According to a new poll, a generic Democratic opponent would beat President Trump by 10 points in 2020 election. Yeah, the generics do great. It’s the name brands [shows photo of Hillary] who have trouble. –Seth Meyers
[Ten points is also the difference between how Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton did against Donald Trump in head to head polls. Democrats sure could have used that ten points they gave up by nominating Clinton for the general election.]
Bonus Quote
Trump claims the United States’ trade deal with China is unfair. Of course it is. The United States sends China high-quality American-made products, and in exchange China sends back the Donald J. Trump signature suit collection .–James Corden
Did you get that from wikileaks?
'There is nothing left of Wikileaks' credibility',"
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/930556047491821570
Nothing here is from Wikileaks, but they are far more credible than MSNBC. Of course you would believe their distorted coverage.
You might check what is actually at Wikileaks rather than going by the intentional misquotes from biased sources:
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-atlantic-commits-malpractice-selectively-edits-to-smear-wikileaks-65ecd7c2468f
MSNBC? Really?
Whoa! You sent me to read someone who aligns themselves with Nazis!! I dont know what to say. Well I do but you have shown your true colors
Earlier this week we ran a piece by Yoav Litvin, in which he questioned why some Green Party members, including ex-presidential candidate David Cobb, who also served as Jill Stein’s campaign manager last year, would align himself with Caitlin Johnstone, a writer who openly calls for the left to team up with the racist far-right in order to fight the so-called “deep state.”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/13/on-caitlin-johnstone-and-david-cobbs-attempt-to-destroy-the-green-party/
The post has nothing to do with Nazis. It is simply about showing how Wikileaks was misquoted.
And you again show your true colors (McCarthyism, and a total disregard for the facts) when you try to suggest any connection between my support for freedom and government transparency with Nazism. When the facts are against you, you again resort to your usual disgusting smear tactics.
Of course not. I never heard of her so I was curious and to my surprise she wants to break bread with nazis. After that little nugget she has nothing to say to me but you on the other hand will crawl in bed with anyone who agree with your wrong headed view
More of your smear tactics. Saying she wants to break bread with Nazis is already a gross distortion. I have not given any support for her idea of a tactical alliance with the right on some issues, so your trying to tie me to this is just another lie on your part. You yet again ignore the facts. The whole point in this was that she pulled out the actual quotes to show how Wikileaks was misquoted–again nothing to do with any Nazis. You once again ignore the facts while claim I have a wrong headed view.
Considering your support for a corrupt authoritarian warmonger with a strong opposition to government transparency, yes, from your perspective I could see that you would see this as a “wrong headed view.”
You also basically admit that your response to the facts in the article was to ignore the facts and try to find some way to smear the writer, even with a misleading article which has zero to do with the subject. Then you go from there to try to smear me.
With conduct like this, what makes you think you are any better than Donald Trump or the alt-Right? You certainly are showing as little integrity as Trump here.