Staff Reports
In the latest episode of “Trump Derangement Syndrome: Meltdown of the Week,” the left has once again shown that their collective hysteria knows no bounds. With Donald Trump securing yet another term as President-elect, the liberal elite appears to be stumbling over themselves in their desperate attempts to reason with a reality that doesn’t suit their fragile worldview. The unflinching predictability of their reactions suggests that this column could have a new name—“Vance Derangement Syndrome Meltdown of the Week”—as the left gears up for the 2028 election.
The backdrop of the latest tantrum comes courtesy of Michelle Goldberg, a rotating fixture in the Opinion section of The New York Times. While some might label her as one of the less offensive voices at the paper, she still embodies the quintessence of a coastal liberal: an angry college student who lacks self-awareness, pontificating loudly about intersectionality while sipping overpriced coffee. Her columns are a masterclass in illustrating the vast chasm between elite opinions and the struggles of everyday Americans.
Trump Derangement Syndrome Meltdown of the Week — We're Back, Baby!https://t.co/j9wfIwPEhe
— PJ Media (@PJMedia_com) December 18, 2024
During a press conference, Trump detailed how after his latest victory, the tech titans who once derided him are now vying for his favor. This sudden “friendship” has sent a shiver down the spines of the left, who interpret it as a harbinger of an “authoritarian oligarchy.” However, the notion that Trump has somehow coerced these industry giants into submission is nothing more than a rehash of tired, unoriginal leftist complaints. Of course, the term “authoritarian” is flung about with abandon by those too invested in their echo chambers to acknowledge the reality of the 2024 election results.
Goldberg’s critiques mirror the countless op-eds from the Times, where the left seems to continually scream “literally Hitler” without a hint of creativity. The bewilderment she expresses over Trump’s sway over once-obstinate Democratic stalwarts lacks even a nod to the fact that actual voters made their choice clear. In her narrative, there’s no acknowledgment of the dynamic world outside her urban bubble, where real Americans—those she likely views as mere “rubes”—voted for Trump not out of coercion, but out of a desire for an authentic alternative.
For anyone who wishes to understand the pulse of the American electorate, a simple trip across the Hudson would suffice. The fear and misunderstanding of those who voted against the progressive tide are palpable in Goldberg’s writing. Perhaps if she immersed herself in the real world for a bit instead of relying on her bubble’s reassurances, she might discover that the voters she derides are not just outliers, but a vital segment of the populace demanding a seat at the table.
While the mainstream media will undoubtedly continue to churn out their daily doses of biased drivel, there’s solace in knowing that those on the right are ready and willing to respond. The liberal howls may reach a crescendo, but the call remains clear: America has spoken, and for those too enmeshed in their own delusions to hear it, perhaps a little more interaction with the heartland is in order.
