Staff Reports
The latest spectacle from the New York Times Editorial Board showcases yet another case of blatant Trump Derangement Syndrome. It seems that the Editorial Board never disappoints when it comes to flinging absurd accusations and melodramatic character assessments against the former president. Their recent tantrum, cleverly titled “The Dangers of Donald Trump, From Those Who Know Him,” is essentially a recycling of tired narratives aimed at whipping up the anti-Trump base just in time for another election cycle.
In what can only be described as a cringe-worthy attempt to offer a “balanced” perspective, the Times claims that dozens of Trump’s former colleagues and associates have raised alarms about his suitability for office. Apparently, after spinning the wheel of Democrats’ favorite talking points, they landed on “let’s produce a hit piece on the guy who was once our beloved POTUS.” The irony here is thick enough to be sliced: the very same individuals now crying about Trump’s character were once in line for photo ops with him.
It's been a few weeks since I did a TDS column:
Trump Derangement Syndrome Meltdown of the Week — New York Times Editorial Board Fills Its Diaper AGAIN https://t.co/E6VABHhz9e— SFK (@stephenkruiser) September 27, 2024
The editorial not only rehashes old gripes but also spins them as heroic whistleblowing, implying that sniffing around Trump’s inner circle is a career jeopardizing stunt. That hardly holds water in a political landscape that rewards Republicans for taking swings at him. The spin of risking one’s career sounds more like the desperate whining of a losing football team complaining about the referee when they’ve already fumbled the game. Truth be told, there’s a lucrative market for bashing Trump, one that many disgruntled former cronies have eagerly tapped into.
Furthermore, the Times seems blissfully unaware or conveniently ignores that these past criticisms are regurgitated versions of anecdotes from the 2016 primary debates. Members of this so-called band of hero aides have since come to terms with the undeniable truth: the biggest threat comes not from Trump but from the likes of Kamala Harris and her ongoing confusion about basic policies. Churning out complaints from 2016 as if they are fresh takes in 2024 is a clear indicator of creative bankruptcy rather than a reasoned critique.
As the Times carries on, it’s clear they are stuck in the emotional loop of the “cute boy at the dance” analogy, longing for attention while spewing their contempt. Their editorial reads less like serious political analysis and more like the desperate chatter of an ignored classmate who can’t understand why the popular kids won’t glance their way. Indeed, the once insurmountable Trump is still seen as thumping the prospect of defeat, while the Times continues to pine for an era in which they believed they held sweeping influence over the political narrative—an influence demonstrated to be far more smoke and mirrors than reality.
The reality remains undeniable: while the New York Times churns out flailing editorials filled with recycled negativity, the supporters of Trump, energized by his prior accomplishments and undeniable skill at political maneuvering, continue to rally behind him. Expect this trend of mischaracterization and sensationalism from the Left to ramp up as the election looms closer. Eventually, the only takeaway from the Times’ editorial board will be just another sad sob story for the shelves, right next to their last few embarrassments.
