9 ms·

Are you suggesting the New York Times does not have a "deliberate left slant"?

namdnay 4y ago
I'd say the NYT has an "educated big coastal city american slant", not sure it's a question of left or right. I seem to remember they were pretty gung-ho about invading Iraq, hardly a left-wing position
- AmericanChopper 4y ago
  > hardly a left-wing position It’s a nobody position in 2022, but the Iraq Resolution passed through congress and the senate with a substantial level of bi-partisan support. So really, it was a popular left-wing position at the time.
  - dagw 4y ago
    "bi-partisan" support in congress/parliament doesn't map neatly onto left/right support. In the UK, the Labour party (ostensibly the left wing party) pushed for the Iraq war and the vote passed with bi-partisan support, but it was still about as far from a "popular left-wing position" as you could get.
    - AmericanChopper 4y ago
      I’d say that’s just the difference between whatever ideals you hold the left to represent, and the ideas they champion in reality. To say the Iraq invasion didn’t have a substantial level of left wing support is simply to rewrite history.
      - yeahforsureman 4y ago
        I think you Americans should stick to calling this group as liberals or move to progressives where appropriate (identity politics, woke "ideology" etc.), and leave "left" to those who can still perceive it as a somewhat coherent concept in their politics (although perhaps every day less so). What I mean is just that if you toned down their woke/progressive evangelism and posing, the Democrats would be a firmly center-right party in large parts of western and central continental Europe, for example.
        AmericanChopper 4y ago
        This is just a no-true-scotsman though. The term “left”, whilst representing an extreme generalization, means just as much (or as little) in the US as it does continental Europe, or any other western democracy.
        ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
        yes, of the groups left, center, and right, it means those left of center, regardless of party currently the Democratic party best represents "center" for a number of reasons, not the least of which is because their platform better represents most Americans (but not the ones on the right or left) than that of another major parry platform
  - dfxm12 4y ago
    To go from "most of the people in congress support X" to "therefore X was popular to the left wing" makes quite the leap, first of all that congress evenly represents its constituency. Left wing of US is tiny and has little representation in congress and mainstream media (including NYT). This is true today as well as back then. I think you're also overstating the bi partisan support the Iraq resolution had. Of the Democrats, only 39% representatives and 29 out of 50 senators voted for it. Among the bloc who voted against the Iraq Resolution were politicians like Bernie Sanders, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Peter DeFazio, et al., who at the time, represented even your definition of "left wing".
    - AmericanChopper 4y ago
      It had well over a super majority in both houses, that is substantial bipartisan support. If the definition of “left” isn’t “mainstream left wing politics”, and is instead “a small collection of politicians chosen by dfxm12”, then the word may as well not have a meaning.
      - dfxm12 4y ago
        It had well over a super majority in both houses, that is substantial bipartisan support. I'll add that super majority doesn't mean much in terms of "bi partisan support", when a single party (the republicans) nearly had a super majority of the house alone. Even in the senate, the Republicans pretty much all voted the same way while the Democrats split. It's almost as if there was some sub group of politicians for whom this issue was not popular and split from the mainstream, off to one side (plus the regular Americans who did not support the war). If the definition of “left” isn’t “mainstream left wing politics” "Left" or "left wing" is by definition not "mainstream". and is instead “a small collection of politicians chosen by dfxm12”, then the word may as well not have a meaning. Do please try to post in good faith.
        AmericanChopper 4y ago
        > I'll add that super majority doesn't mean much in terms of "bi partisan support", when a single party (the republicans) nearly had a super majority of the house alone. In 2002 the republicans has a 14 seat majority in the house, and no majority in the senate with only 49 seats. The history re-writing going on here is pretty extreme.

I'd say the NYT has an "educated big coastal city american slant", not sure it's a question of left or right. I seem to remember they were pretty gung-ho about invading Iraq, hardly a left-wing position

AmericanChopper 4y ago
> hardly a left-wing position It’s a nobody position in 2022, but the Iraq Resolution passed through congress and the senate with a substantial level of bi-partisan support. So really, it was a popular left-wing position at the time.
- dagw 4y ago
  "bi-partisan" support in congress/parliament doesn't map neatly onto left/right support. In the UK, the Labour party (ostensibly the left wing party) pushed for the Iraq war and the vote passed with bi-partisan support, but it was still about as far from a "popular left-wing position" as you could get.
  - AmericanChopper 4y ago
    I’d say that’s just the difference between whatever ideals you hold the left to represent, and the ideas they champion in reality. To say the Iraq invasion didn’t have a substantial level of left wing support is simply to rewrite history.
    - yeahforsureman 4y ago
      I think you Americans should stick to calling this group as liberals or move to progressives where appropriate (identity politics, woke "ideology" etc.), and leave "left" to those who can still perceive it as a somewhat coherent concept in their politics (although perhaps every day less so). What I mean is just that if you toned down their woke/progressive evangelism and posing, the Democrats would be a firmly center-right party in large parts of western and central continental Europe, for example.
      - AmericanChopper 4y ago
        This is just a no-true-scotsman though. The term “left”, whilst representing an extreme generalization, means just as much (or as little) in the US as it does continental Europe, or any other western democracy.
        ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
        yes, of the groups left, center, and right, it means those left of center, regardless of party currently the Democratic party best represents "center" for a number of reasons, not the least of which is because their platform better represents most Americans (but not the ones on the right or left) than that of another major parry platform
- dfxm12 4y ago
  To go from "most of the people in congress support X" to "therefore X was popular to the left wing" makes quite the leap, first of all that congress evenly represents its constituency. Left wing of US is tiny and has little representation in congress and mainstream media (including NYT). This is true today as well as back then. I think you're also overstating the bi partisan support the Iraq resolution had. Of the Democrats, only 39% representatives and 29 out of 50 senators voted for it. Among the bloc who voted against the Iraq Resolution were politicians like Bernie Sanders, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Peter DeFazio, et al., who at the time, represented even your definition of "left wing".
  - AmericanChopper 4y ago
    It had well over a super majority in both houses, that is substantial bipartisan support. If the definition of “left” isn’t “mainstream left wing politics”, and is instead “a small collection of politicians chosen by dfxm12”, then the word may as well not have a meaning.
    - dfxm12 4y ago
      It had well over a super majority in both houses, that is substantial bipartisan support. I'll add that super majority doesn't mean much in terms of "bi partisan support", when a single party (the republicans) nearly had a super majority of the house alone. Even in the senate, the Republicans pretty much all voted the same way while the Democrats split. It's almost as if there was some sub group of politicians for whom this issue was not popular and split from the mainstream, off to one side (plus the regular Americans who did not support the war). If the definition of “left” isn’t “mainstream left wing politics” "Left" or "left wing" is by definition not "mainstream". and is instead “a small collection of politicians chosen by dfxm12”, then the word may as well not have a meaning. Do please try to post in good faith.
      - AmericanChopper 4y ago
        > I'll add that super majority doesn't mean much in terms of "bi partisan support", when a single party (the republicans) nearly had a super majority of the house alone. In 2002 the republicans has a 14 seat majority in the house, and no majority in the senate with only 49 seats. The history re-writing going on here is pretty extreme.