You know we can all read that in context through the link right?

And not a goddamn .edu among them. Thank you for illustrating the problem. It’s literally available for free. Have fun reading, they have one about normal liberals too.

It lays some common sense ground work too though. Food supplies that were tainted and arrogance as to Arctic ice conditions would have been enough to doom them all. There’s a real possibility that even if they left as soon as possible to head south they never would have made the journey.

I’m pretty sure NAFTA means they can’t.

That’s not saying what you want it to say. It’s a top level picture taking great pains to speak in general terms. So no, it’s not a guard against MBFC having a bias where it rates conservative stuff higher.

We’ve found concrete examples of bias in MBFC that would be very hard to see if you’re just smashing 11,000 data points against each other. This requires checking the actual sites by hand, basically doing their self appointed job again and checking their work. Then checking it against MBFCs other ratings for internal consistency.

The Heritage Foundation is anything but unorganized.

No. Just no.

They share a couple goals. They are not the same thing. And if you want to describe Neo Liberalism so broadly as to mean all American politicians who aren’t Socialist then you’re just spreading misinformation at that point. Usually this is some stupid take from tankies.

Go look it up. Because Maggoty class time is over. I’ve spent enough time today on this already.

I’ve gone to just having stuff delivered to a place for pick up. It’s just so mush easier in the long run. As a bonus it forces to actually walk around my neighborhood.

You know them as their brand name, Libertarians. I’m making the point that they are not a mainstream center ideology as MBFC protrays.

The answer is no. But of course some idiot is going to do it and make the thing able to self replicate and fuel from “biomass”.

No it’s got a bias problem. They consistently rate sources they perceive as left as less factual, consider conservative anarchists to be mainstream, and rate literal campaign websites as not very biased. They also made up their own terminology that’s loaded, despite the existence of objective terms for decades.

19 hours later it’s at -7. You did get good feed back. You need more sources because MBFC itself is either bad at it’s job or specifically a project to whitewash libertarian and conservative sources.

Because the US is the only country that can enforce its own laws about not sending weapons or cash to countries committing war crimes.

Lmao. Look at those goal posts move! That’s a new land speed record!

Liberals and conservatives absolutely have different ideologies. People won’t stop voting for liberals until we correctly assign blame to them rather than pass it off as a conservative thing.

Please stop making up definitions for words that already have them. Liberalism has always been pro capitalist. Neo liberal specifically refers to complete deregulation of the market, abolishing the income tax, and getting rid of social welfare programs like SSI and Medicare.

I agree with you. I’m just laying out why Harris might be better for Palestinians than Biden.

Ah yeah, I remember the Hungary thing too so also, it’ll be a veto.

I’m not familiar with how the EU actually works, does each country get a veto for things like sanctions? Because Germany might just get outvoted if Israel keeps going down this line.

She’s trying to stay neutral, Israel has a right to exist, there must be an immediate cease-fire, etc. This in contrast to Biden parroting the IDF’s PR. She is clearly not as pro Israel as Biden.