The Failing Trump Presidency Analysis

As a fervent reader of The New York Times I have recently come across your article, titled ‘The Failing Trump Presidency,’ written on the 19th of August, 2017. You clearly believe that Trump is not an ideal president - there was not a single point that supported his actions, and you explicitly state that the government is doing nothing to help the Americans. This could prove to be true - Trump might be inefficient at imposing certain policies and at times, not make the best of his decisions. However, such points came across as quite outrageous to me that you declare him as incompetent even before stating the exact reasons to support your argument. The bias in your article is evident especially due to the diction the tone used. I strongly suggest
The headline of the article, ‘The Failing Trump Presidency,’ seems to show the extreme opinions you have regarding the president. Upon coming across this title the audience members will, even before reading the whole text, view Trump as unreliable. This misleading title consequently hinders people from making objective decisions about the president. That Trump “is failing the office that Americans entrusted to him” is also not necessarily true; this is your personal opinion on the president, and not enough evidence is present to back up your claims. Some people think of Trump as the ideal president, and some don’t; it is just that you agree with the latter. Evidently, the word “fail” is used frequently throughout the whole article, and the repetition puts emphasis on how Trump has never been successful, and how he never will be. Although it might not seem significant, that one word is memorable and to people with no background knowledge, it will have a huge impact. In addition, when you say that Trump seems to be “divorced from decency and common sense” you characterise him not only as an abnormal man of inability. Despite the fact that it is up to the audience to decide whether they agree, that statement will inevitably force them to distrust Trump. The media has no place in persuading people to believe certain things, and I conclude that your attempt to shape the opinion of the people
When you say that he wanted “to spare himself the humiliation of further corporate desertions” the readers can visualise a helpless man, swayed by his advisors. This makes the viewers think that Trump does not have enough skill to confidently instruct those around him. In addition, you make him look violent and illogical by saying that “he crashed ahead,” attacking others with “bursts of anti-historical nonsense.” Such diction used create a sardonic tone overall - it appears as if Trump has done nothing right since the start of his regime. The truth is that he has made supreme court nominations, improved national security, and reduced the number of illegal immigrants entering the country. By not providing examples of such achievements and putting emphasis on his “sheer incompetence” people are determined, at this stage, that Trump is a poor leader. By listing out such weaknesses you have persuaded the viewers to think that Trump is both morally and politically unfit for the position of president. However, I think that by providing them with a neutral, information-based writing it would be more effective, since they would be able to know the whole context and develop their own