Today’s Warren Report (#228-2019) is better than most. The article’s premise is simple. Sen. Elizabeth Warren is trying to appeal to moderate voters by saying she will raise taxes, just not on you. Somebody else will pay. So there is no reason not to elect her because you will get a lot of stuff for free and you won’t be charged.
It used to be that candidates would never admit they were closet socialists. Bernie admits it right up front, which is one reason why he never posed a real threat to Hillary Clinton. But the Democrats have moved so far left that being a socialist is no longer a detriment, it is a benefit. Still, unlike Sanders who is a committed socialist (and probably a closet communist), Warren is smart enough to eschew the label until after she is in office.
Candidates also would avoid admitting they would raise taxes. Saying you planned on raising taxes was a big red flag to many voters who were more comfortable voting for people who lied to them. Remember George Bush the father saying “read my lips?” His broken promise was a death blow to his reelection efforts.
Massachusetts’ Native Daughter tries to thread this needle by saying yes, she will definitely raise taxes, but it won’t be on you, it will be on the “gazillionaires” who aren’t paying their fair share. She’s got a plan for that, all right.
If you believe Ms. Warren can spend what she wants and can fully fund it by just taxing the ultra rich and it won’t come back to bite the middle class in the rear end, then vote for her. Just don’t be surprised when your taxes goes up because like most politicians, she is lying to you.
*Requires minimim of 5 Ratings to be displayed
Grading articles for bias is subjective. We hope that with widespread participation, we can give the reporters and editors at the Boston Globe valuable feedback on their professional work. Here are our suggestions for grading news articles for bias. (We do not rate editorial opinion columns for bias. But we do analyze the Boston Globe for overall editorial balance.)
Consider whether the article is completely free of bias (a grade of 10 or A), has been mostly free of bias (8 or 9, A- or B+), has been biased but not terribly or where the bias did not hurt the integrity of the underlying information (7 or 6, B or B-).
If the article was fairly biased overall, but subtle; or where the bias was particularly prominent but isolated to a single section, give the article a 5 or 4 (C+ or C). If the article was very biased but perhaps not intentionally so, perhaps a C- (3) would be deserved.
If the article was extremely prejudiced with major misstatements of fact, intentionally misleading, or ignored well known facts to advance a false narrative, give the article a D or F (2 or 1).
Reviewers must subscribe to Public Editor and agree to our terms of service to participate. Subscriptions are currently free. We recommend that all readers subscribe to the Boston Globe or the newspaper of their choice to support journalism, and to send the Boston Globe your feedback directly. Thank you for participating in Public Editor’s bias rating project!