It's the identitarianism, which is much the same as Duke/Spencer who are white identitarianism, but their socioeconomic views fall far more in line with the left than the right.
Steve Says: The Democrats are using Mueller to divide America https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...re-using-mueller-to-divide-america/vi-AAAXIZP
so does that make farrakhan right (and islam in general) and richard spencer (and the nazis mind you) left? on the sum of their values, by sticking them on an american political compass, that would be true. Of course those people don't identify that way, so it'd likely create more confusion than anything. If the grouping is based on affiliation where we put them on some sort of identification grouping, it's easier to follow and hence functionally useful as the more people who understand what the terminology is, the more useful for communication it is (of course that doesn't quite apply to historical people from other continents).
I guess there would be similar (if not more extreme) positions held by OAN viewers, talk show listeners, and InfoWars fans...
I'm not sure what they are qualifying as far right as far as the article goes or Facebook or whatever. But sometimes people believe that Farrakhan believes in additional government assistance, welfare, food stamps and the like. He is a die-hard against those things which is a right-wing position. I guess the term 'far' is where there is room for disagreement.
Trump would still be president and CNN’s ratings would likely rank even further. CNN needs him more than he needs them
Washington Post writer Dana Milbank complains that Trump revoked his press credentials because he is anti-Trump. The reality is probably something else: WHITE HOUSE REVOKES DANA MILBANK’S PRESS PASS Dana Milbank, the Clown Prince of the Washington Post, has had his White House press pass revoked. He complains about it in this column. Milbank says “he strongly suspects” that he lost his pass because “I’m a Trump critic.” This is a serious charge. The White House shouldn’t revoke press passes because of the political bent of the holder or the content of his writing about the president. However, Milbank fails to make much of a case that this happened to him. He lost his pass pursuant to a new policy stemming from CNN’s legal action to restore James Acosta’s pass. The judge in that case stated that the White House’s process for revoking Acosta’s access was “shrouded in mystery.” In response the White House established a standard. Credentials are to be retained only by those who are in the building at least 90 out of the previous 180 days. According to Milbank, that’s a “nearly impossible” standard to meet. I’m not sure why. If a reporter is covering the White House, why shouldn’t he be present on most working days? In any event, the White House decided to grant exceptions for “senior journalists” who are “consistently engaged in covering the White House” and for those “with special circumstances.” Under this test, all seven of the reporters assigned by the Washington Post to the White House got press passes, but Milbank did not. In his column, Milbank makes no argument that he meets the test for obtaining an exception. Indeed, it seems clear that he is not “consistently engaged in covering the White House” (he is consistently engaged in bashing President Trump, but that’s not the same thing). Apparently, Milbank showed up at the White House only seven times during the 180-day period analyzed. He says that foot surgeries limited his ability to appear there, but acknowledges he’s never come close to meeting the 90 day standard. On these facts, there is no reason to believe that Milbank lost out because he’s anti-Trump. I know that at least some of the seven Washington Post reporters who kept their credentials are “Trump critics” in their reporting, albeit not in the distinctively nasty way Milbank is. The key, though, is that the seven are reporters, not opinion writing performers like Milbank. If Milbank can identify reporters who consistently cover the White House and have been denied a press pass or opinion writers more noticeably sympathetic than he is to Trump who have been granted one, he might have a case. Milbank does neither in his column. Thus, as far as the reader can tell, all he has is a moan. https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/05/white-house-revokes-dana-milbanks-press-pass.php discussing Mibank's article at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...a575670e91c_story.html?utm_term=.d6732378b77e
Is it any wonder why trump supporters only watch fox when the fox talking heads repeat trump lies regardless of how easily disproven...
