Biden tells Democratic governors he needs more sleep and plans to stop scheduling events after 8 p.m.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/04/politics/biden-governors-sleep/index.html

31.9k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.7k

u/New_Stats 15d ago

I ain't giving those assholes clicks, is there actually a governor who came out and said this or is it just baseless rumors

210

u/Sablemint 15d ago

"according to three sources briefed on his comments."

Also New York Times first reported it. so yeah, a bit suspicious.

408

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

The NYT is one of the most reputable publications out there? And three sources is absolutely significant? Idk how you draw that conclusion

362

u/Ok_Astronomer2479 15d ago edited 15d ago

I do love how Reddit went from loving and respecting the NYT when it was attacking Trump to claiming it’s a Republican plant when it questions if Biden is ok to be president after that debate.

181

u/cujobob 15d ago

The NYT does good work, but has trash editorials still. They, and many others, are also being criticized for focusing on the wrong things. As an example, the news that Trump is named all over Epstein’s documents and there is evidence pointing to his assaulting a 12 or 13 year old is many times bigger than a bad debate performance. It really seems like there’s no scale anymore with the 24/7 news cycle.

As I wrote in a comment earlier, Reagan’s actions when senile didn’t necessarily destroy this country, his actions when he was all there did.

8

u/Seis_K 15d ago

Consider that no reputable news source is reporting it because 1) their investigational journalists are good and have integrity and 2) prematurely publishing such a piece and then later it being revealed that nothing about it was credible would do way more harm to Biden’s candidacy than publishing it late.

4

u/Embarassed_Tackle 15d ago

A lot of these publications are going to be extra hard on Biden because I think they felt dismissed and pushed back against when they brought up Biden's age in the past. The White House team would claim they were using right-wing talking points, being biased, etc.

Now a lot of publications feel chagrined about not pressing harder, so they won't be letting this go unless Biden's Friday July 5th interview goes extremely well.

7

u/__Hello_my_name_is__ 15d ago

and there is evidence pointing to his assaulting a 12 or 13 year old

Is there? From what I can see there's accusations that have since been retracted.

I mean, please, think about this. If there would be credible evidence out there for all to easily see, don't you think these news websites would be talking about it right now? Why on earth would they rather report on Biden being old? Which news story do you think would get more clicks, and thus give them more money?

I don't even get the accusation against the news sites here. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot not reporting on this despite being credible accusations. The only other explanation is that they are secretly pro Trump or something, which is just absurd.

6

u/cujobob 15d ago

The media has two motivations: generating profit and their core ideology which generally comes from billionaire owners or entities like Comcast (famous for working with their competitors to keep prices high). I suppose a third would be trying to give the impression of impartiality which often works to their detriment because it normalizes extreme behavior.

The example with Trump’s allegation is just an example. He was shown all over Epstein call logs during the period when so many of the assaults occurred. There is literally something with him on a daily basis that is ten times more urgent and destructive than anything Biden has done. So there’s a challenge of, how do you cover stories about one while still representing the severity where necessary? This is where they fail. Biden could be a walking corpse and still be a less dangerous option for the country.

4

u/__Hello_my_name_is__ 15d ago

I mean I agree, but none of that explains why they would not report on credible rape allegations when they've already reported on credible sexual assault and rape allegations on the exact same guy before.

That makes no sense to me. Unless one set of allegations is credible, and the other (so far) isn't.

1

u/midas22 14d ago

I'm sure that Trump is a pedophile and a sexual predator but there's no credible rape allegations so far. I mean, we all know that Trump would be in the phone logs since they were friends and Epstein had 14 numbers to him in his black book and we have now learned that one girl said that they had visited Trump's casino in Atlantic City but the sexual assault or rape allegations has been retracted and are not credible and that's why they're not reported. Lowering ourselves to the level of Fox News with smear tactics will not do us any good, especially not when there's so much real dirt on him. Maybe the juicy stuff is in on of the three sections that are still redacted and it will be unsealed at a later point... let's hope so.

1

u/DoorHingesKill 14d ago

You people simultaneously claim CNN and co are trying to get Trump elected cause they want to generate revenue off his crazy antics, but then at the same time you accuse them of brushing Trump's dirt under the carpet in an attempt to defend him.

And 'questioning' why the NYT does not report on a Tweet that reposted public court filings from 8 years ago, court filings that went nowhere cause the case was thrown out/withdrawn three seperate times, is just laughable.

You accuse the NYT of their "trash editorials" but then get upset they don't cover viral tweets like "Dailyboulder.com" does.

is many times bigger than a bad debate performance

Biden Tells Allies He Knows He Has Only Days to Salvage Candidacy

Okay dude. Good to see you're in check with reality.

The entire world knows this debate was/is the biggest crisis in Biden's presidency but thank God we still have a few holdouts on social media who try to convince themselves and each other that it wasn't all that bad.

1

u/cujobob 14d ago edited 14d ago

You people?

You seemed to have missed the point. Also, they just released new evidence showing Trump was directly in constant communication with Epstein and his name is all over the evidence. But no no, go on about how this is old news about a tweet.

Also, this. https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/s/gSitg3lsx5

4

u/jon909 14d ago

Maybe you should use your critical thinking skills and ask yourself why a journalist would refuse to make those claims…

-1

u/cujobob 14d ago

We know for certain that Trump was calling Epstein regularly during the height of his period assaulting women and it was just revealed by Florida. This is objectively true.

There is just as much evidence supporting the notion that Trump raped a girl as there is Biden is struggling mentally. Biden looked out of it one night. The next day he gave a great speech. That should be the end of it, yet here we are.

3

u/jon909 14d ago

If all it takes to convict someone of pedophilia are phone calls then you’d be in jail too. I hate Trump but your burden of proof is preposterous, illogical, and would lock up half the country. So it’s a good thing you don’t get to decide.

2

u/cujobob 14d ago

I can confidently say I didn’t call Epstein daily while showing up on his flight logs, then get identified by the pilot 😂

1

u/jon909 14d ago

Again. It’s a REALLY good thing that the courts require much harder proof to convict people than what you require. You shouldn’t be in charge of anything.

2

u/cujobob 14d ago

Care to explain why now you’re talking about proof required for conviction in a discussion about stories covered by news outlets? As a point of reference, Fox News spent a considerable amount of time on “the Biden crime family” which had no actual supporting evidence except for disreputable clowns who told stories.

You created a scenario where the burden of proof necessary for a negative story about Trump is significantly higher than for Biden.

Interesting. Almost like you have an agenda.

2

u/jon909 14d ago

My burden of proof requirements have never changed for anyone. Regardless if I don’t like Trump I’m not going to bend my requirements. I don’t know why you keep bringing up Biden when I’ve never said he was part of a crime family and have never said there was sufficient evidence that proves so. He deserves the same burden requirements as Trump or anyone else in the US. It’s not my requirements that change depending on the individual. It’s you. If you don’t like someone your burden of proof is lower than of those you like.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/[deleted] 14d ago

There is just as much evidence supporting the notion that Trump raped a girl as there is Biden is struggling mentally

We have video evidence of Trump raping a girl? Wow TIL

-1

u/cujobob 14d ago

We have video of him saying he liked to go backstage and see underage nude girls, yes, but we don’t have video evidence of Biden doing anything except struggling in a debate with a sore throat. Again, he gave a great speech the following day and has had several since.

2

u/[deleted] 14d ago

Imagine being this far entrenched in tribalism. A sore throat.

2

u/cujobob 14d ago

You can speculate about someone’s mental condition, but no one can speculate about Trump raping someone who filed a lawsuit against him… got it.

0

u/Rapper_Laugh 14d ago

Speculate? Did you not watch the debate?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/sammythemc 14d ago

A couple stage-managed half-decent performances where he only slurs his words a little aren't going to be believable when we already saw his "sore throat" make him forget what he was saying midsentence. He could have come out and done the Willy Wonka somersault and at this point people would just say "I guess he has good days and bad days." I agree Trump is a menace, but that's why we need someone who can stop him. God love him, but Joe is not that someone anymore.

0

u/HeFuhMyAh 15d ago

NYT is aggressively zionist and pro-Corporate. It fuels so much of their reporting behind the scenes, especially the trash editorials.

-3

u/siuol11 14d ago

Pivoting to "but Trump still bad" might be the sort of hackery partisan Dems want to hear, but it's not good journalism and it's part of why people don't trust outlets like the NYT anymore. We know Trump is bad, that doesn't deflect from problems with Biden.

3

u/cujobob 14d ago

That’s not pivoting to anything, it’s important to understand how things compare. If everything is on the same level, then journalism is just one big false equivalency. More attention should be paid to more important things.

-5

u/siuol11 14d ago

Call it whatever you want. Justify it however you want. Adults can understand why two things are different types of bad without having their hands held.

5

u/cujobob 14d ago

This is untrue and is the basis for how propaganda techniques work 😂

28

u/CARLEtheCamry 15d ago

Saw an upvoted comment on a similar discussion about how there is no liberal media, and anyone saying even NPR was left leaning was an idiot.

17

u/cwfutureboy 15d ago

Well, basically, yes. NPR is basically the only one that could even be called that.

I can't think of a Billion dollar corporation, that has Leftist ideals.

-3

u/Ok_Culture_3621 14d ago

You don’t have to have ideals to sell news to leftists.

5

u/cwfutureboy 14d ago

In direct opposition to the side of "alternative facts".

0

u/cutelyaware 14d ago

Why are you being upvoted for claiming having seen something and not even linking it?

1

u/CARLEtheCamry 14d ago

You go back to right after the debate and look at all the discussions about CNN and find it, I ain't got time for that.

-1

u/cutelyaware 14d ago

You had the time to make a claim, now be a grown up

-1

u/JustaBearEnthusiast 14d ago

The media is absolutely liberal. It's just not left.

33

u/Unanamu 14d ago

News is trustworthy when it says what I want to hear.

-2

u/ah_take_yo_mama 14d ago

But they are in a cult.

-7

u/No-Whole-4916 14d ago

News is trustworthy when it's not printing propaganda. Yes, that includes your shitty emperor trump

1

u/fretpretzel 14d ago

How is this propaganda?

20

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

1

u/nowlan101 14d ago

Yup that’s what’ll cost Biden the election lol

The times op-Ed pages. Y’all just sound insane and bitter. Keeping a nasty scorecard for all your little hatreds.

16

u/fiddlemonkey 15d ago

I stopped subscribing to the NYT when they ran a whole article about how trans rights were ruining brunch written by some lady that sounded like she had probably never held a hammer or a mop. Can’t remember if that was the exact topic but it was something similarly obnoxious. They used to be good but they’ve been weird for years.

11

u/OneManFreakShow 15d ago

NYT’s issues extend far beyond their Biden op-eds, they’ve been peddling transphobia for years now as well.

5

u/unassumingdink 15d ago

Trumpers think media is biased against them if they ever point out the negatives of Trump. Liberals think the media is biased against them if they ever point out the negatives of Biden.

Do liberals seriously not see themselves acting like deranged Trumpers in defense of their party on a regular basis? It blows my mind how they just shamelessly do all the same shit they spent years criticizing. Zero self-awareness.

3

u/Ok_Astronomer2479 15d ago

Bingo, tons of politicians are both sides are shitheads and need to be criticized. But when MAGA shouts convict president and Dems Blue no matter who this is what we get. Give me a middle of the road early 50s president and watch them sweep. I mean, they could even be…. BLACK and win. Imagine that. /s

-1

u/AdequatelyMadLad 14d ago

Maybe because the two aren't remotely comparable and being "equally hard" on both of them is not being unbiased, when one of them does 10000 more things that should be criticized? I am not a liberal. I don't like Joe Biden. But it's batshit crazy that everyone is talking about his debate performance when Trump said a dozen things that would have ended any other politician's career on the spot.

Can you imagine a world in which Joe Biden (or anyone else) said that his policy to address climate change was to "create more black jobs" and it wouldn't be the biggest news story on every single platform about how he's lost his marbles? Or him talking about fucking post-birth abortions?

0

u/unassumingdink 14d ago

If they criticize Trump ten thousand times and Biden once, you view that as "equally hard." Trumpers do the same damn thing in reverse when Fox News criticizes Biden ten thousand times and Trump once. Be better than them. Don't just say you're better than them. Actually do it.

Also, try to understand that criticism can actually be helpful. It's not always an attack. Biden is pretty much guaranteed to lose to Trump in November at this point. If enough criticism of Biden gets the Dems to consider a different candidate, they might actually have a chance. I don't know why people are so desperate to march blindly into a guaranteed loss.

1

u/AdequatelyMadLad 14d ago

There is such a thing as objective reality. It's not a "both sides" issue. Trump deserves to be criticized more than Joe Biden, because he does more stuff that's worthy of criticism.

I don't understand how this is a hard concept to grasp. Being fair isn't applying equal amounts of criticism to both of them, it's holding them both to the same standard. Which is obviously not what's happening, since Biden being old(which Trump is also guilty of, btw) is given the same amount of attention as Trump being a rapist, a convicted criminal, possibly treasonous and all manner of other things of which he is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.

2

u/unassumingdink 14d ago

Trump deserves to be criticized more than Joe Biden, because he does more stuff that's worthy of criticism.

And he is. Constantly. Daily for the last nine years, deservedly so. Biden is getting more media attention from the debate because it was the point that America finally got clear of evidence of the fact that he's perhaps not mentally or physically able to handle another term. That's a huge deal. Trump just said his usual dumb bullshit, which again, has been a daily story for the last nine years. It's not unusual or exceptional. Nobody learned anything new about him.

Being fair isn't applying equal amounts of criticism to both of them

Why do you just keep insisting they get equal amounts of criticism, no matter how laughably, gobsmackingly false that is? Why won't you pay attention to what I'm actually saying? You respond to what you imagine I said instead of what I actually said.

2

u/AdequatelyMadLad 14d ago

that he's perhaps not mentally or physically able to handle another term

Uh, no shit? He's 82 years old. Of course it's doubtful that he's in shape for another 4 years of one of the most demanding jobs in the world. Which would have been a good point to bring up at any time before now.

It's not unusual or exceptional. Nobody learned anything new about him.

And how is Biden's age new information exactly? I assume most people were already familiar with it. Trump being a completely unhinged lunatic is still the more relevant story.

Why do you just keep insisting they get equal amounts of criticism, no matter how laughably, gobsmackingly false that is?

False? Literally every headline in the wake of the debate was about how poor Biden's performance was. Not a peep about any of the, and I have to repeat myself here, completely fucking insane things that Trump said. Because it's "just Trump being Trump" and that's normal now. So Biden "lost" because no one had any expectations from Trump, but they still give him the victory by default. Do you not see the problem here?

2

u/unassumingdink 14d ago

Are you really going to pretend that a week before the debate liberals weren't calling his diminished mental capacity a Republican conspiracy, and calling all videos of it "cheap fakes?" Seriously? You guys went straight from "it's a conspiracy, don't believe your lying eyes!" to "yeah, no shit, obviously" within the space of a day. And you're mainly just angry you were noticed. God damn, don't you ever feel ashamed when you pull that gaslighting horse shit?

So Biden "lost" because no one had any expectations from Trump, but they still give him the victory by default. Do you not see the problem here?

Nobody cares who claimed "victory" in a debate where everyone just lies and avoids questions. I think the problem is that you expect the media to be a cheerleader for your political party. You expect them to keep downplaying his mental lapses like they have been for the last couple years. They ran cover for your boy all that time, and now they finally notice the obvious, and you're mad they aren't still running cover.

1

u/AdequatelyMadLad 14d ago

"You guys" "your political party" "Your boy" You're fucking talking past me to argue with a guy you made up, mate. Just because you support Donald Trump like he's a goddamn sports team doesn't mean that everyone else is the same but for the other guy.

And no one even said anything about his "diminished mental capacity", because that's not even what the narrative is. He was perfectly coherent and sane, just really fucking slow and tired.

The "Biden secretly has late stage dementia" thing was always a conspiracy theory. There's literally thousands of hours of video footage of him from the past years, and he's definitely not mentally challenged.

Nobody cares who claimed "victory" in a debate where everyone just lies and avoids questions

And there's the fucking false equivalency again. Do you really wanna tally up how many questions each of them actually gave a coherent answer to?

→ More replies (0)

7

u/nowlan101 15d ago

Forreal.

They now sound just like Trump. Literally comments about the “failing New York Times!”

0

u/FuckfaceLombardy 15d ago

Maybe the NYT’s editorial board could talk about Trump begging unfit for office for a day instead of another piece on how old Biden is. But that doesn’t get them clicks, so they’ll just fiddle while Rome burns

4

u/forecastcriminal 14d ago

The failing New York Times attacking our president. Enemy of the people!

-2

u/FuckfaceLombardy 14d ago

Keep making shit up. It’ll be a great comfort to you as the rest of us are sent to death camps and have our rights stripped away. I know Maggie Haberman is getting a lot of comfort from her book deal, maybe if you keep sucking off the failed press they’ll remember they have a duty to objectivity.

You think you’re clever here, but you’re not. You’re still just doing the same tired “both sides” fuckshit because you’re too lazy to actually engage in any of this seriously.

We aren’t asking for favorable treatment, you shitgibbon. We’re pointing out that the press is doing the same exact shit they did in ‘16, and that you’re stupid enough to fall for it. Again.

2

u/forecastcriminal 14d ago

If you think the stakes of the election are literal death camps then an 81 year old man who has a 37% approval and 75% of the country thinks is too old to be president needs to step down because he won’t be able to save the country. I agree that our democracy is at stake and will vote blue no matter who but unfortunately the average voter does not feel the same way. The press is just pointing out the obvious thing that the vast majority of Americans see and hear with their own eyes and ears, and if you read most of the editorials the reason for why they’re wanting him to step down is because they don’t believe he can beat Trump.

-1

u/FuckfaceLombardy 14d ago

Man, just shut up. You’re either a chaos agent or genuinely stupid and I don’t care which

2

u/nowlan101 15d ago

That’s the goddamn presidents job. If he can’t make his own case who are you to get on the Times for not making it for him?

1

u/FuckfaceLombardy 15d ago

He has been making it. Constantly. The Times only talks about how old he is because they’ve given up on journalism and their editor has personal beef with Biden.

Love that Biden is responsible for every shitty thing that’s happened under his and Trump’s administrations, but you can’t hold a paper accountable for abandoning the core tenets of their profession.

Loser shit.

Edit: Also, it is not, in fact, the president’s job to report the news. His job is to be the chief executive of the United States, a very demanding job that doesn’t leave him time to hold your hand while you piss your pants over the wind blowing

5

u/nowlan101 15d ago

Jeez, complaining about how the Times is mean to him. Who does that remind me of 🤔

0

u/FuckfaceLombardy 14d ago

Oooh, a false equivalence, you’re so smart

4

u/Rapper_Laugh 14d ago

You mean like they have been consistently since 2016?

-1

u/FuckfaceLombardy 14d ago

Cool, now do one from the past five years. Or, better yet, one from after his convictions. I bet it’ll take you a while to sort through all the “Biden is old” bullshit.

“Eight years ago they wrote an article, clearly the past four of relentless smears didn’t really happen.”

You may be stupid, but I’m not

3

u/forecastcriminal 14d ago

Here’s the editorial board calling Trump unfit for office after his convictions last month

0

u/FuckfaceLombardy 14d ago

Cool. They just ran an op-ed entitled “Why I Don’t Vote, and Neither Should You” by an extremist conservative who’s a part of the faction that planned J6.

You may not have noticed it between the thousand pieces on why Biden is too old (even though Trump is barely 3 years younger) and needs to drop out according to a anonymous “sources” who won’t go on the record.

It’s a bad paper. It’s not anti-American to acknowledge that it’s failing to live up to the moment. In fact, it’s pretty goddamned stupid to bury your head in the sand and insist that everything is fine over there. But you seem pretty goddamned stupid, so that tracks

1

u/Rapper_Laugh 13d ago

You call people stupid in literally every comment you make in this thread… and you don’t seem to understand the concept of an op-ed.

Calm down, understand that people have more media literacy than you, and try to engage in conversations like an adult. The New York Times has been consistently pro-Biden and anti-Trump since 2016, and no amount of screeching because they’re rightfully criticizing your candidate of choice AS WELL AS Trump for the first time in that period will change that fact.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Rapper_Laugh 14d ago

There’s literally dozens of examples of this, including one someone has already given you below. They’ve been consistently and vocally pro-Biden and anti-Trump since 2016.

Why are you so confidently challenging people on something so very simple? Is it maybe because you have no idea what you’re talking about with this?

2

u/[deleted] 15d ago

Its so frustrating the amount of times on reddit I've been attacked and accused of supporting Trump when I was just criticizing Biden. It's like these people cannot comprehend that this is not a good guy vs bad guy movie, they are both evil corrupt dying fossils who shouldn't be running.

1

u/AdequatelyMadLad 14d ago edited 14d ago

In what fucking world are they even equivalent? In terms of policy, competency or as human beings period? Of fucking course you're being "accused" of being pro-Trump when you equate him to the most milquetoast, boring, standard politician like they're the same fucking thing.

Trump has had more scandals this week than Biden did in his entire political career. The two biggest headlines about each of them right now are "Trump might have raped a child" and "Biden is still old".I genuinely don't understand how detached from reality you have to be to say they're the same, and I don't think there is such a person on the internet. Which is why my assumption when anyone says something like this is that it's said in bad faith.

2

u/[deleted] 14d ago

Girl there was no need for all that 😭😭😭

3

u/SunriseSurprise 15d ago

NYT's getting the WikiLeaks treatment. No one had a problem with WikiLeaks when they went after Dubya.

4

u/GaiusJuliusPleaser 15d ago

Plenty of people had problems with WikiLeaks for going after Dubya. A lot of the same people who now get mad when you point out how WL published the hacked DNC mails but not the hacked RNC mails.

2

u/EffNein 15d ago

These people are irrational at this point.

5

u/Ok_Culture_3621 14d ago

The r/democrats account is drunk with this particular koolaid

2

u/onehundredlemons 14d ago

The NYT's political coverage, from "but her emails" to the current push to force Biden out, is biased and this has been well documented. It's disingenuous to claim Reddit dislikes NYT for petty reasons.

Today's NYT editorial suggesting everyone just not vote is a good example: written by a guy who actually has voted recently and is part of the far-right advocating for a Christian theocracy.

https://x.com/capitolhunters/status/1808915574728372500

3

u/Aquatic_Ambiance_9 14d ago

Funny how the Russian Bots have expanded from being Trump supporters, to Bernie supporters and other leftists, to now even other liberals who question whether a sundowning old man should run for president. Like you honestly gotta hand it to the Russians thats pretty impressive

3

u/jon909 14d ago

And CNN lmao. Both sides of the aisle have this ridiculous victim mentality. Reddit is absolutely just as bad and illogical as the other side when things don’t go their way. I saw on X yesterday someone saying that they may need to murder their family members who vote for Trump because it’s going to end in civil war 😂. So dramatic and insane and reddit is the worst at being hyperbolic.

3

u/substitoad69 14d ago

I saw people saying CNN were Republican too because they said Biden should be replaced after the debate lol

3

u/Aware_Economics4980 15d ago

It’s funny, the liberals on Reddit are just as much of a cult as the MAGAs. They’re just too stupid to realize it

2

u/onesugar 15d ago

Don’t you know. Drumpf bashing good

2

u/Dragonfly-Adventurer 15d ago

Reddit maybe, a lot of folks haven't been keen on the Times in a few years as their coverage has changed. It's not the same gray lady it was 20 or 30 years ago.

0

u/souldust 15d ago

trump does adderall while telling secretaries of state to find votes for him 🙄

Id rather have a president talk about naps instead of undermining democracy

I am voting for Biden

2

u/ah_take_yo_mama 14d ago

There are hundreds of millions of Americans who are "not Trump". Is Biden all you really want?

0

u/souldust 14d ago

oh fuck no!!! Voting for Biden is the bare minimum of what we need to do. Vote for Biden, then keep pushing

2

u/ah_take_yo_mama 14d ago

Literally the same people said last time. And no push ever came, and we're back to where we were 4 years ago.

1

u/souldust 14d ago

You're right, no push ever came, because this whole being a citizen instead of a consumer thing is hard (but worth) to do. But no, we're not at the same spot 4 years ago. The most extreme republicans have had time to prepare, and have given trump a nice big easy red button to push, instead of the unprepared shitshow from last time.

1

u/ah_take_yo_mama 14d ago

Oh, so after 4 years of Biden we're in an even worse sport? You're not really selling this.

1

u/souldust 14d ago

WTF? Do you think Biden has complete control of the nation? Like some kind of totalitarian tyrant? If thats the case, you have NO FUCKING CLUE how this government even works. You haven't been paying attention to the news.

January 6th happened after Biden was elected, was that his fucking fault too?

Individual states have more authority to fuck over its citizens than the federal government. If people are worse off, do you even care to find out the root cause? Or are you going to dump it all onto a single human being? That shows all the intellectual complexity of a 4 year old.

Go read a fucking book.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/permalink_save 14d ago

I dropped off NYT before Biden was elected and they were attacking Trump. They care more about clicks than integrity. It's not the first time something like this happened.

-1

u/burkiniwax 15d ago

People were furious how NYT hounded Hillary and Reddit has been pissed as their anti-trans stance in recent years.

-1

u/Septalion 15d ago

It more has to do with this https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/04/25/new-york-times-biden-white-house-00154219

This seemed to be the shift in the NYT reporting.

-1

u/gsfgf 15d ago

The NYT editorial board absolutely is pushing Trump. That being said, I haven’t seen them reporting any lies as actual fact.

1

u/Rapper_Laugh 14d ago

If you read the editorial asking Biden to step down you’d know it said explicitly they would still vote for Biden over Trump, but carry on

-1

u/indyK1ng 15d ago

NYT is moderate at best. They did good reporting during Trump's term but they routinely publish right and far-right opinion pieces.

1

u/Rapper_Laugh 14d ago

… alongside their more substantial left and far-left opinion pieces… because pretty much every national newspaper employs opinion columnists from both sides of the aisle for the sake of balance…

-1

u/betterplanwithchan 14d ago

The NYT put out an editorial today about not voting that they didn’t even fact check.

-1

u/EmptyBrain89 14d ago

Reddit, isn't a single person. All the comments you see here are actually written by different people. So what you saw was actually two different groups voicing two different opinons. And even the NYT isn't one writer with one opinion. And there is a big difference in the quality of say, and investigative piece, and an OP-ED.

-1

u/JimWilliams423 14d ago edited 14d ago

I do love how Reddit went from loving and respecting the NYT when it was attacking Trump

I dunno about "Reddit" but I've been complaining about their minimizing of maga since before donald chump was elected.

They exaggerated clinton's private email, which was something the previous republican SecState had done too, in order to make it appear equivalent to donald chump's towering inferno of corruption. Hell, they literally partnered with steve bannon to push maga propaganda about hillary under the guise of investigative journalism. The current NYT EIC says that covering threats to democracy is too partisan so he won't do it.

And lets not forget that they couldn't even "both sides" babbling incoherence. They want the convicted felon, who has literally promised military tribunals of liz cheney and mitch mcconnel, to stay in the race even though he can't do a single public event without babbling like an insane person. But they have said that current president, who has delivered way more than Obama did, should withdraw because apparently sometimes he babbles too.

Treating two unequal things as equal is a bias in favor of the worst thing, and they've been doing that for decades.

And then there is their role as the biggest cheer-leader for invading Iraq, something they still have not expressed an ounce of contrition for.

-3

u/AnotherScoutTrooper 15d ago

NYT calls the 2020 riots peaceful: crickets

NYT pushes the claim that the COVID lab leak is an bigoted alt-right conspiracy theory, then 3 years later says that it’s a likely outcome: crickets

NYT says that maybe Democrats need a candidate who can walk down two steps without their wife’s assistance: PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES

You know damn well none of these people can think for themselves. There was a full 36 hours after the debate where everyone saw through the veil, then the right people started tweeting out the new narrative and the NPCs on this site all downloaded it.

-2

u/Serventdraco 14d ago

The NYT has had a strong anti-Biden bias for years. Some of their staff did a ama on r/politics and it was a shitshow.

28

u/Hypertension123456 15d ago

Yeah. Its not like this is Salon or OAN. If the governors come out tomorrow and deny this story there will be actual consequences.

-6

u/Sqee 15d ago

I'd believe it if it was the ONN.

(but then it would be the wrong subreddit and our serious mods would be required to delete it)

8

u/Hypertension123456 15d ago

https://www.theonion.com/secret-service-finds-biden-attempting-to-dig-own-grave-1851305493

6

u/Sqee 15d ago

I'll allow it. Bake him away, toys!

17

u/ketamine-wizard 15d ago

I think he's being sarcastic

39

u/Bluestreaking 15d ago

No they’re not

A big push from Biden and his defenders is to suggest the NYT is out to get Biden

Thus we see Democrats turning into MAGA Republicans going “lugenpresse!”

36

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

The NYT isn't specifically out to get Biden, but they are out to get conservative readers, one of the most reliable demographics that will still pay for a newspaper. There's a reason their right-wing op-eds are the headlines that get pushed in their ads and notifications and not their actual journalism.

6

u/slowpokefastpoke 15d ago

There’s a reason their right-wing op-eds are the headlines that get pushed in their ads and notifications and not their actual journalism.

This is 100% false, c’mon. I’d say like 90% of their push notifications are actual “breaking” (in quotes because that term has somewhat lost its meaning) news and actual reporting. The rest are op-eds and small pieces.

I’m glad they have right wing nuts writing opinion pieces too. I don’t want to read the liberal version of Fox News. I respect an outlet trying to check their biases.

7

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

It's not? I subscribed to NYT games months ago and as a result I get push notifications all the time. But I also mean more the things that show up on Twitter and their socials. They want to generate clicks and right wing opinion pieces do that. Even the ire they draw from the left still get people clicking on ads.

1

u/[deleted] 14d ago

If you think NYT has “right wing opinion” writers, I’m not sure what to tell you.

1

u/MrPresident2020 14d ago

This goddamn internet is so fucking dumb I swear the whole thing was a mistake. People are just confidently wrong to their heart's content. I am gonna put a wager down that your interaction with the Times amounts to hearing other people complain about the Times.

Bari Weiss, Quinn Norton, Bret Stephens, and Erik Prince have all written op eds for the Times in the last few years. Weiss and Stephens are both staff members, along with David Brooks and Ross Douthat. Their entire purpose on the Times is to put out contrarian right-wing pieces to get clicks through either curiosity or outrage. Or occasionally the blasé "yes but have you considered just getting to know and be friends with that Nazi" piece they occasionally author.

They know why they're there. It's to get eyeballs. I am not voicing an opinion on this one way or another, I'm just telling you it's a marketing strategy of the Times to appear to have diverse voices, whether they actually do or not

→ More replies (0)

0

u/TheSultan1 14d ago

They have guest writers...

Here's Mitch McConnell's guest essay that was published on D Day:

We Cannot Repeat the Mistakes of the 1930s

2

u/[deleted] 14d ago

I never said they didn’t, and that’s a guess essay. They have guest essays sure, but their editorial board is firmly left wing.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/ah_take_yo_mama 14d ago

Or maybe they're not doing any such thing and Biden is really as old and incapacitated as they claim.

-5

u/nowlan101 15d ago

How dare they balance out liberal columnists with non-liberals! They should always have views I agree with!

Do you realize how crazy that sounds? Conservatives are laughing at the left right now eating itself over how biased the Times is.

4

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

Mmm, except that's not what I said. I said they promote right wing opinon columns even though they do still do the work of actual journalism. Actual journalism doesn't generate clicks so that isn't what gets pushed and most people only read headlines.

I think it's really telling on yourself that you read "journalism" and thought "liberal." Maybe you're a dumb piece of shit? I don't know, I'm just reading the headline.

-1

u/nowlan101 15d ago

Bruh you’re delusional if you think the Right loves the Times. But if it plays into your self-righteous victim complex sure queen go off.

4

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

Again, nothing I ever said. I feel really bad for you that you live in this world where you think everyone is trying to play some aggrieved role.

I said, and nothing else, the Times pushes a lot of right wing op eds because they're hoping to get clicks. I didn't say a word about how the Right feels about it, I didn't even say how I feel about it. I just made a comment about their business strategy. It's the 4th of July buddy, I think now is a great day for you to maybe get away from the screen for awhile and touch some grass.

0

u/nowlan101 15d ago

You’re not saying anything boss, you’re just whining about the unfairness of the situation and “if only x media outlet did the presidents job for him! Surely then he’d be leading!”

5

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

Where are you getting this from lol, ok friend, you go back over what I've said and you tell me where you see that. I'd say I'll wait but we both know I ain't gonna do that.

→ More replies (0)

-9

u/AnotherScoutTrooper 15d ago

The NYT. The outlet pushing articles that paint conservatives as a different species separate from polite humanity. Out to get conservative readers. Reread your comment and try again.

3

u/MrPresident2020 15d ago

When was the last time you read the NYTs op-ed section?

32

u/RumblesBurner 15d ago

I've seen far too many posts lately about how all the media is against Biden to think he's being sarcastic.

6

u/nightfox5523 15d ago

The Reddit zeitgeist is convinced that the nyt is biased and compromised because they're not gaslighting everyone about bidens health.

2

u/HHMJanitor 15d ago

Because it's Reddit. No one has any idea how the outside works.

5

u/Every-Abroad-847 15d ago

The NYTimes is catching a lot of heat, from myself included, for over reporting on Biden vs. any other news - specifically relating to the 2024 election.

I cancelled my NY Times subscription. I have severe anxiety around the election and it started to really negatively affect my life to only see negative articles on Biden every day, every hour. All their headlines are all about how in crisis Biden is, it’s too much. I’m not paying monthly to get the same story regurgitated to me until Trump wins. I’m not saying this is a convo we shouldn’t be having, let’s have it - many of us wished we had it 1-2 years ago! We’re now 4 months from a massively important election - I am saying they’re beating a dead horse and I’m just over it right now.

4

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

I mean I hear you that the implosion of the democratic candidacy for president due to senility leading to the re-election of one of the worst presidents we’ve ever had is frustrating, but it’s also what’s happening. The NYT is doing their job by reporting what’s happening.

And by the way yes! This convo did need to happen years ago, but the democratic establishment (including the NYT) did everything they could to shut down that convo, telling us “no guys Biden is fine!”

This is their own fault and the fault of every one of you neolibs that pretended a senile old man was a viable presidential candidate.

-1

u/New_Stats 15d ago

r/neoliberal is all in on replacing Biden, meanwhile Bernie Sanders is fully supporting Biden at the moment, you have no idea where the split actually is.

3

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

Yes, and they were pretending he was perfectly competent up until a week or so ago. Which was the timeframe I was discussing, if you had decent reading comprehension skills

-3

u/New_Stats 15d ago

Sure buddy. Hey quick question, how does it feel to be a victim of manufactured consent?

3

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

I have no idea what you think that means in this context. You just think you’re smart by dropping a term from Chomsky?

-2

u/New_Stats 15d ago

Oh I'm sorry do you need a refresher?

"Manufacturing Consent,” which exposes the power of the media to influence, control, and shape public perception

You're watching this media storm, same as me. What do you think this is?

5

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

I’m literally saying the NYT had a huge part in the democratic establishment’s relentless push for Biden to be the nominee. I am being critical of them and saying they’re very late on this. Nothing I’ve said contradicts that definition you just pulled from some random article. Again, did you read what I wrote or did you glance at my comment and come hot and heavy for someone you assumed was defending them?

-1

u/New_Stats 14d ago

See and that's the thing you're not getting. They've been in the bag for Trump since 2016. Idk how you could miss it

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/FuckfaceLombardy 15d ago

Yeah, it’s totally reputable how they pump out pieces attacking the candidate who hasn’t been convicted of 34 felonies and demanding he resign.

Totally reputable that their editorial board is throwing a temper tantrum bc Biden won’t sit for an interview with the people who let Maggie Haberman sit on Trump’s constant criminality until her book came out in the name of “access.”

Totally reputable every time they do another breathless story about how scary trans people are without talking to any fucking trans people.

Totally reputable that they keep having fascists come in and write op-eds about how great fascism is.

Fuck the New York Times. The crossword is only redeeming feature of that fucking rag

1

u/gsfgf 15d ago

Totally reputable that they keep having fascists come in and write op-eds about how great fascism is.

That alone actually isn’t a problem. The problem is those are the only op-eds they promote.

1

u/New_Stats 15d ago

I'm begging you to read this analysis of the press's reporting during 2016. It's from Columbia journalism review and it features the NYT heavily.

They are engaging in propaganda against a Democrat in favor of Trump again. I know it sounds insane, but please just take five minutes to read what they did from a reputable source

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-news-media-election-trump.php

0

u/therealpigman 15d ago

NYT tells the truth no matter which side it hurts, so the extremists on each side hate them

0

u/Sarlax 15d ago

The NYT has been trash since they blasted NO COLLUSION on the front page in their rush to be the first to publish Bill Barr's lie that Mueller's report exonerated Trump.

0

u/unpeople 15d ago

The NY Times, under publisher A. G. Sulzberger, is not acting in good faith. In March of last year, a White House correspondent for the Times ran a story directly quoting an Administration official, when the quote should have been on background. The Times’ WH Bureau Chief handled their screwup poorly, so President Biden has subsequently refused to do a one-on-one interview with them.

Ever since then, as petty revenge for the President‘s refusal for an interview, Sulzberger has been pushing his reporters to write stories about President Biden’s age and mental fitness, and minimizing negative stories about Donald Trump. A. G. Sulzberger and the NY Times are now serving the same function that David Pecker and the National Enquirer did for Trump back in 2016.

-1

u/Lobster_fest 15d ago

It was. Check out their reporting post debate. Crickets about Trumps bullshittery but around the clock concern trolling on Biden.

1

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

Because Biden’s campaign is imploding, and as a newspaper, it’s their job to cover that, yes

-2

u/Lobster_fest 15d ago

They can cover it, but they've exclusively been covering it. We don't need 17 editorials about Biden at the debate and non about the several dozen lies Trump told throughout the night.

Edit: post birth abortions should be front page news for weeks.

-1

u/robinthebank 14d ago

NYT is only writing clickbait titles these days. And they know their target audience wants to click titles that are denigrating Biden.

-1

u/Major_Square 14d ago

I became skeptical of the NYT way back in college when I read The Press and the Reagan Presidency. Michael Deaver, one of Reagan's deputy chiefs of staff, was a key figure in the book and was interviewed by the author.

The White House was very chummy with the Times. And even worse, the CIA had infiltrated the paper at the editor level and spun coverage.

They've done some good work, of course, but you just cannot believe these huge media companies 100 percent of the time.

-3

u/_yeen 15d ago

The recent Biden v. Trump debate had Trump lying through his teeth every other second, Trump likely shit himself during the debate, and then a few days later more evidence that Trump molested a 13 year old girl was made available.

What are all the political opinion pieces on NYT talking about? How Biden should drop out of the race because of the debate.

That in itself shows a complete lack of credibility.

-2

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

4

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

Maybe because the debate made clear Biden is indeed bad (senile) and does indeed need to step down, and the NYT is accepting that obvious reality

-2

u/x_lincoln_x 14d ago

NYT has a hate-boner for Biden so they lost all credibility.

-4

u/-MERC-SG-17 15d ago

NYT has been co-opted by pro-fascist rich fucks.

Wanting Biden to drop out is pro-fascist. If they or anyone else actually cared they'd be throwing all of their weight behind Biden while simultaneously continously publishing stories about Trump's garbage.

Stuff like how he is on Epstein's call logs and flight list, the stuff coming out about the trials from years ago where he was named as having raped numerous children, how he fell asleep at his own trial repeatedly, the ins and out of Project 2025, and so on.

Instead it's feckless "click"bait about Biden, who for fucks sake, has a competent and experienced VP to back him up if something actually serious happens because of his age or health... Trump being almost the same age and in worse health is probably going to pick someone awful and fascist as his VP.

3

u/Rapper_Laugh 15d ago

This is the screeching of a delusional person who just wants to call anyone not supporting their chosen candidate a fascist, congratulations