Why are there no fossils for the 'missing link' that connects our ancestors with other species? Is this a misconception or is there another explanation?

For context:

Cheers.

Human evolution is complex because populations of our ancestors ran around all over the planet for millions of years. The question that raises is the complex issue of finding precise fossils that can clarify ** exactly ** which pre-humans gave literal birth to Homo sapiens. That is not required, however, for our basic understanding. ‘Missing link’ is a rotten term, by the way.

What is price of the "liberal celebrities" e.g. Bill Maher, Seth Meyers, Jon Stewart, Trevor Noah, Jimmy Kimmel, Desi Lydic etc. to join the great MAGA movement like Stephen Colbert who wanted to European ambassadorship to turn back on "the Left"?

Some pre-human populations apparently even co-existed for more than a million years, such as Homo habilis and some Australopithecines. Neanderthals and Homo sapiens and Denisovans coexisted in different regions, too, and modern humans comingled with Neanderthals for a while. Sexy story, that.

Which ancestors do you need connections for? Modern Homo sapiens to Homo erectus, or something earlier? Which part of our family tree is not clear at a basic level??

It’s complicated, and the story seems likely to get *more* complicated as we find more good fossils.

Why do only ugly women like me on Tinder? Is it because I'm an ugly man?

===> I wouldn’t call that a ‘missing link’ problem because it is clear that pre-humans did indeed give rise to modern humans. In that sense there are no missing links, we would just always like to find more for the sake of detail and clarity.