Flanagan vs. Trump: Shalane Flanagan gets huge opinion piece in NY Times that ends with comparison of her feminism vs. Trump's f

NYT Agenda wrote:

This would have been a great article on Flanagan's strength as a leader if the author didn't toss in the nugget of Trump bashing. Not a fan of the Trumps but I wasn't expecting this topic to present an opportunity to knock down the president's daughter. It's a shame that the NYT chose to promote their political agenda at the expense of quality journalism.

"Flanagan’s leadership style doesn’t fit the “girl boss” leadership archetypes that are flourishing in pop culture, the Ivanka Trump feminism, with its shallow claims of support for women, that yields no results. (Ms. Trump’s kind of feminism may attract cheers at races, but it does not win them.) Flanagan does not just talk about elevating women; she elevates them. And they win."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/11/opinion/sunday/shalane-flanagan-marathon-running.html

It’s called “Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).” It’s very real. And it makes you do things that you normally wouldn’t have done.

Unfortunately, much like any type of evidence in the current “Russia!” charade, a cure for TDS has not yet been found.

It's a good article, thanks for sharing. Sorry that the NYT obvious political bias is too much for you to handle.

Unlike most adults, I can handle reading information from a biased source without having a brain hemorrhage. On the other hand, the only time I saw Faux News and Breitbart actually cover running was when Shalane won the New York City marathon. What a convenient time to cover a running event! All the other great running achievements don't matter, except when an American wins. Right?

Well, it is an opinion piece. And it's not like the NYT is the only paper in the country writing less than stellar things about big T.

Much rather kanoodle with Ivanka than Shalane. Also, Shalane has a potty mouth.

MAGA

+1. As someone who did not vote for Trump I thought that was pretty weak cheese. Just shows how far the liberal media will reach to take a shot at the man.

Also, the author said shalane is not petty and elevates women. I guess she was so focused on Trump that she missed shalane's response to Hasay's result at Chicago, which was pretty dang petty.

I can handle it just fine. I just don't get it. This would be a quality piece if you take out the part about Ivanka. I'm not defending Ivanka. There's just no place for it in this topic. This was a great opportunity to prop up Shalane as a role model. Why torpedo your article just for a swipe at a Trump? Why make a contrived effort when there are unlimited other opportunities to take legitimate pops at a trump? The author goes from credible and insightful to petty and personal. Just my opinion.

Agree it ruined what would have otherwise been an okay article. I saw somebody joke once about how obsessed the NYT was with Trump, saying that even in their style sections they couldn't shy away from taking jabs at him even with completely benign, apolitical topics. I assumed it was a bit of an exaggeration, but obviously not.

Hopefully this writer is seeing someone to get help with whatever issues she has.

NYT Agenda wrote:

I can handle it just fine. I just don't get it. This would be a quality piece if you take out the part about Ivanka. I'm not defending Ivanka. There's just no place for it in this topic. This was a great opportunity to prop up Shalane as a role model. Why torpedo your article just for a swipe at a Trump? Why make a contrived effort when there are unlimited other opportunities to take legitimate pops at a trump? The author goes from credible and insightful to petty and personal. Just my opinion.

In those terms, I agree, it was an unnecessary inclusion. Completely shifts the focus of the article. Ivanka has nothing to do with this particular achievement. Save it for your think piece on modern feminism, Ms. Crouse.

Lol dwumpf wrote:

A fat man who wears makeup calling another man fat. The anti-intellectualism is strong.

Your bigotry against 'fat' people, and men who wear makeup, is strong. Why so much hate?

Great job, lib.

Anti-Trump sentiment in an OPINION piece! The horror!

vivalarepublica wrote:

It's a good article, thanks for sharing. Sorry that the NYT obvious political bias is too much for you to handle.

Unlike most adults, I can handle reading information from a biased source without having a brain hemorrhage. On the other hand, the only time I saw Faux News and Breitbart actually cover running was when Shalane won the New York City marathon. What a convenient time to cover a running event! All the other great running achievements don't matter, except when an American wins. Right?

Well she was nice and Aryan looking

But the whole premise was stupid. Flanagan classlessly attacked Hasay after Chicago. She went years with ignoring Kara after her split with Nike. It's not like she was the model of lifting up others.

She was a selfish runner. And you have to be selfish to be good

NYT Agenda wrote:

I can handle it just fine. I just don't get it. This would be a quality piece if you take out the part about Ivanka. I'm not defending Ivanka. There's just no place for it in this topic. This was a great opportunity to prop up Shalane as a role model. Why torpedo your article just for a swipe at a Trump? Why make a contrived effort when there are unlimited other opportunities to take legitimate pops at a trump? The author goes from credible and insightful to petty and personal. Just my opinion.

Agree completely.

vivalarepublica wrote:

It's a good article, thanks for sharing. Sorry that the NYT obvious political bias is too much for you to handle.

Unlike most adults, I can handle reading information from a biased source without having a brain hemorrhage. On the other hand, the only time I saw Faux News and Breitbart actually cover running was when Shalane won the New York City marathon. What a convenient time to cover a running event! All the other great running achievements don't matter, except when an American wins. Right?

You said "faux". That's funny and original.

I see dumb people wrote:

Anti-Trump sentiment in an OPINION piece! The horror!

It's possible to write an opinion piece on a topic without unnecessarily shoving your agenda into it, too.

But let's ask the most important question: Does Lindsay Crouse read letsrun?

vivalarepublica wrote:

But let's ask the most important question: Does Lindsay Crouse read letsrun?

Let's ask an even more important (for her) question: Does Lindsay Crouse gain readers by inserting her political bias into a running opinion piece? I'd venture to say that the answer is no, and she actually loses readers. But logic is certainly no strong suit of the liberal-persuasion.

I detest Trump as much as anyone.

I cannot stand the man. He is an embarrassment to our fair republic.

But I have to agree that the chunk about Mrs. Trump should have been left on the cutting room floor. I read this on the NYT website this morning before I even saw this thread on LRC. My reaction was the same—what not leave that part out? It is jarring, off-topic, and seems determined to alienate.

Teller of Truths wrote:

+1. As someone who did not vote for Trump I thought that was pretty weak cheese. Just shows how far the liberal media will reach to take a shot at the man.

Also, the author said shalane is not petty and elevates women. I guess she was so focused on Trump that she missed shalane's response to Hasay's result at Chicago, which was pretty dang petty.

Totally agree. I'm not a Trump fan, but this was weak as hell. Really?? Can't we just celebrate Shalane's victory without dragging our political opinions into it? Perhaps Shalane is not petty (I have no opinion really) but this writer sure is petty!