Objective reality doesn't support the President, Brit.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
4% of Republicans voted against Trump. They are 3/3 of the times opinion page. That's like a 1 in a trillion statistical chance.
-
Why would they choose their columnists at random? Should there be a representative number of anti-vaxxers too?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Oh come on. All the columnists are hacks in their own way. Nearly every column written by these goons would fail an intro college political science course. And why is
@paulkrugman allowed to write the same column over and over again?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, toadying is best seen in the comments section
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
CNN did hire some pro-Trump commentators on these grounds, every single of them proved out to be a joke.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
isn't it disingenuous to present conservatism in the times in solely an anti-trump flavor? they're an extremely small minority, having trumpist columnists would at least be honest
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But the Times has hackery. Brooks makes stuff up all the time, even if he isn't in the bag for Trump
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Who would you try to recruit for that role?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As far as I can tell, the Times doesn't have a single columnist defending the theories that the earth is flat or that the moon landing was faked. Bias!
Thanks. 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.