Slashdot Mirror

"Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation...we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton." -James Comey, Director FBI, Sunday, November 6

http://www.npr.org/sections/th...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/06/...

You wouldn't know it from the SJWs, but you can walk a gay lesbian wearing a hijab through the whitest white town and the worst they might experience is a short chat with local law enforcement

Last I heard, Louisiana was part of the USA. As was New York City, and Charlotte, NC

To bring this thread full-circle, just because you have the privilege of being a Cis White guy so you don't ever have to experience that stuff, doesn't mean it isn't happening to people.

After examining results in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin computer scientists have discovered Clinton averaged 7% worse in counties with e voting machines vs. counties with only paper or optical scan ballots.

Where's that come from? A CNN article which doesn't provide a citation to anything which supports that claim, not even NYmag, which seems to be the original source for it. That article is more specific, saying

The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots.

Going further, the one name given in both articles, J. Alex Halderman, in the post at the other link in the summary, says the article was inaccurate:

You may have read at NYMag... That article, which includes somebody else's description of my views, incorrectly describes the reasons manually checking ballots is an essential security safeguard (and includes some incorrect numbers, to boot).

... and goes on to give reasons for checking ballots, with absolutely no mention of the statistical anomalies claimed.

Furthermore, examining the above "7%" claim, the Halderman article has a map which shows that all counties in Michigan and Wisconsin use paper ballots. So, there can be no basis for the claim that there's a difference between electronic and paper ballot counties in Wisconsin (or Michigan)!

And, no info on methodology back up the claim - you can't directly compare two different counties in two different states (or even the same state) and expect them to have equivalent vote proportions. If such comparisons were made, were they against previous votes in the same counties? How are they comparing votes in Pennsylvania counties with electronic voting against Michigan and Wisconsin counties? Or are they just using a difference between polls and actual vote totals? Seems the polls were wrong in lots of places, and to try and base any statistical claims on them seems to be a case of garbage-in-garbage-out.

Finally, if as stated the concern is with electronic voting machines, why would they call for recounts in Michigan and Wisconsin, which use paper ballots?

It just defies logic and sense. Is this just fake news which has found its way onto CNN via NYMag?

Well, not giving a defeat speech is a little out of "best standard".

Oh really..I suppose the liberal media just staged this whole event then?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/...

The tradition is to give a concession speech as soon as practical after it is clear you have lost. In Clinton's case, it was clear she had lost at 1:35am ET when Pennsylvania was called for Trump making it virtually impossible for her to win, but the fate was sealed at 2:30am when Wisconsin was called for Trump giving him the 270+ needed. What happened though is at 2:07am Podesta came out and told the crowd "Let’s get these votes counted and let’s bring this home” despite Trump’s victory being all but certain and only one state call away, and told the crowd to go home and there would be no speech that night. It is reported that Clinton called and congratulated Trump at or before 2:35am, just half an hour later, but still she did not offer any public speech, either in person or even by phone, until 11:40am the next morning (the speech your link is to), over nine hours after the election was called by all the major news outlets.

I think that excessive delay is what poster was referring to. Of course, there have been reports that she was not in any reasonable shape to appear publicly by that time in the morning so it may have been more of a need to hide rather than a refusal to speak.

TOTALLY AGREE. As an ex-military NCO with top secret security clearance - requiring quarterly briefings and signed documents attesting to your understanding of the responsibilities and penalties - I am fully aware of the offenses and penalties for abridging the classified document handling procedures.
INTENT is NOT a requirement, only that it HAPPENED by the person's personal choice and their own volition.
THIS, along with being a well-entrenched part of the 'establishment', is what cost "Hillary - dillary - can't touch me - I'm a politician, a lawyer, and I'm rich" the election, even though the choice was an agonizing one of the 'known devil' vs the 'perceived devil'.

Take a trip down memory lane with the following: (some pro, many con'vict')
http://rense.com/general80/hop...
http://www.wnd.com/2000/04/447...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
https://peterfrancisgeracilaw....
https://www.truthorfiction.com...
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/20/...
http://www.politico.com/story/...
http://conservativeamerican.or...
http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

Americans have made their choice, whether through the electoral college or the basic raw vote count - - - being tilted a bit in Hillary's favor, but with the small margin still showing an inherent distrust of the entrenched 2-party system - either side is the same, just a bit different on the talking points - - - basically, the same old shit !

News reports already seem to indicate that president-elect Trump is willing to accept new information and alter his 'campaign promises __LOL__ ' in order to get down to the actual business of running the country.

Well, not giving a defeat speech is a little out of "best standard".

Oh really..I suppose the liberal media just staged this whole event then?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/...

Well, thanks for that. I must admit that is uncool on HuffPo's part. Uncool, but accurate.

But you know what's uncool and often inaccurate? Breitbart:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/1...
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2...

Ethics reform - five year ban on administration officials becoming lobbyists, can never lobby for foreign nations. I wonder how cozy corporations are to YOUR government...

4) Trump has already had a lobbyist in the employ of a foreign government sit in on one of his classified breifings. On the bright side, his administration is off to an amazingly fast start. Most administrations have to work up to this level of corruption over years.

This is the same CNN site that declared math is racist ...fake news.

I wonder. Is this misrepresentation or stupidity? The article is very clear what it's talking about. If we have mathematical models making judgements of people based on correlating various factors then there can be unfair bias against people. A good person who lives in a bad area may be assessed as bad. A bad person from a good area will likely be assessed as good.

ordinarily I'd think that it's a lack of education (educated people know that headlines tend to be sensational since they want people to read the article) and ignorance. However the actual headline is "Math is racist: How data is driving inequality". In which case the irony of putting "fake news" in a comment which is clearly a "fake accusation" is quite astounding.

This is the same CNN site that declared math is racist ...fake news.

Reading only headlines tends to exacerbate your ignorance. Reading less than half a headline is further debilitating to understanding.

The other 62.5% of the headline denotes common corporate practices are compounding negative outcomes for disadvantaged populations. The article itself delivers the nuance unavailable in headlines to support the basic thesis on the misuse of data as put forth by a Harvard-educated subject matter expert with a Ph. D. in mathematics.

Poorly written headlines are commonplace enough that educated readers generally learn to RTFA before popping off about news.

This is the same CNN site that declared math is racist

...fake news.

Actually, Mr. Trump did say that he couldn't release his taxes until the audit was complete and then changed the story when it was pointed out from multiple sources that he could.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/2...

Many of the "right wing hate crime" hoaxes have been debunked.

Meanwhile, in many incidents people have been arrested for attacking Trump supporters or committing property crimes during anti-Trump riots.

You are part of the fake news problem.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/2...

This single story sums up CNN: Math is racist. [cnn.com]

So, first, you're misrepresenting the title, which is: Math is racist: How data is driving inequality

What about the story is bullshit? I might agree that the title is over-the-top and if all you do is scan the first 15 characters of story titles, then you might have a point. But deliberately misrepresenting the title in order to excoriate CNN is part of the problem.

> If he was from a country where terrorists originate

He is british.
And the only "fake news" here is that CNN said it was because of trump.

> Not because he's muslim, because he's a citizen from an area where combatants live.

You are so transparent.

This single story sums up CNN: Math is racist.

With that single story a national of deplorables can trivially take CNN off the credible list. But that isn't the only story. Its been a barrage of bullshit for years and years now.

You can easily find complete bullshit stories like this coming out of every single major news outlet, be it FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS, BBC, RT, and even PBS and NPR.

Thats it. They have taken credibility off the table so all thats left is pushing paid-for narratives and personal biases. Its really as simple as that w.r.t. the media.

I just googled the only specific things you listed.

I found this story. They asked Trump directly, and he didn't seem to have a problem with that interpretation of what he said.

As for the Macy's story, it looks like CNN wasn't the only news outlet to post that news.

"Volkswagen sales plunge on emissions scandal"

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/13/news/companies/volkswagen-sales-emission-scandal/

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

Look at the vile hatred that was spewed from one side in particular.

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

The vast majority of people on either side are completely peaceful. But when you look at the retoric that was spewed by one candidate in particular, it's not hard to see why people are angry.

Also, what happened to the whole "rigged election" thing? Seems like the ol' Trumpster clammed up on that subject right around November 8th, didn't he?

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...

Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.

The bulk of the attacks I've heard about have been done to Trump supporters.

You have remarkably selective hearing.

You have remarkably little evidence cited.

The multiple attacks on Trump supporters are well-documented and available to anyone who searches Google/YouTube. Many were at the direction of Robert Creamer, a Democrat Party operative and husband of Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/...

Leftists are always the violent ones because by the very nature of their ideology, they are unable to win sufficient voluntary support through an open marketplace of ideas so they must spy on people, propagandize, censor, silence, and use violence and the threat of violence to attain and keep power.

Yes he resigned. But as explained in Top US intelligence official: I submitted my resignation (and probably elsewhere)

All members of an outgoing administration must submit a resignation at some point.

But every news outlet and internet troll seems to be falling over themselves to shout to the world that he resigned, as if this event actually means something.

Sure you could probably make a case for all sorts of things happening to him after he is out. But for fucks sake, his resignation is expected and required.

Read this and notice the GBP did fall horribly.

"You're very good at only picking and choosing articles that back up your prejudices."

Way to provide a list of actual violence against others for their beliefs. Oh wait. You provided a single link that includes just one physical attack. The rest talk about burning Obama in effigy -- something that protesters have been doing in the US since before we were the US.

Come back and try again when you have a bakers dozen. I only listed the highlights.

How about the crazy Colorado guy who shot up a theater? He was a nut but the left had a crazy hissy fit about this Colorado right-wing gun freak..
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/19/...
Oh wait... he wasn't from CO -- he was from Berkeley. Yes, he was a nut, but the left wanted to paint him as a right wing gun nut rather than from one of the most liberal locations in the US.

Or how about those silly republicans who slashed the tires of helpless democrats?
http://articles.chicagotribune...
Oh wait... it was DEMOCRATS slashing the tires of republicans to prevent them getting to the polls!

Want some more?

when he back pedaled on that. See here. Specifically this part:

But he, Vice President-elect Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan have provided some insights into how Republicans would handle the thorny issue of insuring the sick.

They would set up a two-track system: one for those who maintain continuous coverage and one for those who don't. And they would replace the subsidies with a tax credit or deduction to help people pay their premiums.

This is exactly how it was when I was a kid. Any gap in coverage and you're screwed. Tax subsidies are worthless to someone who's chronically ill. You've probably just lost your job. Best case you're on FMLA with no money coming in to pay for anything. Tax cuts don't help when there's no income to tax.

You are retarded - http://time.com/4569129/racist... and http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/10/... which shows Trump made a feeble attempt to defuse it but hasn't made any serious efforts.

Sorry to be the one to have to inform you of this, but this is not just about bathrooms. Sure, bathrooms are all you hear about on the news, because that's how it's framed. No one really cares the sex of the person in the stall next to you. Opinions change when you start talking about locker rooms, showers, and other facilities, especially when these facilities are used by children.

Sexual identity issues and bathrooms do not equal boys and girls in school showering together. You're literally making that up.
This is from the Charlotte non-discrimination ordinance:
"A place of public accommodation may not refuse to provide the full and equal enjoyment of its facilities based on a protected characteristic, such as gender identity and gender expression. Restrooms, locker rooms, and other changing facilities are covered by the ordinance."

Here is the source:
http://charlottenc.gov/NonDisc...

Oh, but you said boys and girls. OK. Let's look at what the Obama administration wants:
"Schools should let transgender students use bathrooms, locker rooms and other sex-segregated facilities consistent with their gender identity, according to the guidance." ...
"The letter does not carry the force of law but the message was clear: Fall in line or face loss of federal funding."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/12/...

So you're just completely ignoring the Obama shooting targets that suddenly got popular both times he got elected, not to mention the people who actually hanged and burned his likeness hundreds of times, during the widespread protests?

A few 'interesting' news clips over the last two election cycles about violence targeted at people for their opinions:

A Thousand Oaks man got his finger bitten off by someone who didn't like the Anti-Obamacare Protesters.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...

Democrat tried to run down Republican with his car.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOL...

Left wing nut flies plain in to building.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02...
(interesting to note that he was 'originally' reported as a right-wing nut because... Texas. After his "note" was found, it was clear he was a left wing nut)

Man beaten and robbed by democrat thugs because he supports Trump.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/poli...

High school girl attacked for supporting Trump:
http://nbc4i.com/2016/11/11/vi...

To be fair, there were also these bits:

Muslim women in CA and LA attacked by Trump supporters.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article...
Oh wait... no witnesses or injuries -- and one admits to lying about it entirely and is going to be charged for filing a false police report.

Trump supporters paint "Die Blacks Die" during protest:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016... (foxnews, but associated press provided).
Oh wait... it said "Die whites die". So silly of me.

How quickly people forget.

Yes... and how willingly they ignore what's under their nose...

So you're just completely ignoring the Obama shooting targets that suddenly got popular both times he got elected, not to mention the people who actually hanged and burned his likeness hundreds of times, during the widespread protests?

A few 'interesting' news clips over the last two election cycles about violence targeted at people for their opinions:

A Thousand Oaks man got his finger bitten off by someone who didn't like the Anti-Obamacare Protesters.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...

Democrat tried to run down Republican with his car.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOL...

Left wing nut flies plain in to building.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02...
(interesting to note that he was 'originally' reported as a right-wing nut because... Texas. After his "note" was found, it was clear he was a left wing nut)

Man beaten and robbed by democrat thugs because he supports Trump.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/poli...

High school girl attacked for supporting Trump:
http://nbc4i.com/2016/11/11/vi...

To be fair, there were also these bits:

Muslim women in CA and LA attacked by Trump supporters.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article...
Oh wait... no witnesses or injuries -- and one admits to lying about it entirely and is going to be charged for filing a false police report.

Trump supporters paint "Die Blacks Die" during protest:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016... (foxnews, but associated press provided).
Oh wait... it said "Die whites die". So silly of me.

How quickly people forget.

Yes... and how willingly they ignore what's under their nose...

Protesting and terrorism are two very different things. Protesting is what the "left" generally does. Sure, some bad actors break windows and such, but rarely are people killed. The "right" murders and incites terrorism. Very different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

So, whine about protesting all you want. That's the foundation of this country (both protesting and whining). But keep ignoring domestic terrorism at your own peril.

So, put this scumbag in jail so he can continue to surround himself with like minded people.

Such as this guy? Or maybe you meant this guy. Perhaps this guy.

Please tell us oh enlightened one how it's only the left which surrounds itself with like minded people and considers anyone who doesn't think like they do the enemy when day in and day out it is Republicans who use the word enemy to describe people within their own party who didn't back him?

Vent all you want but your words ring hollow when for the last eight years all we've heard is how bad things are, how horrible this president has been, how he should be impeached (for doing his job), and all the other vitriol cast upon him almost solely because of his race, yet none of that falls within your myopic view only the "left" being out of touch. If things are so bad then why suddenly, when not a single thing has changed in the last week, are Republicans suddenly saying the economy is doing well and there are no problems?

Because in a Republican's world if you don't bow down to your leader, if you don't blindly follow the leader, if you don't think like the leader, you're an enemy. Wouldn't want to open a Republican's hypocritical and bigoted mind by listening to others who don't agree, now would we?

Does this count for something?

No, i'm refering to Chalabi aka Curveball.

Or the documents experts said were forged and shouldn't have fooled anyone? linky

Which can only mean the CIA is inept...or wanted a particular outcome

of course the biggest example is the multitude of subsequent 'explanations' for why we went into Iraq. i.e. it totally wasn't the WMD.

that would have identified fake or hoax news stories, but disproportionately impacted right-wing news sites

Which means those right-wing "news" sites were putting out fake stories. What's the problem? An algorithm doesn't determine what party a comment is affiliated with, it only determines the veracity of the comment.

But remember, Zuckerberg laughed about FB having an impact on the election. Because that's totally crazy.

Then again, based on this posting, it appears Zuckerberg was lying about FB being introspective in regards to fake news and the election.

Also rust belt didn't vote for Trump, rich white people did.

> They voted Trump because they were fooled by promises he has already broken

No, they voted Trump because they are either racists or chill with the racism.
Trump lost the working class vote. He only beat Clinton with people earning more than $50K/year.

To be fair, we built lots of roads and schools in Afghanistan -- but by not committing sufficient resources to wipe out the Taliban, we allowed the Taliban to
- place thousands of IEDs, making many of those roads impassable
- throw acid at schoolgirls, making many of those schools a shadow of what they could be

Libya was a huge mistake. Gaddafi's dictatorship had become much more benevolent in the later years, and if this report is accurate -- Colonel Gaddafi 'killed by bayonet stab to the anus' -- his demise was a war crime.

Well, that's certainly a matter of opinion. But regardless, Mashiki wasn't comparing Obama and Trump, he was comparing people in general (I suppose especially US citizens). Read what he said: "...were _people_ so rabidly insane" (emphasis added). He's presumably talking about the protests against the election, not about Obama or Trump themselves. (He also talks about Hilary Clinton.)

So ok, let's say DogDude got off the rails a bit, should we then go back and question Mashiki's claims a bit?

Well, Mashiki was talking about people not being so rabidly insane after Obama's election and relection. Ahem. That's a falsehood too, there's plenty of rabidly insane comments from those days. Even the Donald himself. Oh well, he deleted them. I guess they never happened.

I say many of these people were rabidly insane. Insofar as it is a figurative language, not a clinical diagnosis, but I think we know that.

It's like the Nazi comparisons which people on Fox never made. Or how there was no racism before Obama. (Then there's how she's wrong about the schools and neighborhoods shot up, and so forth.)

I'll grant the chair business wasn't entirely crazy. It raised flags with me, but ok, I'll let you just pass him off as Hollywood loony, not crazy.

And do note, I've not gone into the depths too far. This is not comprehensive, it is just enough to show that some people did go off the deep end. And if you look at the other comments, you will see, that they deny any, any craziness at all.

Of course, I'll say that the 70% who believe America is going in the wrong direction, unsourced though that is, would just as well cover people who think Trump being nominated, and winning as anything else. So they could be right. But of course, it's not sourced, so no idea what was truly being polled.

This, today, from US Gov. I saw something previously, an offhand remark by Peskov, but I've been unable to find it again. So this is all I can offer. Sorry.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/...

Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, first made her self-described "confession" in a Washington Post column on Thursday. Since it published, she told Costello, she has received a torrent of abuse on social media. It's a symptom, Nomani insisted, of an increasingly hostile "liberal honor brigade."

And that is what the left doesn't understand... and it is one of the reasons Clinton lost...

Liberals, self-proclaimed "tolerant" people, attack anyone who doesn't hold their values.

Values like equal rights and innocent until proven guilty? You're right, they should just bend over and take it from the fascists.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/...

Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, first made her self-described "confession" in a Washington Post column on Thursday. Since it published, she told Costello, she has received a torrent of abuse on social media. It's a symptom, Nomani insisted, of an increasingly hostile "liberal honor brigade."

And that is what the left doesn't understand... and it is one of the reasons Clinton lost...

Liberals, self-proclaimed "tolerant" people, attack anyone who doesn't hold their values.

Pence is Trump's impeachment insurance.

Trump's the first republican to hold a pride flag on stage. http://m.washingtontimes.com/n...

On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words “LGBT for Trump” written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way.

He's also said trans could use what ever bathroom they wanted and Caitlyn Jenner took Trump up on bathroom offer. http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/...

The main impetus of Trump supporters is:

A complicated situation that you haven't quite covered as comprehensively as you might have. Silentcoder has already called out some, on his prior replies, but let me add some more, since he seems to be more frustrated over it.

curb ILLEGAL immigration. Have a legal process and stick to it.

That might seem true, but it requires you to ignore all the other things that Trump said. And his supporters CHEERED. Build a WALL! Make MEXICO PAY for it. Deport them ALL! ESPECIALLY the MUSLIMS! This chant didn't come from nowhere.

Now then you add in how Trump brazenly claimed that Hillary, and Liberals in general, want completely open borders, and to invite terrorists into the country, then you have to wonder...how truly nuanced the conversation was.

I mean, if you want to tell me that Trump was over-the-top, hyperbolic, and a more moderate discussion should have been had, I'll respect that from you, but don't tell me that I didn't see what I saw.

Of course, what I'll tell you in that discussion is that we will end up with amnesty, much like Reagan, because the sheer cost of deportations is excessive. There is no way the numbers are going to go easy, even Romney couldn't bring himself to tell that big a lie, so he had to with self-deportation. But the fact is, Trump himself admitted Obama deported millions. He had to lie about nobody talking about it though. That was odd and perplexing. The only truth to that, is that he wasn't talking about it honestly.

Surely you can acknowledge, that Donald Trump has been intemperate, and prone to exaggeration, and that that might be his problem, as it clearly is his own choice, and even when handed the opportunity, he doubles down on his rhetoric, rather than walk it back?

drill for oil at home because
--- jobs here
-- stop sending money to Saudi Arabia which then funnels their money to expand their totalitarian ideology

Because they've watched too many episodes of the Beverly Hillbillies and Dallas, and think it'll cure what ails them.

In reality, there has been an Oil boom already.

Hasn't done that much. And Saudi Arabia has had their totalitarian ideology for decades. They've been receiving US support for just as long.

Trump won't change it. He might claim he will. But he won't. They'll still have oil. Even if we drilled ours right now, at a prodigious rate, regardless of the cost, they'd just have that oil, and we'd not even have potential reserves.

The better way to go, I submit, is to use up their oil first, and maintain ours at some level of stability. This would be a more calculated and considered response, I think. It might not be immediately gratifying, but long-term, it has advantages.

-- (conversely they are not opposed to renewable energy)

This is the same group that had the vapors over Solyndra, blaming Obama, claiming it was crony capitalism, and even to the extent that they denied that the company even made solar panels? That's right, they were so upset, they didn't realize the factory was, in fact, built. That the real problem was CHINESE dumping of their solar panels for cheap.

This is also the same group that freaked out over the incandescent bulb ban, the same group that is so upset over wind that they pretend to be upset over bird deaths. Really, I recall all the people declaring that they'd buy a lifetime supply of bulbs, and that the mercury, the mercury in CFL's was so terrible, and I just saw how Trump wigged out of LED bulbs,

Who uses Facebook most? Young people. Who voted for Clinton? Mostly young voters who use Facebook. If Facebook had any effect, it supported Clinton rather than Trump.

Facebook stats: Age 25 to 34, at 29.7% of users, is the most common age demographic. (Source:Emarketer 2012)

http://www.cnn.com/election/re...
18-29 Clinton 55% Trump 37%
30-44 Clinton 50% Trump 42%

@swilden

Oh, and Trump will have The Button and there's not a damned thing anyone could do to stop him from pressing it whenever he wanted, short of Congress pre-emptively legislating that the system be dismantled (and if Trump commanded the armed forces not to comply?).

Fortunately you're wrong. There are checks and balances in place. Read this ... it cheered me up no end. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11...

Nothing in that contradicts what I said. Yes, the UCMJ requires the military to obey only lawful orders... but an order from the Commander in Chief that doesn't violate any article of the UCMJ is lawful, by definition (outside of the US; inside the US, US law also applies, but Posse Comitatus pretty much eliminates that issue anyway).

Besides that, when it comes to the nuclear arsenal, you have to keep in mind that the command and control system was designed during the depth of the Cold War, and there were two overriding priorities: (1) it must not be possible to launch without proper authorization and (2) when a properly authorized person (the president being the primary such person, unless he is dead, incapacitated or incommunicado) says "launch", the missiles must fly reliably and immediately. The "reliably" part was a really big concern, because people were afraid that someone down the chain might decide they just couldn't do it, so the system is designed as much as possible to disallow anyone from interfering once the "go" order is received. The "immediately" part was also critical, because the most likely scenario requiring quick launch was a detected inbound strike, and they needed to get the response strike off before the incoming missiles struck. That also motivated the elimination of all delays and cutouts. There is simply no time for "checks and balances" when the missile have to fly within minutes.

It is true that there are multi-layered checks, but those are all related to verifying proper authentication, not to questioning the order. The two-man rule also applies top to bottom (all the way down to the grunts at the missile site -- which I was, about 25 years ago, BTW), but that only means that the president has to put one man who will say "yes" into the right position. If the top-level command is authenticated and verified by that yes man, no one below will question.

So, even if there were some legal restriction on it, there is no process in place for checking the legality. If the president says "fire", the missiles fly. Congress could remove him for insanity afterwards, sure.