Can you give a good source or two please?

larsiusprime had a good analysis [0] that gets into some of the details.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28793851

He didn't say which subset of universities he saw that statistic for. The group of "most liberal universities in the country" includes what, all of the most wealthy and important ones? It's certainly a reasonable subset to consider. The 98% figure is pretty close here (for the group as a whole, not just one like you claim).

You need stronger evidence to attack someone like that, and you don't have it, partially because we don't even know what exactly the scope of the claim was. You could certainly criticize the vagueness of the statement without being toxic.

Your source shows just how strongly anti-vax Biden was, making the case that the vaccine can't be trusted because of political influence. Since Biden can't give us any credible assurances that politics aren't involved in FDA approval or CDC recommendations, nor can he address his own concerns about the vaccine's development being politicized, then, by his argument, the American people should not have confidence.

> The following week, Biden restated his concern about politics intervening in vaccine development:

> "Americans have had to endure President Trump’s incompetence and dishonesty, when it comes to testing and personal protective equipment. We can’t afford to repeat those fiascos when it comes to a vaccine. … Let me be clear: I trust vaccines, I trust scientists, but I don’t trust Donald Trump, and at this moment, the American people can’t either. Last week, Senator Harris and I laid out three questions this administration’s going to have to answer to assure the American people that politics will not play a role whatsoever in the vaccine process. If Donald Trump can’t give answers and the administration can’t give answers to these three questions, the American people should not have confidence."

PolitiFact is one of the most biased outlets I've seen.

> When exploring the makeup of Ivy League institutions and universities in New England, results, such as the case with Brown University, were as high as 60:1 in favor of registered Democrats among professors.

As chuckee linked a bit down the page:

[0] https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/02/study_liberalto...

If you want to know "normal" output, you'll find that wind is very inconsistent. (I probably did find the mean at some point, but I don't have it at hand, and honestly don't feel that it matters). Wind is not "supposed" to carry the winter load, but ERCOT's record day for wind generation was set in February. Investors don't want to build power plants that could serve the expected winter load but will bleed money when wind has a good winter. Texas has built nothing but wind and solar for years because that's where all the profit is. ("Nothing but wind and solar for years" is according to D'Andrea's leaked phone call that got him fired, but I don't doubt his account of his own crony capitalism).

Wind is not "supposed" to be at fault for outages because it's expected to drop to as little as 1% output for short periods, but the reality is that we have built a power grid that does rely on wind. Our population is increasing dramatically, but we are not building any more reliable capacity because it's unprofitable compared to its subsidized competitors.

I'm happy that Texas is a world leader in wind generation, but we need a reality check. We have to build reliable capacity too. Winterization will help, but it's not going to do a thing to fix our problems during the spring and summer. We actually need more than that, because we occasionally have winter demand that matches peak summer demand. If we keep building so much wind, that will never happen unless wind happens to have a record winter in just the right year.

[0] http://www.ercot.com/gridinfo/generation/windandsolar

Maybe we tolerate it because fixing it is politically impossible.

[0] http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/lists/181766/IntGenbyFuel20...

"Article 36. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of religious belief..."

"Article 37. The freedom of person of citizens of the People's Republic of China is inviolable..."

"Article 49. Marriage, the family, and mother and child are protected by the state..."

Just meaningless words on a page. To be completely fair, the text does imply that the above isn't worth a wooden nickel in practice:

"Article 51. The exercise by citizens of the People's Republic of China of their freedoms and rights may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society and of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens."

The European Convention on Human Rights has a similar clause (which you quoted) that allows the state to eliminate one's rights "for the protection of health or morals". It seems that "human rights" are mainly there to make the state seem legitimate. They "protect" humans against the state for exactly as long as the state allows.

Plano, like many Texas cities, is racially diverse, while Irvine has hardly any black population at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irvine,_California#Demographic...

> It is highly significant that—after more than three years of stonewalling and refusing to answer any questions or respond to a single demand—CEO Pichai has admitted that the technology firm controlling nearly 90 percent of worldwide search traffic has been suppressing WSWS content all along.

Political censorship is equally harmful whether done by the government or by a megacorp. When the megacorp becomes more powerful than government, it's time to either break them up or make them a public utility.

The institutions could start telling the truth once in a while. Statements like "27 police officers injured during largely peaceful anti-racism protests in London" (BBC) and "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" (CNN) with the city burning down in the background account for why trust in media is rapidly approaching zero. It makes it clear that the violence and devastation is just a curiosity to the upper-class elites that control these institutions, but normal people who actually have to live with aftermath are not amused.

Fauci is another huge contributor. First don't wear masks, they can actually hurt. Then you have to wear masks. Now wear two or three! But earlier he was ridiculing people who wore multiple masks. Along with all the knowingly false statements about how long lockdowns would last. Clearly Fauci should not be allowed to speak in public, but unfortunately the blast radius of his mistakes extends beyond him to the government and media institutions that defend him and amplified his misinformation.