The New York Times opinion writers on who they think
won the Biden vs. Trump Debate.....

![]() |
In Relation to 2020, Our Media Are Quickly Becoming Modern Day Kamikazes |
"I totally disagree with this editorial. I don't want an investigation. I want a coronation of Joe Biden," Tolchin wrote according to the NYT. "I don't want justice, whatever that may be. I want a win, the removal of Donald Trump from office, and Mr. Biden is our best chance." ...
"Suppose an investigation reveals damaging information concerning his relationship with Tara Reade or something else, and Mr. Biden loses the nomination to Senator Bernie Sanders or someone else with a minimal chance of defeating Mr. Trump. Should we really risk the possibility?"Day after day in America, the leftist media continues to demonstrate out in the open, with no conscience what so ever, they're willingness to do anything including lie, cheat and open up the the electoral system possible massive voter fraud just to regain power and replace DJT with a Doddering Old Delaware Fool.
MSNBC's Brian Williams and NYT Editorial Board member Mara Gay do the math and conclude that Journalist Mekita Rivas is right, with the $500 million Bloomberg spent on ads he could have given $1 million to every American. pic.twitter.com/S9yWNqxoHN— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) March 6, 2020
Consider the levels of failure here:— Steve Cortes (@CortesSteve) March 6, 2020
-original tweet from a blue-check writer for Glamour and WaPo
-TV production staff
-anchor Brian Williams
-NYT editor Mara Gay
2/3...
“Some in the party view President Trump as an aberration and believe that a return to a more sensible America is possible. Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced.”So, the country is no longer sensible and the we need someone who can kill capitalism. So what's more sensible and destructive then a post-menopausal woman?? Yeah, let's endorse Lizzy, everyone's vision of a self-medicated crazy cat lady, and another who reminds everyone of that one mean school teacher they all hated, and you just knew she secretly enjoyed getting drunk and kicking puppies.
we regret to inform you the NYT is at it again pic.twitter.com/WGlH3iKdy0— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) September 17, 2019
"We may be living in an age where certain pockets of the corporate world are breathlessly adapting to women’s needs — company-subsidized tampons, salary workshops, lactation rooms. But even in the world’s most progressive workplace, it’s not a stretch to think that you might have an empowered female executive leading a meeting at one moment and then sneaking off to another floor to relieve herself, the next."
"The bathroom is saturated with gender in fascinating ways,” said Mr. Haslam, a professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne, who noted that women’s aversion, particularly at work, is not entirely unfounded: One unpublished study he mentions in his book found that a woman who excused herself to go to the bathroom was evaluated more negatively than one who excused herself to tend to “paperwork” — while there was no difference in the way participants viewed the men."Poop shame is real. In other words, the patriarchy has seeped into women’s intestinal tracts. Let’s just call it the pootriarchy.
"It’s easy to look at what’s happening in Washington DC and despair. That’s why I carry a little plastic Obama doll in my purse. I pull him out every now and then to remind myself that the United States had a progressive, African American president until very recently. Some people find this strange, but you have to take comfort where you can find it in Donald Trump’s America."But now, despite the mental trauma, even Jill Abramson and some present news analyst can see past the end of her nose and actually admit what can unmistakably be applied to most every news outlet in the land.
A former executive editor of the New York Times says the paper’s news pages, the home of its straight-news coverage, have become “unmistakably anti-Trump.” Jill Abramson, the veteran journalist who led the newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says the Times has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility.
In a soon-to-be published book, “Merchants of Truth,” that casts a skeptical eye on the news business, Abramson offers some harsh words for her successor, Dean Baquet. And Abramson, who was the paper’s only female executive editor until her firing, invoked Steve Bannon’s slam that in the Trump era the mainstream media have become the “opposition party.
Though Baquet said publicly he didn’t want the Times to be the opposition party, his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump,” Abramson adding that she believes the same is true of the Washington Post. “Some headlines contained raw opinion, as did some of the stories that were labeled as news analysis.....”Needless to say, because of Abramson's sin of truthful criticism, her invites to NY and DC liberal elite dinner parties may just have taken a really big hit. Bless Her Heart......
The Comments are Hilarious!The New York Times needs your help. We’re looking for false information being spread deliberately to confuse, mislead, or influence voters ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. https://t.co/p3eeW5fnGm— The New York Times (@nytimes) September 18, 2018