This does not somehow redeem Frank fucking Luntz. (See also, Liz fucking Cheney, who today is all-in on voter suppression.)
Thrag
3492
Cheney’s brave stand really does amount to “We’ve can’t overthrow the results of an election after the fact! We need to fix the results beforehand!”
Start with sponsored content. Stay for the magnetic vagina blanket.
https://www.venusinventions.com/
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo
KevinC
3495
Can’t wait to read articles from The Athletic talking about what 14 racist Trump voters think about LeBron not shutting up and dribbling.
The Athletic is made up mostly of local sports writers who were all laid-off or about to be laid-off because newspapers are dying.
And then here comes the goddamn NY Times.
Fuck that. Can’t cancel fast enough.
A follow-up to John Oliver’s segment.
Maybe the “left wing media bias” is just the lack of truthful right-wing agencies.
Wait, so CNN is left biased about as much as RT America or Fox News is biased to the right?? That’s fucking laughable.
I find this site more useful if you want to check bias of sources.
That’s not how I read it. Fox News is in a different category than CNN, plus it’s lower on reliability.
No. Fox is almost 50% more biased that CNN and 25% less reliable per the numerical attributes of both.
I am not a fan of the graph on that page then, although it’s probably mostly because I was looking at it on mobile.
It says a lot about the political leanings of the English-speaking world that the Daily Mail is one of the most centrist publications by whatever their methodology is.
Yeah, I am with you there. You have to drill down to the numbers, which even on a PC I found difficult - some dots I can’t even click as the screen jumps when I hover over the dots.
A bill aimed at protecting voting rights is a “far left” issue, who knew. [For those keeping score, Manchin was a co-sponsor last congress ]
Pelosi is now part of the activist left, woohoo. Go Nancy!
KevinC
3509
That was, like, so last congress, man.
Timex
3510
HR1 cannot reasonably be interpreted as simply a bill that “protects voting rights”. It does far more than that. It’s an 800 page bill that goes far beyond merely dealing with voting rights.
Now, you can argue the merits of all those other things it does, but to handwave them away as though HR1 was just a voting rights bill, is misinformed.
That’s fair, but looking at the rest of the major provisions (measures related to ballot security and retention, expanding optional public funding for campaigns, requiring candidates to disclose tax returns, independent commissions to redraw congressional districts, tinkering with the makeup of the FEC to make it more effective / less partisan, and non-binding statements about Congress’s power to make a DC state), which one or ones are the ‘far left’ overreach to which it is reasonable for one to object?
