The Kamala Harris presidential candidacy

[Max Peck]

I'd argue (because this is the internet, so of course I'd argue ) that the difference between "left leaning" and full on left-wing is more than mere semantics. It speaks to the editorial bias of the publication. Do you consider something like The Federalist to be merely "conservative leaning"?

[hepcat]

As much as I would entertain the thought that someone could be half dead.

From mediabiasfactcheck.com

Analysis / Bias

In review, Current Affairs reports on politics and culture with a left-leaning bias in story selection. There is the moderate use of loaded language in headlines such as this: FREEDOM-LOVING AMERICANS SHOULD DEMAND UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE. This long-form article is well researched and perfectly sourced to highly credible information. In another article, HOW THE LEFT SHOULD THINK ABOUT TRADE, there is again excellent sourcing of information. In general, most stories on Current Affairs favor the political left by endorsing policy and Democratic politicians. However, it is highly factual through proper sourcing.

If you'd like to say they're entirely left wing, go for it. Leftist would probably be a better description though so as to include more of the spectrum.

And yes, this is the internet and this is a discussion of semantics and it was inevitable.

[Max Peck]

But is the actual article left-leaning clickbait or is it left-wing clickbait?

[El Guapo]

"How much of it was a scam?" is a clickbaity headline that dramatically reduces my faith and interest in the author's analysis.

[Kraken]

"How much of it was a scam?" is a clickbaity headline that dramatically reduces my faith and interest in the author's analysis.

+1. Was money spent unwisely? Quite likely, given that she only had about 100 days to pull her campaign together and it was showered in donations from Day One. Certainly, that's worthy of analysis. But it falls well short of being a scam. .

[Blackhawk]

Pretty much that. I wasn't knocking it because of some defensiveness because it was about the left, I was knocking it because everything about the source screamed 'unreliable.' Left or right, nobody is immune to criticism, but nobody is immune to bullshit, either.

[Unagi]

The title demands that some portion was a scam - But pretends to be an honest look. Total bullshit from the cover.

What a great share.

[LawBeefaroni]

You can't spend $1B without a little bit of someone skimming.

If it comes out that someone took a few $M, shame on them individually but its a blip. If someone stole a few hundred $M, shame on the campaign.