This graphic is nice enough to state that it is only based on 1901 respondents to an online survey. How many of those respondents could possibly be speaking for Nordstrom employees? Certainly not many. Also, how much does selection bias play a role in this survey?

I like the message, but the statistics likely make this info useless...

Adding more to this. If we assume that the 1901 responses were evenly distributed across the 34 companies mentioned in the graphic, we get about 56 responses per company. That would give a margin of error of +/- 13.1% for the numbers. So, even without any kind of bias, most of these numbers are junk...

We have one $450 Toto and one cheap one from Luxe that currently sells on Amazon for $63. I actually prefer the Luxe because it sprays harder. It just uses the ambient water pressure while the Toto self-pressurizes. I think my wife prefers the Toto because of the other functions like the heated seat and the preheated water.

When I have to poop away from home I feel like a barbarian. I seriously miss the bidets when I travel or have to poop at work.

Again, let me preface this by saying that I do not like Trump and think that he is terrible for the country. I'm just saying that he says enough awful shit that we don't need to twist the truth or lie.

Okay, two things here. First, the statement that Trump "cut overtime for millions of Americans as President" has been rated as "Mostly False" by PolitiFact.

PolitiFact ruling: Mostly False. When contacted for comment, the Harris-Walz campaign pointed to news articles showing that former President Barack Obama proposed to extend overtime pay eligibility to more workers, but a judge blocked it in November 2016, just before it was slated to take effect. The Trump administration did not challenge the judge’s ruling and instead set its own overtime rule, which extended overtime pay to millions fewer people than Obama’s rule would have done.

The Obama rule was not in effect at the time Trump took office, so Trump’s administration did not cut an existing benefit.

Second, that's not even what this article is about. This is about him saying the following:

I know a lot about overtime. I hated to give overtime. I hated it. I'd get ... I shouldn't say this ... I'd get other people in. I wouldn't pay. I hated it.

So, what does he say there? He hated paying overtime so he would bring in new people to take over the work. He didn't stiff them. He sent them home after working a full shift and brought in new people to take over.

Now, he may have (probably did) stiff workers in other ways. This is not evidence of that.

I know that he does screw over employees, but how is that the case in this circumstance? He is sending workers home before they hit overtime and bringing in a different shift of workers. Every business does that. Every business attempts to minimize the amount of overtime that they pay. In fact, that's the point of overtime laws, to disincentivize working employees too many hours.

I'm not defending him as a person. I'm saying this is shitty journalism that just gives him something additional to point at when he says that the media lies about him. We shouldn't be giving him that ammo.

I despise Trump. I want him to lose. This kind of "journalism" needs to die so that the real stories about him don't get buried by half truths and lies. Trump says enough shitty, fashist things that we don't need to twist his words like this.

Trump said that he hates paying people overtime so, if they're getting close to overtime, he brings other people in. He does what every business does and implements shifts. He didn't say that he screws people out of overtime pay for time they worked. He avoids overtime pay by brining in a new shift of workers.

How often Trump stiffs his employees and contractors for real is a good story. This story is essentially a lie that attempts to portray Trump badly but really only makes "the left" look bad.

Don't lie and ruin the credibility of left-leaning media. Use the real ammo that Trump drops like bread crumbs everywhere he goes.

Actually, an example of this just popped up. This article states that Trump admitted to stiffing his employees by not paying overtime. If you listen to the video at the bottom, though, he said that he hates paying overtime and would "get different people in".

He didn't require people to work, then fail to pay them overtime. He would send the workers home and bring in a new shift.

I wouldn't call that stiffing his employees. I wouldn't even call that controversial. This article twists Trump's words to make up a story about him rather than focus on the very real threat that he poses. It dilutes the negative press against him and makes it look like the left are liars, just out to get Trump.

This kind of journalism needs to die. Trump is an awful human being and says plenty of awful stuff. We don't need to bend the truth or lie about him. We just need to report the actual shitty stiff he says.

I don't have anything at my fingertips. I thought I had some comments on articles that bothered me in that way, but maybe I never finished those comments. I had problems with lemmy not letting me post with my vpn turned on...

I've had several times recently where I felt that an article was making a mountain of a mole hill to make Trump look worse. I wrote, but apparently didn't post, comments saying, effectively, "Trump makes himself look bad enough without exaggerating or lying. Tell the truth about what he says and he looks like a fascist maniac. Exaggerate and you make people wonder if you're always stretching the truth.

Normally when I see a headline like this it is taking Trump out of context or giving a very uncharitable take on what he said. Every once in a while, though, what he said is truly as ad as the headline makes it sound. This is one of those times.

He is literally calling for either The Purge or Kristallnacht! This man is calling for mass murder as a way to solve crime.

I'm not looking forward to the day that Colorado loses Kyle but I am certainly looking forward to the day that he gets to moderate a presidential debate. Kyle is amazing.

I think they are clarifying due to what has happened with Ubisoft. They're also using it as an opportunity to spread the word farther that they won't do the same thing.

Can you recommend some models to try?