, 4 tweets, 2 min read Read on Twitter
NYT responds to criticism of its retrospective coverage of the Tea Party, which omitted some of the most salient facts about the Tea Party.
This sentence seems to be what they added, laying it all off on the perceptions of "Mr. Obama's allies."
Suppose, rather than this tack-on job, they took the idea seriously. What if this solves Jeremy Peters' "DNA" conundrum that the Tea Party was popular but the ideas that it was permissible to associate with it were not? What if it's backed up by data? journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
That would lead them down the road that NYT under Baquet seems desperate to avoid: that the throughline of GOP politics from the Santelli speech to this week's G7 summit is not to do with small govt or health insurance but revenge for the election of the first black president.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to southpaw
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!