too many F grades for that to be unbiased. The median and average is an F. Just shows that the site has an agenda.
Were witnessing a U.S.-funded genocide, paid for by the billions with our tax dollars.
Are you being sarcastic or not? I can't tell.He brought up a valid question.
How can you NOT look at that site and know theres a biasWhat is it bias to? What's wrong with bias in general? What's wrong with the bias specifically?
too many F grades for that to be unbiased. The median and average is an F. Just shows that the site has an agenda.Or it means most politicians support Israel. Because that's the case. Only a few are brave enough to stand up for Palestine in American politics
is this literally just for democrats? I live in a red county in a red state, and nothing is popping up when I search for my area.
Why is it considered a negative to affirm Israel's right to exist...? I get that it's mostly performative, but Israel has a right to exist. And pointing it out as a negative only goes to bolster the viewpoint of people who think pro-palestine means wanting to eradicate Israel.You just earned yourself an F buddy.
What is it bias to? What's wrong with bias in general? What's wrong with the bias specifically?
Why is it considered a negative to affirm Israel's right to exist...?
JFC. STFU.Has that ever worked? What is it bias to? What's wrong with bias in general? What's wrong with the bias specifically?
Why is it considered a negative to affirm Israel's right to exist...? I get that it's mostly performative, but Israel has a right to exist. And pointing it out as a negative only goes to bolster the viewpoint of people who think pro-palestine means wanting to eradicate Israel.
Palestine
Why is it considered a negative to affirm Israel's right to exist...?
Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live with democracy, safety, peace, and human dignity. This resolution that ignores the existence of the Palestinian people brings us no closer to peaceful coexistence. Its important to recognize that Palestinians also have a right to coexist with Israelis in their historic homeland, with equal rights and freedom, rather than living under racial segregation or being subjugated as second-class citizens. This resolution falls short of that.
Israel does not have a right to carry out illegal occupation and apartheidwhich will never lead to a just and lasting peace. Unfortunately, this resolution is a one-sided attempt to rewrite history, contributes to the ongoing erasure of Palestinians by not even acknowledging their existence, and fails to recognize the historical and ongoing Nakba in which countless Palestinians have been and are actively being killed, displaced, and driven from their homes.
What is it bias to?
What's wrong with bias in general?
What's wrong with the bias specifically?
Who gives a shit though? Why are you judging American politicians based on whether or not they say they would support a ceasefire in a country thousands of miles away?Lots of people all over the world are anti-genocide and apartheid. That's all people can do in a representative democracy, find the best candidate they can.
What's an example of a bias not being negative?
That would be a negative. Not what I'm asking.
Does anyone currently have the following stance? If so, they have my vote.Yes, every Republican
<img src="https://media.tenor.com/AXMEDSnkaH4AAAAe/godzilla-let-them-fight.png">
Being anti-genocide is not a bias.
I don't think you are understanding what people are complaining about with that website. Being anti-genocide is not a bias. Stating " Were witnessing a U.S.-funded genocide, paid for by the billions with our tax dollars. Our U.S. government is the primary funder and enabler behind Israels ongoing mass murder of the Palestinian people." -- is a bias because it isn't speaking from an objective standpoint and it's favoring one perspective over another.
Yes, the US tends to back Israel, but where does dropping aid to Gaza fall into this? It goes against the narrative this website has set and that isn't explicitly stated. That means the website is favoring one perspective only while not telling the entire story.
The user CountCorvinus?
Yes, the US tends to back Israel, but where does dropping aid to Gaza fall into this? It goes against the narrative this website has set and that isn't explicitly stated. That means the website is favoring one perspective only while not telling the entire story.https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/b/b45201c8.jpg
It shouldnt be that hard to answer: bias leads to lying, being dishonest, misleading, etc. in support of that bias.
Just look at what TC is doing. He is claiming that the site is simply biased against genocide and even heavily implying that someone who questioned him and his topic is supporting genocide.
My pronouns are They/Them.
What's an example of a bias not being negative?I'm confused what you're asking. I'll answer what my gut thinks you're asking.
Now answer my questions.
you are doing a fantastic job at that with this hard black and white stance.
I'm confused what you're asking. I'll answer what my gut thinks you're asking.
A bias is an inclination toward anything. If I said I had a positive bias for pizza that would mean a negative bias however slight towards other fast food.
So I don't think there's a way to have a positive bias without also having a negative bias.
Now answer my questions.
Screw your questions. You post in bad faith, nobody should ever take you seriously.I've answered many questions, what is actually bad faith is not fairly answering questions back.
I've answered many questions, what is actually bad faith is not fairly answering questions back.
I'm confused what you're asking. I'll answer what my gut thinks you're asking.Pizza, really? Nah, bias is a disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing, usually in a way that is, inaccurate, closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair.
A bias is an inclination toward anything. If I said I had a positive bias for pizza that would mean a negative bias however slight towards other fast food.
So I don't think there's a way to have a positive bias without also having a negative bias.
Now answer my questions.