President Donald Trump, the first Republican in decades to enter the White House, is making it a priority to convince Americans that he’s not the enemy of the people.
And while he’s doing so, the Times is still struggling to maintain the same level of faith in his ability to govern.
The paper is facing a dilemma, one that comes down to a fundamental disagreement over the nature of reality: Are the people who are voting for Trump, in the eyes of the Times, to be counted as legitimate or not?
The answer is both.
Trump’s voters are mostly angry, discontented people, and they tend to have a stronger aversion to government.
If they’re not satisfied with a politician who will work with them to solve their problems, then the Times’s opinion columns are going to look a lot more like the opinion of the average Trump voter.
This is a crucial question for a paper that has long tried to appeal to both the populist and the nationalist.
The editorial boards have been working overtime to build a public image as the newspaper of the People, a sort of American version of the New York Post, the paper of the elite and the working class.
They have been particularly successful at doing this through stories that appeal to the voters who would otherwise not read the paper at all.
But the Times’ public relations strategy for these days is all about making the Trump voters look like the people they really are.
That’s why, in this election cycle, the editor of the Washington Post has been trying to convince the American public that it’s not just a bunch of angry, frustrated people.
The idea is that Trump voters will believe what he says, not what he writes.
So in the face of a crisis, the Post is doing everything it can to try to keep Trump voters believing what they’re saying.
The Times, for instance, recently ran a story that said that “Trump’s rhetoric and temperament make him a volatile figure, as do the people he threatens.
.
.
.
He also has a history of making incendiary comments.”
The piece went on to say that the Times has seen a “long-term decline in readership from Trump voters.”
The Times then goes on to tell its readers that Trump is a “maniacal, self-destructive narcissist,” and that “his repeated and public attacks on his political opponents, and his repeated and self-declared disregard for facts, will not be tolerated.”
But Trump supporters are the ones who are actually going to read the article.
It’s true that the article was written in the spring of 2018, when Trump’s presidency was already under attack.
But this isn’t a story about the Trump people.
It was written by the Washington bureau chief for the Times.
It has been published as a regular column.
And it is also a column that Trump himself has endorsed.
Trump is right that he is not a serious person.
He has made mistakes, but he is a man of principle who has stood up for the values that have made this country great.
He is not an enemy of anyone.
But he is also not a threat to anyone.
As Trump’s popularity wanes, the New Yorker has started to take a more aggressive role in defending him.
The New Yorker is now using the Times as a weapon in its war on Trump, attacking the president for “failing to uphold the values of a democratic republic.”
And when the Times starts to try and distance itself from Trump, it goes beyond the usual journalistic niceties and starts to get into political politics.
The article is headlined “Why Is The Times So Angry About Donald Trump?”
It begins with a warning from a Times executive editor: The Times has long been a powerful voice for democracy.
We should not be blind to the dangers that Donald Trump represents.
But we are also not the only ones who need to be watching out for the country’s interests.
For too long, the political class in Washington has been blinded to the importance of our democracy, and we have allowed ourselves to become complicit in the destruction of the republic.
This may be the case because we do not share the interests of our own citizens.
We live in a world of big corporations, which we have helped to create.
And we have watched our own government fail to deliver on its promises to the American people.
We have also allowed ourselves, as Americans, to believe that our government can be trusted to do the right thing.
That is not the case.
If we have learned anything from the Trump era, it is that when it comes to politics, we don’t trust the political establishment at all, much less the political press.
The new president is trying to shift this narrative.
He’s trying to appeal directly to the fears and resentments of Trump voters, using their anger as a shield to push his agenda.
The goal of this campaign is to make them believe that the country is under threat from a man who is not even in office.
This will be achieved by attacking his supporters, by attacking