6. Brooks & Stephens in particular are in pretty much agreement on all issues. Brooks is a better writer & less willing to lie about climate
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
7. The ideological spectrum in Times runs from Marco Rubio supporters on the right to Hillary Clinton supporters on left. That's narrow.
12 replies 99 retweets 377 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
8. Times shouldn't hire based on which candidates columnist support but an interesting op ed page give diversity of voices.
4 replies 18 retweets 117 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
9. Times doesn't have to hire pro-Trump writers but should hire writers who don't support GOP establishment consensus (that lost).
8 replies 16 retweets 88 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
11. And on the left, why not have people from the new social movements bubbling up -- BLM, the feminism, Democratic Socialists?
5 replies 37 retweets 215 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
12. Bret Stephens is an incredibly safe choice for the Times because he's close to many centrist liberals (anti-Trump, anti-PC, anti-BDS)
8 replies 26 retweets 115 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
13. Even Stephens's climate denial fits in comfortably with establishment. It's just Exxon Mobile boilerplate. Corporate PR.
15 replies 28 retweets 137 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
14. So on the right, if I were Times, I'd hire
@michaelbd &@DanielLarison, on left@rtraister,@rgay &@sunraysunray13 replies 17 retweets 145 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @michaelbd and
Richard Spencer, John Derbyshire and other Pepes represent The Right much better than Larison, Dougherty, or Scott McConnell.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, but they are insane. Not a good quality in columnists.
-
-
What best exemplifies
@DissidentRight's insanity, in your view?0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.