6 hours ago
21
In his latest New York Times opinion piece, journalist and podcaster Ezra Klein poses a question: “If Donald Trump is so dangerous, then how come the consequences of his presidency weren’t worse? There is this gap between the unfit, unsound, unworthy man Democrats describe and the memories that most Americans have of his presidency, at least before the pandemic. If Donald Trump is so bad, why were things so good? Why were they at least OK?”
Klein argues that you cannot separate Trump’s policies from his personality—that it’s both his “great strength” and “terrible flaw.”
To suggest that things were “good” or “at least OK” reflects significant privilege—precisely that of a white man siphoned off at one of the world’s most prestigious news outlets where Trump’s harmful policies have not had a direct impact. Klein’s perspective fails to account for the lived experiences of marginalized groups, and those who never saw it coming, whose lives were profoundly impacted by Trump’s administration.
