Instead of downvoting because you think the title makes the article pro-Trump, people should actually read the article

I don’t think anyone is saying he’s good. They’re just saying “holy shit, even this this insane guy who is so bad is anti-Trump”

There’s a really good Dick pun to be made as a follow-up joke here, I just can’t think of it

What most people don’t realize is that childhood vaccinations don’t actually last forever. It’s been probably 30 years since I completed most of my vaccinations as a toddler, but when I got my most recent job (at a healthcare provider), they tested me and I needed boosters for some childhood vaccines due to losing immunity.

They’re in our blood and even in our brain?

There are a number of feminist communities on Lemmy that you’re welcome to join, although I doubt you’ll get very far with arguments that were addressed in the 1990s

Whoa. You guys get replies when you email DAs of the biggest cities in the USA?

So you read the pieces that challenge what I believe, but how about the sources that validate my opinion? Let’s ignore all the other evidence and focus on that

Ha. This guy hasn’t heard of nukes

There’s an alternate timeline where he wins and can’t get anything through because there aren’t enough progressive Dems in the senate.

The other thread was an attempt to gauge feedback on specific ideas (as this post mentions, they are so in the works) and it precipitated this post

Honestly, the bias piece was never the important piece for us. It was the credibility piece.

Just trying to give some insight into why we used it in this community.

The last sticky thread actually had some really good feedback, like using a fact checker that is part of the International Fact Checking Network (of which MBFC is not a member) and many other similarly great suggestions.

One of the issues might be in the name. We don’t want to create a bias bot. That seems like a fool’s errand, which is one thing we learned in the process of implementing the MBFC bot. We want to create something that makes people aware of posts that are from medium to low quality sources. Obviously, if the source is super sketchy, we’d delete it, but there’s a lot of grey area where we leave things up.

Just FYI, they agreed

Nearly 500,000 of the voters purged during the time period highlighted by Mr. Abbott were dead. About the same number were cleared after they were put on a list of people who did not vote in two successive general elections and are believed to have moved.
Those numbers were roughly equivalent to the number of voters in those categories removed in previous years.

…

Mr. Abbott said around 1,900 possible noncitizens had a voting history in the state before their registrations were canceled. He said their records were being forwarded to the attorney general’s office for investigation.

…

“In a two-year cycle, 10 percent of your roll could move,” even in an economic downturn, Mr. Bettencourt said. During a good economy, it could be even higher, he said.

Seem like all the numbers are there to me?

Only dead ones afaik

Roll tide! /s

It’s also weirdly thrown in there without much detail. Seems like that should be driving the story

Just gonna leave this here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_(organization)

The current president, David Bossie… served in executive positions for President Donald Trump’s and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection campaigns.

What law are you referring to?