The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Bad bot. If all you do is rate the bias of well known sources, then you’re even more useless than I thought.
Much as I dislike Vance and like Walz, I don’t care for sources like this. While the article seems okay, the site is questionable.
The home page for population.fyi is nothing but a generic image, the message “population.fyi - analysis, research summaries, and definitions on population dynamics, housing, and health provided by population.news”, and a text box for your email address and a subscribe button.
The whois information for the site is basically empty. The only fields about the ownership that are populated are “Registrant Country: CA” and “Registrant State/Province: ON”. All the other fields say: “REDACTED FOR PRIVACY”. There’s no information about who owns the site nor any contact information at all other than for the registrar, Tucows. The whois information for population.news is the same.
It’s no wonder that MBFC couldn’t find anything on the site. I’m guessing it’s a propaganda pipe for the left.
Talk about distractions lol
Wvance is a cuck and walz has a good record but both of these clowns are diversions policy wise.
Fake news keeps pumping these clowns as if they set policy 🤡
What you’re seeing are electoral platforms, the claims and goals made by folks running for the chance to actually implement policy changes they deem fit.
Dismissal of candidates’ views and policy habits is basically the same as dismissing the vital importance of voting.
Voting is very important to deny the two party regime legitimacy.
