A new report from the Media Research Center shows that the media’s lack of coverage and big tech’s suppression of certain issues and scandals surrounding Democratic Presidential Nominee Joe Biden could have cost President Donald Trump the election.
The survey results report that 17 percent of Biden voters would not have voted for the Biden-Harris presidential ticket if they had known about at least one of the eight news stories that were suppressed by big tech and mainstream media outlets.
[…]The survey, conducted online by The Polling Company with a +/- 2.34 percent margin of error at a 95 percent confidence interval, asked 1,750 Biden voters living in seven swing states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) if they were aware of certain issues surrounding Biden, his family, and some of the Trump administration’s successes.
Some of these topics include former Biden staffer Tara Reade and her sexual assault allegations against Biden, the Hunter Biden scandal, VP Nominee Kamala Harris’s extreme liberal voting record in the Senate, the U.S.’s economic jump in the third quarter, millions of jobs added, America’s energy independence, Operation Warp Speed successes, and Trump’s facilitation of multiple peace deals in the Middle East.
[…]Over a quarter of Biden voters said they didn’t know Sen. Harris had the most liberal voting record in the Senate in 2019, and nearly half of all Biden voters polled, 49 percent, said they were unaware of the U.S.’s remarkable economic recovery in the third quarter, doubling the previous record.
I blogged about most of those things here, but people were depending on the far left news media and Big Tech to keep them informed.
I have a conundrum. I have met someone great. We have been on 6 wonderful dates over two weeks. Even if he’s not my “usual type” I’ve been open to trying something new and seeing where this goes (shout out to my therapist). My usual type is masculine bad boys, and obviously that hasn’t worked out well for me – usually their emotional immaturity or ego makes relationship impossible and leaves me emotionally shattered.
This time, I’ve met a handsome, extremely kind man, who is driven in his career, and really likes me. I really enjoy spending time with him too, we can talk for hours, and there is chemistry (though not the ‘fire’ that I’m usually used to… more of a slow burn, but it’s definitely there).
When we first kissed and when we first started dating I was wondering if he wasn’t super attracted to me… he seemed hesitant or holding back on our first kiss. Our kisses have improved greatly but I can’t shake the feeling that he lacks a bit of confidence. I don’t feel confident that he would… be assertive in a situation requiring it or stand up for me it I needed it (dumb example I know). Sometimes I wonder if his gentleness is actually meekness, and one thing I desire from a partner is a feeling of protection.
I feel like a total a**hole because I’m used to dating… a**holes, mistaking masculinity and assertiveness for confidence. My dad is kind of that way, and I’ve seen how it’s been difficult in my parents marriage. I’ve fallen into traps of dating assertive people who are not actually confident but overcompensate for their insecurities by being d*cks. So I feel caught – knowing that this hasn’t worked for me in the past, but feeling like something is missing here.
I want to keep dating him to explore what’s there, and because I genuinely like him. I feel safe and cared around him, and we have a lot in common. He is 100% husband material. He’s already starting to ask me to meet his friends but I feel like I need to get to know him more and clear this one doubt. I know I have my own fears of intimacy and commitment too that factor in here.
Sincerely, a**hole lover
TLDR, Perfect man I’m dating lacks confidence, maybe. Not sure if this something that can be resolved or if I should move on?
She seems to be concerned that this man is lacking confidence, because he is not a bad boy. What’s a bad boy? A bad boy is a man who has certain physical features and mannerisms which are attractive to women, but he won’t commit to marry any woman. And many women mistake the presence of these features and mannerisms as being signs of “masculinity”.
Here’s a study about it from Evolutionary Psychological Science, reported by PsyPost:
Men with psychopathic traits tend to create favorable impressions on women, according to a new study published in Evolutionary Psychological Science. The findings indicate that psychopathy may include features that make men appear as more attractive romantic partners despite having a reduced interest in committed relationships.
“Psychopathy as a way of describing some people — mostly men — who have specific personality and behavioral tendencies has led to some enigmatic and quite frankly alarming findings from prisons, many of which had sexual and romantic consequences,” said study author Kristopher Brazil (@brazkris), a PhD candidate at Brock University.
“For instance, clinicians and psychologists working in prison settings have long known that inmates with more psychopathic features tenaciously try (i.e., are preoccupied with sex) and often succeed (i.e., must offer some attractive qualities, even if faked) at seducing prison staff, including clinical staff supposedly equipped with the tools to not be subverted by manipulation and charm that psychopathic men deploy.”
“Yet these individuals were some of the most violent and disruptive individuals in the institutions they were housed. The enigma of presenting such a positive image of themselves successfully despite their negative effect on others is what strongly influenced our ideas for this study,” Brazil told PsyPost.
[…]Brazil and his colleagues found that psychopathy was positively related to both men’s social intelligence and favorable attitudes towards casual sex. They also found that women’s ratings tended to be more favorable to men with more psychopathic traits — even after controlling for physical attractiveness ratings.
“Psychopathic men have a personality style that makes them appear attractive to women in dating encounters. This may be because they are extra confident or feel at ease or know exactly what to say to get the attention of women,” Brazil told PsyPost.
In the past, women evaluated men for marriage, because they grew up in homes with fathers and mothers. They watched their fathers love their mothers, and hold them accountable for acting selfishly. They saw their fathers acting like husbands, and they chose men who would make good husbands.
Today, thanks to feminism, any focusing on marriage and preferring men suited for marriage is seen as sexist. What’s left? What’s left is chasing the bad boys. The psychopaths. And if it doesn’t work out, well – that’s what big government is for.
More than 20,000 ab5entee ba11ots in Pennsy1vania have impossible return dates and another more than 80,000 have return dates that raise questions, according to a researcher’s analysis of the state’s vot3r database.
Over 51,000 ba11ots were marked as returned just a day after they were sent out—an extraordinary speed, given U.S. Postal Service (USPS) delivery times, while nearly 35,000 were returned on the same day they were mailed out. Another more than 23,000 have a return date earlier than the sent date. More than 9,000 have no sent date.
The state’s vot3r records are being scrutinized as President Donald Trump is challenging the results of the presidential e1ection in Pennsy1vania and other states where his opponent, former Vice President Joe Bid3n, holds a tight lead. The Trump campaign is alleging that invalid ba11ots have been counted for Democrat5 and valid ba11ots for Repub1icans were thrown away.
The analysis of the publicly available data was conducted by a data researcher who submitted it first to the Chinese-language edition of The Epoch Times. The researcher, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he consulted about the matter with several USPS field engineers, who said the return dates shown in the database are “impossible.”
The dataset made public by Pennsy1vania’s secretary of state was last updated on Nov. 10, and “describes a current state of mail ba11ot requests for the 2020 General e1ection.” The data includes the mailed-out and return dates.
In Pennsy1vania, vot3rs must request a ba11ot, which is sent to them via USPS. The vot3r then fills out the document and sends it back via mail or returns it in person. The process usually takes several days or even weeks, depending on the speed of delivery and response by the vot3r.
This year, Pennsy1vania also allowed vot3rs to “request, receive, mark and cast your mail-in or ab5entee ba11ot all in one visit to your county e1ection office or other designated location.” That may explain the ba11ots with no sent date—they may have been received and cast in person.
While it could also explain the ba11ots with the same sent and returned date, that appears to clash with the description of the database, which says the sent date is “the date the county confirmed the application to queue a ba11ot label to mail the ba11ot materials to the vot3r.”
One of the leading national LGBT activist organizations is urging presumptive President-elect Joe Biden and his administration to advance policies that would strip Christian colleges that uphold rules and stances that oppose homosexuality of their accreditation.
The request was part of the Human Rights Campaign’s “Blueprint for Positive Change,” a recent document which offers 85 policy and legislative recommendations for a potential Biden administration. The document comes as Biden pledged throughout his 2020 campaign to advance “LGBT equality” in the U.S. and around the world.
One of the recommendations proposes the elimination of nondiscrimination exemptions for religious colleges if the institutions support biblical definitions of marriage or fail to offer “scientific curriculum requirements.”
[…]The document’s list also includes making refusal to hire people because of their LGBT identity illegal, adding a nonbinary option to passports, allowing transgender individuals to serve in the military and forcing faith-based charities to hire LGBT individuals even when it violates their conscience.
I saw a lot of anti-Trump tweets and statements from Southern Baptist leaders and celebrity preachers during Trump’s presidency. They will be happy with Joe Biden as president. They are looking forward to the changes Joe Biden will make. When ethics and religious liberty conflict with the Democrat Party, the Southern Baptist leaders always side with the Democrats.
A high-quality, large-scale D4n1sh study finds no evidence that wearing a face m4sk significantly minimizes people’s risk of contracting C0VID-19. The randomized-control trial found no statistically significant difference in coron4v1rus infection rates between m4sk-wearers and non-m4sk-wearers. In fact, according to the data, m4sk usage may actually increase the likelihood of infection.
“The recommendation to wear surgical m4sks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general m4sk use,” the authors summarized their results.
While m4sk-wearing has been advertised by health officials all around the world, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr. Anthony F4uci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to prevent the spread of the coron4v1rus, the Danish researchers found that there was no statistically significant difference between wearing a m4sk or not in preventing people from contracting C0VID-19.
“In the third post hoc analysis, which investigated constellations of patient characteristics, we did not find a subgroup where face m4sks were effective at conventional levels of statistical significance,” researchers found.
The randomized-control trial, which is considered the “gold-standard” design for scientific research, had a large sample size of more than 6,000 people. Most studies conducted on various kinds of face m4sks against various coron4v1ruses are neither randomized, controlled trials nor conducted regarding the specific virus currently affecting the world.
This clinical trial was conducted from April through June in Denmark, a largely unm4sked area with government recommendations only to social distance and wash hands frequently as the country began to reopen in May. Roughly half of the 6,024 participants, 4,862 of whom completed the study, were randomly assigned to wear surgical m4sks “outside the home among other persons together” while the other half continued to operate in public without a m4sk.
Note: this study doesn’t not prove that masks don’t protect OTHERS from people who have the virus. That was not the topic of this study. And that would also be hard to measure in any case.