Stop Analyzing Trump's Unhinged Ideas Like They're Normal Policy Proposals
The New York Times just ran 1,200 words gaming out the electoral math of forcibly annexing Canada. We're in trouble.
Sometimes a piece of journalism is so wildly off-base that it perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with political coverage. Today's example comes from the New York Times's Peter Baker, who decided to treat Donald Trump's delusional ramblings about annexing Canada as a serious policy proposal worthy of electoral analysis.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Present Age to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.