Journalists sure are counting a lot of things in advance of the election; for example, they tallied the number of times candidates stepped on each other during the debates, inviting numerous think pieces about how interrupting is sexist.

It would be easy to pity the poor New York Times interns who were made to keep track of each and every person, place, and thing Donald Trump insulted since declaring his candidacy, but the authors look to be staff writers behind such exposés as the relative nutritional value of quinoa and granola.

The team has logged 281 insults so far, and the extensive online list made it into the print edition of the Times Monday, filling a two-page spread that people rushed to photograph and tweet like teen girls sharing pics of their pumpkin spice lattes.

Inspired journalism? OK. The obvious question: when is the paper going to do the same for Hillary?

The less obvious question: didn’t the Times recently publish on its front page the accounts of two women who accused Donald Trump of groping them? It seems kind of petty to drop a bombshell like that and then pivot to a list of every time Trump called the New York Times “sad.” Boo hoo, guys.

Other insults documented among the hundreds catalogued include “dishonest,” “bad,” “broken,” “failing,” “not good,” “not nice,” “boring,” and “terrible.” Apologies to anyone who was triggered by hearing those hurtful words.

America has enough unfunny insult comedians that there’s no need for an insult president. But if Trump accuses Charles Blow of “bad reporting,” is that necessarily an insult? He even dared call NBC News — the network that recently tried to stealth-edit Andrea Mitchell’s claim that rape allegations against Bill Clinton had been discredited — “very dishonest.”

How about when he called whoever firebombed GOP headquarters in Orange County, N.C., “animals”? Can you believe he’d level such a base insult at people who’d just firebombed a building and spray-painted a threat on a wall nearby? Sad!