over. As for Kamala Harris, however, she is certainly qualified. But she has no intention whatsoever of abandoning President Biden and has made that abundantluy clear. So has Gavin, and so has Gretchen Whitmer. Biden is the Democratic candidate, and the only viable Democratic candidate. In my opinion, any and all discussion at this point about fielding anyone else is not only fantasy but it is destructive and wasteful of time we do not have. But again, I really do thank you for taking the time to respond.
Hi Keith! Thank YOU so much for your thoughtful response, I'm genuinely honored! I completely agree that upending this election by removing Biden would be, pardon my language, an absolute sh*t show. Zero question, and I have no faith that doing so would be a death knell to this election. I am more thinking of 2028 and starting the process of uplifting Newsom/Kamala/Butigieg/Whitmer/Kobuchar and don't want to go into that process by hurting their reputations when they are the future of the party. All good things and have a lovely weekend! (As a side note, I've been reading your newsletter for several months and just became a paid member today in honor of my ending the NY Times subscription and your wonderful work (and fascinating, if sometimes mildly creepy, sci-fi adventures!)
I was also going to mention a hatchet job that the Washington Post did on a local civil rights leader, but that was back in the 1960s. The post did however print 2 articles correctly reporting about the neurologist visiting the White House. Hint, he wasn’t there to see the President, except one time as part of the President’s physical.
Yep, I saw that! Not in the Post, but I did se that this was reported and was very glad to see that. Naturally there was nothing but crickets from the NYT afterward.
I also unsubscribed from the Times this week after being a reader for 30+ years. It is disappointing (and was an odd hit to my day to day life as I rely on the Times cooking app for most of my recipes) but I no longer felt comfortable supporting what is indeed amounting to the left equivalent of Fox News, except executed more chaotically. The only mild objection I have to your piece is saying that any other candidates are unqualified. While Biden is my candidate, I would certainly not describe alternates as unqualified - indeed, I would be delighted should Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, or even (perhaps) Gavin Newsom were to be president, and they all have more than enough experience to do the job. We need to be thinking about the long-game, not just this election, and I want to be lifting up the party's future, not denigrating them. Besides that, this piece is exactly what is needed and I'm glad to read the Philadelphia Enquirer is doing it's actual journalistic responsibility.
Kat thank you so much for your thoughtful response to my post, and you make some great posts. Perhaps I was too harsh in saying the other candidates were unqualified. However I would still say that Gavin Newsom, while a strong candidate, would not be able to successfully follow in Biden's footsteps, despite his strengths. Although he is pretty well-known, he still does not have near the national name recognition thathe would need to inspire voter confidence from coast to coast, and five months isn't nearly enough time to get it. Also, there isn't near enough time to built an entirely new campaign infrastructure, including raising enough money to pose a serious race, within five months. Remember that Gavin cannot use Biden's funds, and his campaign staff is committed to Biden. You can't just transfer them over. As for Kamala Harris, however, she is certainly qualified. But she has no intention whatsoever of abandoning President Biden and has made that abundantluy clear. So has Gavin, and so has Gretchen Whitmer. Biden is the Democratic candidate, and the only viable Democratic candidate. In my opinion, any and all discussion at this point about fielding anyone else is not only fantasy but it is destructive and wasteful of time we do not have. But again, I really do thank you for taking the time to respond.
Hi Keith! Thank YOU so much for your thoughtful response, I'm genuinely honored! I completely agree that upending this election by removing Biden would be, pardon my language, an absolute sh*t show. Zero question, and I have no faith that doing so would be a death knell to this election. I am more thinking of 2028 and starting the process of uplifting Newsom/Kamala/Butigieg/Whitmer/Kobuchar and don't want to go into that process by hurting their reputations when they are the future of the party. All good things and have a lovely weekend! (As a side note, I've been reading your newsletter for several months and just became a paid member today in honor of my ending the NY Times subscription and your wonderful work (and fascinating, if sometimes mildly creepy, sci-fi adventures!)
Remember Jayson Blair and Judith Miller among others at the Times? Nothing new here. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_controversies)
I was also going to mention a hatchet job that the Washington Post did on a local civil rights leader, but that was back in the 1960s. The post did however print 2 articles correctly reporting about the neurologist visiting the White House. Hint, he wasn’t there to see the President, except one time as part of the President’s physical.
Yep, I saw that! Not in the Post, but I did se that this was reported and was very glad to see that. Naturally there was nothing but crickets from the NYT afterward.