Like that doesn't happen every day in posted articles around here.
It is what passes for editorialism and journalism.
The idea isn't so much to sort things out as support a foregone conclusion. It is the same sort of 'evidence' which is used to prop up the Climate Change gig.
I would like to see it laid out, who supported or benefited from what liberal policy, when (and even with footnotes to context to see why). I'd like to see the same done with Conservative policy and the leading candidates--of both parties.
Exactly. These "journalists" are lazy. They don't really put in the work. There's no scholarship or research. Just opinion masking as journalism.
Oh look republicans might run a guy who supports every aspect of conservatism....has 40% of the dem. vote “because the blue dogs have jumped ship..”....could actually win...better not let him get nominated for cying out loud....sheesh.