This Little Paragraph from The New York Times Is Extraordinary
Although it shouldn't be
Yesterday, The New York Times published an article by David Leonhardt (which I heard about through Twitter), describing ways the Harris campaign can position itself as more centrist. I see they got the memo that moderation is the new hot thing!
Leonhardt names five of the campaign’s weak spots when it comes to moderation: crime, immigration, inflation, free speech, and…check this out:
This is presented as fact, not opinion, not a contested conclusion. It includes no links to articles about doctors in Europe or the scientific evidence—only to polls. It’s…accurate. One trans activist/journalist interpreted this as saying NYT encouraged Harris to target trans people, but that’s not what it says.
I’m thrilled to see this shift. At the same time, allow me a moment of resentment. I’m pretty sure that in the last four years, I’ve sent in at least a dozen pitches for reported articles and finished opinion pieces trying to get New York Times readers to understand the situation in Europe—which is not nearly as clear cut as Leonhardt presents it here (there is some pushback against the Cass Review in the UK, however politically motivated). I wanted readers to understand that there is debate, and that there are alternatives between banning it all and removing all barriers to “gender-affirming care.”
Still, let us acknowledge that the Old Gray Lady has shifted toward the truth. It’s shameful and infuriating that it has taken this long, but it’s still worth celebrating.
Meanwhile, I really hope the Harris campaign takes Leonhardt’s advice—especially since this is what she led with right after being anointed:
Those issues are very niche. But most of us are feeling the burn of inflation. The Left is the side that’s gone all authoritarian and anti-free speechy. Migrant hotels are overflowing. And, heck, she’s a prosecutor. She should be able to position herself as tough on crime.
Will she? We’ll find out on the next episode of “Is this life, or is this the weirdest TV show I’ve ever seen?”
The biggest stupidest euphemism is ‘denying health care for trans people’. Like a doctor would refused to treat a strep throat for a trans person or take out an jnflamed appendix. Really these activists have so corrupted our language. That’s all part of the plan
I encourage folks here who have D candidates and electeds to write to or call them, cite to the paragraph Lisa notes in the Leonhardt article and let them know you agree that this is a weakness for Ds on which it would be wise to change their posture. You might also note that Leonhardt links to Pamela Paul’s superb piece on the Cass Review, and encourage your candidates and electeds to read that too. Let’s take every opportunity like this from now until the election to let our D candidates and electeds know our views.