Yeah, this should’ve happened a long time ago. All they’ve been doing is prolonging the war and making Ukraine fight with one arm tied behind their back

This is why we need a strong leader in the US now more than ever…and that’s not Biden. These problems largely didn’t exist under President Trump. Peace Through Strength

What dictator? Trump was in office already and I don’t remember him being a dictator. That’s just MSM talking points. He never even said he wanted to be a dictator. He made a joke about the left freaking out about it…and they did.

Other account?

Wonder why they left the Democrat party?

You’re just repeating the MSM talking points. Keep drinking the koolaid

Wrong. They didn’t offer Republicans everything they wanted. That’s just completely false. HR2 was a much better bill at getting the border under control, or even just reinstating the executive actions Trump had in place before Biden took office.

Find something that’s less than 20 years old. That’s such a dumb argument anyway. 99% of the news agencies in America at that time wanted to go to war. Everyone wanted revenge for what had happened.

Look it up. It listed plenty of sources you can look at

Trump kept a lot of them out of the country, and you’re pretty naive if you think kids aren’t getting separated from families or getting killed now. Human a sex trafficking are at an all time high right now. And detention at least kept them from killing and raping our citizens.

They donated to Democrats as well, but either way, I haven’t seen any proof of them controlling the articles or opinions in the paper

I’m getting downvoted because it doesn’t fit their narrative. I don’t care about that though. It’s expected

is the new york times a liberal or conservative paper

The New York Times is often perceived as a liberal or progressive newspaper, but its political stance is more complex and nuanced. Here’s a breakdown:

Historical context: The Times was founded as a conservative newspaper in 1851, and it maintained a conservative editorial stance until the early 20th century. However, during the 1960s and 1970s, the paper began to shift towards a more liberal perspective, reflecting the changing values and attitudes of the time.
Editorial board: The New York Times’s editorial board has historically been liberal, but not uniformly so. While it has supported progressive causes, such as women’s suffrage, civil rights, and environmental protection, it has also endorsed conservative candidates and policies on occasion.
Columnists and opinion writers: The Times features a range of opinion writers and columnists, including liberal voices like Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, and Charles Blow, as well as conservative voices like Bret Stephens and David Brooks. This diversity of opinion reflects the paper’s commitment to presenting a range of perspectives.
Coverage and reporting: The Times is known for its in-depth reporting and investigative journalism, which often focuses on issues like government corruption, corporate malfeasance, and social justice. While this coverage can be seen as liberal-leaning, it is also driven by a commitment to fact-based reporting and a desire to hold those in power accountable.
Subscriber demographics: According to Vox, The New York Times’s subscribers skew “older, richer, whiter, and more liberal” than the general population of the United States. This may contribute to the perception that the paper is liberal, but it’s essential to note that the paper’s editorial stance is not solely determined by its subscriber demographics.

In conclusion, while The New York Times has a liberal bent, it is not a uniformly liberal or conservative paper. Its editorial stance is shaped by a complex interplay of historical context, editorial board perspectives, and the diverse range of voices and opinions presented in its pages. ----Brave Search

is the new york times a liberal or conservative paper

The New York Times is often perceived as a liberal or progressive newspaper, but its political stance is more complex and nuanced. Here’s a breakdown:

Historical context: The Times was founded as a conservative newspaper in 1851, and it maintained a conservative editorial stance until the early 20th century. However, during the 1960s and 1970s, the paper began to shift towards a more liberal perspective, reflecting the changing values and attitudes of the time.
Editorial board: The New York Times’s editorial board has historically been liberal, but not uniformly so. While it has supported progressive causes, such as women’s suffrage, civil rights, and environmental protection, it has also endorsed conservative candidates and policies on occasion.
Columnists and opinion writers: The Times features a range of opinion writers and columnists, including liberal voices like Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, and Charles Blow, as well as conservative voices like Bret Stephens and David Brooks. This diversity of opinion reflects the paper’s commitment to presenting a range of perspectives.
Coverage and reporting: The Times is known for its in-depth reporting and investigative journalism, which often focuses on issues like government corruption, corporate malfeasance, and social justice. While this coverage can be seen as liberal-leaning, it is also driven by a commitment to fact-based reporting and a desire to hold those in power accountable.
Subscriber demographics: According to Vox, The New York Times’s subscribers skew “older, richer, whiter, and more liberal” than the general population of the United States. This may contribute to the perception that the paper is liberal, but it’s essential to note that the paper’s editorial stance is not solely determined by its subscriber demographics.

In conclusion, while The New York Times has a liberal bent, it is not a uniformly liberal or conservative paper. Its editorial stance is shaped by a complex interplay of historical context, editorial board perspectives, and the diverse range of voices and opinions presented in its pages. ----Brave Search

That wasn’t pasted from Media Bias Fact Check. I got it by asking Brave search and it listed several websites, MBFC not being one of them

Ss the atlanta journal-constitution a liberal newspaper

According to the search results, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is considered to be slightly Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that lightly skew liberal. Additionally, it is rated as High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.

They may be owned by Cox Enterprises but “While the newspaper is owned by a private company, its news decisions are made by the journalists in the AJC’s newsroom.” https://www.ajc.com/about-us/who-we-are/DT6HW7HAYVFG7N2N6TIIHHTTVE/

I looked to see if I was welcome in the fediverse and this is what I found… The Fediverse is a decentralized, federated social network where individuals can connect with others who share similar interests and values. It’s a space where people from all walks of life can come together, share their thoughts, and engage in respectful discussions.

No discrimination or exclusivity

The Fediverse is built on the principles of inclusivity and diversity. There is no central authority controlling the network, and each server (or instance) is run independently by its administrators. This means that each server can set its own rules and guidelines, but there is no overarching policy that discriminates against individuals based on their political beliefs, including Republicans.

Diverse perspectives and communities

The Fediverse is home to a wide range of communities and servers, each with its own unique character and focus. You can find servers dedicated to specific topics, hobbies, or interests, as well as servers that cater to specific political ideologies or beliefs. This diversity allows individuals to connect with like-minded people and engage in discussions that resonate with them.

I looked to see if I was welcome here and this is what I found… The Fediverse is a decentralized, federated social network where individuals can connect with others who share similar interests and values. It’s a space where people from all walks of life can come together, share their thoughts, and engage in respectful discussions.

No discrimination or exclusivity

The Fediverse is built on the principles of inclusivity and diversity. There is no central authority controlling the network, and each server (or instance) is run independently by its administrators. This means that each server can set its own rules and guidelines, but there is no overarching policy that discriminates against individuals based on their political beliefs, including Republicans.

Diverse perspectives and communities

The Fediverse is home to a wide range of communities and servers, each with its own unique character and focus. You can find servers dedicated to specific topics, hobbies, or interests, as well as servers that cater to specific political ideologies or beliefs. This diversity allows individuals to connect with like-minded people and engage in discussions that resonate with them.

Lol, so anyone that has opinions that you don’t like aren’t welcome here? Okay…