The New York Times seems to be in love with Obama’s newly released portrait as they were with him while he was president.

Maybe more.

Yikes.

Barack Obama's portrait shows him not as a self-assured, standard-issue bureaucrat, but as an alert and troubled thinker. Michelle Obama's portrait overemphasizes an element of couturial spectacle, but also projects a rock-solid cool. https://t.co/tTJuIGWa4d — The New York Times (@nytimes) February 12, 2018

‘Self-assured, standard-issue bureaucrat, but as an alert and troubled thinker.’

Alrighty then, NYT.

Both portraits are sorta silly and the one of Michelle looks NOTHING like her. And what’s with all the bushes behind Obama? Was that some sort of subliminal play on the president before Obama?

Maybe we’re overthinking this.

Ha!

Right?

I don't know who painted these portraits but….they're really not very good. Mrs. Obama's portrait looks unfinished and very 1-dimensional. I'd ask for my money back, I think. — Patsy Jones (@pjones59) February 12, 2018

They look … off.

True.

Yeah, a bureaucrat who bombed more countries than W.

But whatevs.

Only thing I can see pic.twitter.com/PezncRIVLy — Benjamin Fait (@Ben_Fait) February 12, 2018

Run away!

Was this a high school Budding artist competition? — robbi elias (@bstnrbstr) February 12, 2018

This actually crossed our minds, that maybe this was some sort of high school competition?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

We are all alert & troubled right now — natalia (@natalia5727) February 12, 2018

Evergreen.

Related:

ROFLMAO! Ben Shapiro’s HILARIOUS take on Michelle Obama’s portrait triggers a WHOLE lotta stupid

We have a WINNER! CuffyMeh drops a ‘comedy GOLD’ mic on Barack Obama’s official portrait