Slashdot Mirror

Well, Renault Samsung Motors already exists, and Samsung just bought Harmin International. So even if you don't own one of their cars, there's the chance your car stereo will soon be made by them.

The Russian economy contracts 0.6% and somehow Russia is insolvent? LJL. Sorry to break it to you but the Kremlin is still sitting on $390 billion in hard currency and a mere 3% budget deficit. Russia is in a mild recession but insolvent it is not.

I don't know where this 0.6% number is coming from, but it's not an annual figure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

http://www.economist.com/news/...

NEWTON, Iowa — Donald J. Trump, who earlier in the week said he was open to requiring Muslims in the United States to register in a database, said on Thursday night that he “would certainly implement that — absolutely.”

Mr. Trump was asked about the issue by an NBC News reporter and pressed on whether all Muslims in the country would be forced to register. “They have to be,” he said. “They have to be.’’

When asked how a system of registering Muslims would be carried out — whether, for instance, mosques would be where people could register — Mr. Trump said: “Different places. You sign up at different places. But it’s all about management. Our country has no management.’’

Asked later, as he signed autographs, how such a database would be different from Jews having to register in Nazi Germany, Mr. Trump repeatedly said, “You tell me,” until he stopped responding to the question.

Or perhaps you really meant that although he said it he didn't mean it. Because he's just pandering. Just a con artist. Is that what you meant? I don't want to count on his being just a con though — that's OK for a gambling casino operator, not for a POTUS.

He said exactly that here:

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/20/donald-trump-says-hed-absolutely-require-muslims-to-register/

But I feel you, bro. His field of expertise is golf course development. Everybody has pegged the guy wrong. He was talking about this registry:

http://www.usgolfregister.org/

He undoubtedly was talking about registering Muslims to vote, yes, that's the ticket. /s

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/20/donald-trump-says-hed-absolutely-require-muslims-to-register/

One group says "I don't believe in this global warming stuff - it has the same pattern as everything else the left made up to seize power." The experts say "the science is settled, shut up you denier". Result: Trump is president.

That's an interesting take. I guess that means that when Obama won two elections and leaves office with a higher popularity than Ronald Reagan, during those eight years climate change was real?

Or are Trump voters kind of stupid people? I heard Ann Coulter today complaining that Donald Trump is betraying his supporters. She remarked, "It's not my fault".

Despite the fact that she wrote a book titled, "In Trump We Trust". Yes, it appears that Trump supporters make up most of the ass end of the Bell Curve. I assume you've joined their brilliant #DumpKellogs boycott in which they buy Kellogs products and then post selfies of them dumping out those products. That they just bought. Before that, they held a boycott of Starbucks in which they went to Starbucks, bought a $6 coffee and then forced the girl at the counter to write "Trump" on their cup. Not quite clear on the whole, "boycott" concept, but they sure are enthusiastic.

Here are some more enthusiastic Trump supporters:

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

So here what: Trump and his supporters will not be normalized. There will be no point over the next two years when Donald Trump is accepted as President in any normal sense. And when it comes right down to it, there are 3 million more people who voted for someone everybody hated instead of Trump. He's going to have a hard time claiming any mandate or legitimacy. He's the second Republican president in a row who got fewer people to vote for him than the losing candidate, and he has to make sure to stop any effort to actually count all the votes and audit the election process in order to hold on to power. He's already a lame duck and he hasn't been sworn in yet.

Accusing a federal judge of being unable to discharge his duties because he's Hispanic, and a member of the Hispanic Bar Association (one of hundreds of such affinity lawyers groups), manifestly is racist, as even Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was forced to admit.

Insofar as Islam, it is a sprawling religion consisting of 2.2 billion adherents, with many sub-ideologies. If you yourself have not apologized for the "Klan" (who call themselves Christian and "light" crosses as emblems of their WASP faith), then any broad brush attack on Muslims over the actions of al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda of Iraq (a.k.a. ISIS) is pure bigotry.

Bashing illegal immigration, while conspicuously being entirely unconcerned that Trump's own wife Melaina was clearly an illegal immigrant, is again not only a sign of hypocrisy, but one of racism. Because there is no legal difference between the two situations. Merely a skin color one.

The reason why people continue to call Trump racist is because he is. The reason why people call his supporters racist, is because there is hard evidence of racist attitudes taken from surveys of them.

The idea that a racist is going to suddenly vote for the party who opposes racism, instead of the Republican party that it has been proven benefits from it, if only people wouldn't point out their racism, is absurd.

Is that enough research for you?

As mentioned in the article, IBM's past with this kind of thing is suspect. See http://www.nytimes.com/books/f... So you'd think they'd have given a loud and clear "no". As should the other tech firms. And Microsoft's doublespeak about not responding to "hypotheticals" is disingenuous. Trump's statements about a Muslim database are quite real.

A sign of the times? Zeitgeist, perhaps?

Hello Russian troll. You mention St. Petersburg. That's where Putin has his paid army of Russian trolls who haunt the Net to spread disinformation, especially when it comes to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

That you claim everything is great when the facts say otherwise shows you are earning your keep. How many of the plunging rubles does Putin pay you? At 65 rubles to the dollar, things are getting expensive, aren't they? Or does Putin throw in a bottle of vodka as well so you can drown your sorrows?

No matter. The world knows the truth. With numerous shipments of cargo 200 going to Russia every day, and the freshly dug graves of Russian soldiers appearing, it is quite obvious Russian troops are dying in Ukraine.

Russia's economy is collapsing under falling oil prices and sanctions due to their support of fascism in Ukraine.

Interesting article on that here
http://www.mediaite.com/online...

Looks like the shift is occuring during the last few years.

It's still not correct according to the major manuals of style.

http://thegrammarexchange.info...

"Hereâ(TM)s what the New York Times Manual* states at the entry president:

â âoeIt is President Lamm(without a given name) in a first reference to the current president of the United States. In later references President Lamm; the president; Mrâ¦.Lammâ

This style is seen in todayâ(TM)s New York Times, as in the example in this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01...

The order of mention is this: âoeBarrack Obama, President Obama, Mr. Obamaââ¦..âPresident George Bush, Mr. Bushâ

As you see, though, the Times sometimes goes against its own rules, citing the first name, too, as in this example.

â President Barack Obama moved quickly on Wednesday to lay some touchstones for the âoemore responsible, more accountable governmentâ he has promised, ordering a salary freeze for senior White House staff, tightening rules on lobbyists and establishing what he said was a new standard of greater government openness. âoeHowever long we are keepers of the public trust, we should never forget that we are here as public servants,â Mr. Obama said at a swearing-in ceremony for staff members in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
_______

So, in answer to your question, I think it is correct for the first mention of the president to be President (Barack) Obama, and for subsequent mention to be Mr. Obama.
The style may be different in different publications or in different situations. I like this particular style.

There is something else to be considered: you could leave out the honorific President or Mr., as well as the first name, and use only Obama. Some newspapers use this style. I find it jarring and rude in a newspaper, but in a personal letter, it would be acceptable.
"

But I'm not going to loose my cool over it.

Seriously thou I don't see a problem with the US burning taxpayer's money to bring the guy back. He's ...

More to the point, this is something they end up having to do all the time, with much younger people there. For example, just five months ago, two other people had to be evacuated for health reasons. Having to do this every now and this is just part of the price of operating there.

So its not like it means he's necessarily any less hardy that anyone else out there.

I recall the Republicans rioting before Bush was elected. Which helped get him elected. And flying the rioters in on planes supplied by corporate donors. And paying the rioters for their time. And pretending that it wasn't a partisan effort, it was the Good People of Florida spontaneously rising up.
https://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/080502a.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2000/11/sweeney_and_the_siege_of_miami.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11...
http://www.poetrywar.com/Music...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2008/11/20/a-gop-dirty-trickster-has-second-thoughts.html
http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=28
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/2242...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/23/us/counting-vote-miami-dade-county-wild-day-miami-with-end-recounting-democrats.html

As to draining the swamp, he's already done this [politico.com].

Thanks for that link, interesting. I have to rebut it a little, from the article:
- This is actually a loosening of his earlier one.
- It's just a promise, which any politician disposes of quickly, and there's already a lot of his transition team members in clear violation of it.
- There's also a similar pledge the Obama administration put in effect (also broken for some new hires), with possibly a more stringent definition in the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and it applied a year in advance instead of 5 years behind.
All in all, I think it's barely an improvement, but congrats, out of ~30 decisions I've seen him make so far, this is the first positive one. Does it make me think he's draining the swamp? Heck no, the other appointments he's made far outweigh this (see other posts for links), and his conflicts of interest do so many times over.

That entire thing was FILLED with evidence...

Not according to the New York Times.

changes would jeopardize the privacy rights of innocent Americans and risk possible abuse by the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump

The law will be signed by President Barack Obama — who vastly expanded government's surveillance over his 8 years. So stop blaming Trump for it, uhm'k?

No, that still sounds pretty unrealistic. It's far too easy to make that sort of thing look bad — because tearing people away from their friends and families is bad. Whether it's more or less bad than living in a country without permission is open to debate, but I find it very strange that you're taking an absolutist position on immigration law while being willing to compromise your beliefs about strong governments.

As Janet Napolitano was so good as to provide me with a timely reference for this discussion, it seems there are "nearly three quarters of a million" people who have been protected under the DACA. Also keep in mind that they're mostly kids and young people. Can you imagine the shitstorm that would erupt? Riots in the streets, lawyers coming out of the woodwork, and there's only one way the Press would spin this.

There are what, a million or so police in this country, right? And another million or so National Guard. Finding the manpower for this would be awful, and since the government is fortunately not regularly rounding up people en masse they are poorly prepared to do so. We're not going to get away with interment camps this time, either. And what good would deporting "a small fraction" of these people do? Wouldn't that still leave a larger problem? How is that an acceptable compromise to your principles? The idea that people will leave their jobs to follow their kids home is pretty naive. These are young adults, not infants.

I really do have to hand it to whoever dreamed up DACA, it seems like an excellent "thin edge of the wedge". I can understand why you'd be upset about it. I think you are wrong and your arguments ill-founded, even immoral. But I am completely sure that taking action against illegal immigrants would be impractical and politically suicidal.No, the safe and cheap and principled option is for amnesty. It's not like it would be the first time.

Just as the Soviet and East German clandestine work was not an undisputed fact until the wall came down. For god's sake Putin worked as KGB agent in East Germany (Dresden to be precise), and we have a pretty clear idea how much he spends on disinformation.

Again with the hand waiving. It's the United States that has been busted for trying to spy on everyone in the world, not Russia. You're still in chem trail territory here, sorry.

To put this in the same league as chem trail brain-fuckery is beyond naive.

That's exactly where you are until proven otherwise. You have evidence that Russia has been busy tapping under sea cables, wiring taps directly into the communication centers of telecom giants like AT&T, and spying on the personal cell phones of it's closest allies the way the U.S. has with AT&T and Merkel - put up or STFU.

And to the extend that Russia ain't that bad, it is mostly that their reach is far shorter, and they can't afford the intelligence and blah blah blah blah

• Who's had a world wide kidnapping & torture program - Russia or the United States.

• Who's beaten 100 people to death under said program (that we know of) - Russia or the United States.

  Who's allowing boy fucking on their military bases - Russia or the United States. Your tax dollars make you complicit in fucking teen and preteen boys in the ass. Over and over again, right now. Can you say the same of Russian taxpayers?

  Who's overthrown two democracies since he took office - Obama or Putin?

I could go on all day, American Exceptionalist. You're firing stones from a glass house surrounding a mountain, at a molehill.

but go and talk to some Chechens

You first. But do explain why Russia is horrible for bombing opposing Muslims on Russia's doorstep in one country, while the U.S. is a saint for bombing Muslims on the other side of the planet from them in almost a dozen countries. Muslims who had zero chance of being a threat to your American Exceptionalist ass.

There is nothing exceptional about the US. It's neither exceptionally good nor bad.

Exceptional bullshit. The U.S. is the greatest terrorist state, and the greatest instigator of instability and violence than the rest of the world combined. You might want to clean the entrails of an entire extended family wiped out by a single Obama drone strike of a wedding before you dare shake it in someone else's direction, boy-fucker.

Or favorite sports teams, or social movements, or fandoms, or whatever else makes people tick.

Yep, exact same regions of the brain in fact:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10...

So next time somebody talks about how wonderful Steve Jobs was, you can tell them to lay off the drugs, and still mean it both figuratively and sincerely...and hell...probably literally too.

"It means serving patrons in a world in which government surveillance is not going away; indeed it looks like it will increase."

Although surveillance expanded dramatically under Obama, these guys didn't object.

They gave Obama a pass, but are exceedingly harsh on Trump. As we know, this can only be explained by racism... So, fook them — they aren't getting a penny from me until they publicly renounce this wasteful effort.

Yeah. Getta load of this loon...

When Herr Drumpf outlaws satire, will that include self-satire?

Sure, why not Russia. It's not as if Putin has ever shut down newspapers, radio, tv stations or other independent media because they didn't sing the tune Putin wanted them to.

I don't think you could find a better place to store a repository of internet web pages, some of which might contain information Putin finds objectionable because they show the facts of his corruption and abuse of power. What could possibly go wrong?

This explains it, with a link to the study:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016...

Basically resting calorie consumption goes way down. One guy was 700 kcal/day below his previous level, making it actually impossible to diet at a safe level to just maintain his weight.

The fish will pay!
Because climate change is a hoax...
By the chinese.
Uh, but seriously, he says whatever it takes to distract. He actually says one thing and then appoints a a team of climate change deniers to the most key positions of his cabinet.
And all of this might just be intended to distract the public from his conflicts of interest.

Some traditional "country club" Republican strongholds, like Orange County California, voted for Clinton.

The California GOP has more in common with the endangered spotted owl than 1/10th of the U.S. population. The city of Santa Ana in Orange County is 78% Latino. They voted for Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us/california-latino-voters.html?_r=0

You're talking about a blue city in a red county in a blue state. What was your point again? Overall, Orange county almost always goes red. It went blue this time. Why? My theory is the general level of "education"...

Let's just say the whole Birther thing is a bit of a tell, then the not renting to black folks in NYC is kind of a give-away as well.

And this McCarthyist definition of "racism" doesn't bother you at all? Despite evidence that this attitude is alienating huge swathes of swing voters and young independents?

How about this: when it comes to politicians, "proposing policies that would discriminate based on race" is racism. Nothing more, nothing less.

The really, really sad part of this election is Trump's policies (such as they were) re: police brutality and Mexican immigration had a ton of holes. The left could have easily torn them to pieces; instead, they choose to howl and howl not just "Trump is racist" but also "Why aren't you leaping up and down and frothing at the mouth like we are?? We said TRUMP IS RACIST!!!!!" and now "It's not ok. It's not normal. A RACIST is soon going to be in the White House!!!!"

Replace racist with Communist if you cannot see how dumb this strategy appears from the outside. It makes you look weak and unable to engage in actual policy debate.

Let's just say the whole Birther thing is a bit of a tell, then the not renting to black folks in NYC is kind of a give-away as well.

Yeah, the racist bastard!. And since the NYT is completely unbiased, everything is clear now!

Let's just say the whole Birther thing is a bit of a tell, then the not renting to black folks in NYC is kind of a give-away as well.

And Trump's trying the old 'stir shit up redirect' because of the NYT coming out with comprehensive article describing Trump's world wide conflicts of interest.

http://boingboing.net/2016/11/...

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

Hate to be that guy, but:

[citation needed]

Citation provided. Smoking does not lead to higher healthcare costs. Neither does obesity. The savings from their shorter lifespans cancel out the costs of their poorer health.

Disclaimer: The citation is only for lower healthcare costs. There are other costs associated with smoking, such as pregnant smokers having stupider children, by about 3 IQ points on average. Income is depressed by about 1% for every IQ point below 120, so that will mean a cost of roughly $100k over the kid's lifetime ($3k per year * 35 working years).

Some traditional "country club" Republican strongholds, like Orange County California, voted for Clinton.

The California GOP has more in common with the endangered spotted owl than 1/10th of the U.S. population. The city of Santa Ana in Orange County is 78% Latino. They voted for Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us/california-latino-voters.html?_r=0

Hard to say for sure since Trump himself probably doesn't know but I found this quote interesting:

"Bruce Josten, the chief lobbyist at the United States Chamber of Commerce, said he had already been in communication with members of Mr. Trump's transition team, as the chamber pushes its priorities like securing approval for the Keystone Pipeline, the oil pipeline project blocked by the Obama administration, or reopening more federal lands to oil and gas exploration."
...
"The chamber already knows there are certain items Mr. Trump has said he will not support, like the current versions of trade deals with Asia or comprehensive changes in the nation's immigration laws, which the chamber pushed during Mr. Obama's tenure. But there are aspects of each of these plans, like increasing the number of visas for highly skilled foreign workers, that Mr. Josten said he expects Mr. Trump to endorse.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/us/politics/lobbyists-trump.html

Thank you for showing your true colors. Justifying illegal behavior by citing other allegedly illegal/immoral acts is a slippery slope

Didn't spend much time thinking about that before clicking Submit, did we? You want to a be a legalist/moralist, then demand your taxes be raised to pay for reparations and that politicians be held accountable for their crimes against humanity, committed against every. single. country. south of the U.S. border with Mexico. The victims of the Monroe Doctrine are morally owed a green card at the border, no questions asked, with a fast path to citizenship. That's chump change next to real justice - so you fools can pay up, or STFU.

No nation is perfect, but the ones that respect civil rights

Which ones would that be, Slick? Certainly not the United States, that ran a goddamned kidnapping and torture program under Bush, that beat at least 100 people to death, that we know of. That's like praising OJ Simpson and Ted Bundy for their respect for women.

Your tax dollars have directly paid for boy fucking on military bases. Tell me again how much you respect civil rights when your tax dollars have directly supported fucking pubescent and pre-pubescent boys. In the ass. Repeatedly. Or how at the same time it was whipping Americans into wetting their beds at the site of journalists being beheaded by ISIS, it was selling billions in weapons to the beheading capital of the world, Saudi Arabia. Who has beheaded people for sorcery. And that's a percentage of a portion of the cliff notes on America's human rights violations - want to talk about the millions killed in bullshit wars over just the last 15 years?

Or, you could stop being a willfully ignorant (white) American Exceptionalist, and watch your IQ go up by 200 points on the spot. Of course, you're starting from quite the hole in the ground, boy fucker. so that might get you up to 90.

Yes, in the circumstances that allow it to do so.. If the vast majority of sparsely populated areas ALL vote in a particular direction, along with sufficient minority of the denser populations, it can bias in favor of the minority in close elections. This prevents the president's selection from being a simple majority, which, these days, has a bias towards specific states and their ways of life. This gives the minority a voice. It is obvious that DC has been dead to rural populations for quite some time or else they would not have voted as they have.

The founders knew that mob rule was not any way to run a country. That's why we are a republic, not a raw democracy.

Clinton won the popular vote by 1.2% according to the NYT. That's hardly a landslide nor a 'mandate' as they used to call it.
http://www.nytimes.com/electio...

You'd think progressives would approve since they're always braying about minority rights and representation. I guess the 'wrong' minority won this time.

What speaks more about bigotry is how liberals will get their panties in a bunch when someone mentions jihadist mass murderers, as if acknowledging the problem is the same as not making the difference between "normal muslims" and radicals.

If I call all liberals baby killers. If I call all conservative abortion clinic bombers. If I call Americans mass murderers. If I don't make a distinction between Islamic jihadists and Muslims in general. Yep, I do get my "liberal" "panties" (even though I'm neither liberal nor female) in a bunch when we do not make a distinction because the mentality of hating a whole group for some a small minority is involved in without any consideration of trying to deal with the actual violent people misses the point.

Here's real numbers for you. Around the world, there are roughly 75 million muslims that condone and/or support terrorist activities. It's a small percentage (there's around 1.5 billion muslims total) but there's no other religion with such a massive following of fanatics.

Where'd you get that number from the link you provide? Is it extrapolation from the populations and their support of suicide bombing? Because Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq can be used to argue ~108 million of eligible American voters (a larger actual number if you count non-voters) supported the killing of thousands of civilians over obviously false evidence--THREATS AND RESPONSES: THE INSPECTOR; Blix Says He Saw Nothing to Prompt a War spells it out. Why the support? Blind support of nationalism over some vague claim of an existential threat from a dictator--someone who honestly is more of a threat that your 75 million number as the actual forces at their disposal are a lot less. Because they're Muslim and lead by a mad man--both being true but his support being driven politically and his actual acts unlike to hurt anyone outside the Middle East of which the US had allies but wouldn't be directly harmed.

Now if you want to make your mission in life to defend the honor of the remaining 1.425 billion (that nobody except for their own lunatic fringe is putting on trial by the way), go for it. Maybe if someone you care about happens to be in a stadium or supermarket when "freedom fighters" show up with bomb vests and AK-47 your perspective will change. One thing is for sure, if that happens, it's not a Bible or a Torah that those "freedom fighters" will carry with them.

I defend the honor of any group that is demonized to the point that people will actively kill them for being members of the broader group. I mean, for fuck sake: "someone you care about happens to be in a stadium or supermarket when "freedom fighters" show up with bomb vests and AK-47 your perspective will change"? Yea, that happens ALL the fucking time. Oh, right: "it's not a Bible or a Torah that those "freedom fighters" will carry with them" is almost certainly true because consistently most mass murderers in the US are home-grown lunatics who apparently simply hate people without any religious, national, political, etc association. It's almost as if the vast majority of Muslims are non-violent, those who support violence tend to NOT live in the US (because they hate the US), and even then a small minority of those that support violence actually engage in it.

But it's ok, coward. Go on and make me (or anyone who doesn't embrace the politically correct bullshit) the bad person while ISIS is out there burning, raping, torturing and killing people. I'm not a real threat and I don't have bombs so it's easier to focus your anger on people like me while safely draping yourself in the cloth of the self-righteous.

No, coal just causes more pollution.

Wha...?? The media isn't liberal? Are you delusional? Did the whole world not see the US media drop any pretense at journalism and and became people who had a conclusion that they reached, and then searched for facts to show that Hillary Clinton was a winner. That didn't happen in your world? FUCKING SERIOUSLY?

OK, sorry. Let's back up and provide a citation. " "Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is."
--Source: New York Times

Of course, this isn't good enough, it never is. This eight minute video (faster if you play at 1.5 speed) has a great supporter and friend of the liberal media calling them out on their ridiculous liberal bias. That's not good enough either, but I gotta run.

The difference is that people no longer trust the MSM. I doubt they pay that much attention to the memes, but the MSM pretty much burned their credibility with a lot of people so we completely ignore whatever you're saying the same way we do with the people who constantly try to sell us viagra.

I don't know why, but it might have something to do with crap like CNN lying and telling us it's illegal to read wikileaks (as a lawyer, Chris Cuomo should've known better), the DNC holding events with the Washington Post that their own lawyers disapprove of, the New York Times posting editorials in favor of pedophilia, hyper-ventillating over #fakenews and ignoring the "nerd virgins" at Correct the Record propaganda teams that are openly employed, or maybe just the absolute disgust and condescension that the average liberal online treats people from the "flyover states" with.

I mean, isn't it just the least bit odd that you have to invent Russian propaganda teams because you can't believe that people disagree with you?

Reality. That and everyone who's ever looked into it. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11...

Convincing the "Poorly Educated" to vote for you by promising that you will bring Manufacturing back to the U.S is a lot harder then convincing the Highly Educated (CEO's) to actually bring those Manufacturing plants back. For one those CEO's will actually want to see Plans and Details and the Trump campaign lacked either of those.

And convincing the shareholders, who only really care about profits, is even more difficult. For example, from Can Trump Save Their Jobs? They’re Counting on It on Nov 13, 2016:

... manufacturers are seeing relentless pressure, from investors and rival companies, to automate, replacing workers with machines that do not break down or require health benefits and pension plans. Wall Street hedge fund managers are demanding steadily rising earnings from Carrier’s parent, United Technologies, even as growth remains sluggish worldwide.

Carrier isn’t changing its plans.

The Carrier plant here is plenty profitable. But moving to Monterrey, Mexico, where workers earn in a day what they make here in an hour, will increase profits faster.

Even Robin Maynard, a Carrier team leader who enthusiastically backed Mr. Trump, acknowledges that even a phone call from the Oval Office to the company’s executive suite might not be enough to save his job. “Hopefully, he can do something for us,” Mr. Maynard said. “But I think it’s out of the C.E.O’s hands. It’s in the hands of the shareholders.”

China wasn't part of the TPP, nor were there any real worker protections better than NAFTA that was also suppose help foreign workers. The only thing it would do is open free trade for rich countries to abuse poor countries just like NAFTA.
Mexican Min wage was 1993 4.15 USD per DAY(not hour), 2016 4.25 USD per DAY. US had a similar boom from 1900-1920 wages went from 37c to 1.07 an hour nearly tripling wages. So how did it help workers in mexico again? http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12...

Actual Mexican workers, yep living in shack is moving ahead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If Mexico fixed their abuse of workers, there wouldn't be an illegal immigrant problem.

The electronics industry has established a complete manufacturing infrastructure and supply chain in Asia that is not going to uproot itself just because Trump gives one US company, Apple, tax incentives and unspecified deregulation. Even if US policy could change this reality, China, Korea, Vietnam and other countries will counter with their own incentives in a race to the bottom the US cannot win. The reality is the US lost the electronics industry ~20 years ago, and it's not it's not coming back overnight or in a 4-year presidential term. If you [or Trump] need a second opinion just ask the US's last TV manufacturer, Zenith, who sold to Korea's LG in 1995! http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07...

Odd that we have the so call "tech community" on here but they didn't bother to get the full transcript before going off half cocked about what a journalist interpreted as meaning something other than those with the 5th grade reading comprehension would think it means. After reading the full transcript I find it odd that someone would say he was backing down on his stance. Seems more like the liberal agenda of dividing Trump and those that voted for him. Does every ones recall of history go back 1 week now? This is the same NYTimes that was colluding with Clinton's campaign to give her good press and Trump bad press. So are well all suppose to ignore how they were exposed now???

C'mon! What's your next comedy prediction?

Trump Foundation admits to self-dealing (i.e. fraud).
Trump University settles fraud lawsuit for more than half of initial amount.
DJT Promotes business interests in political meeting.

Wow, great response. Maybe your next one will be based on our world. That world being the one I personally remember happening while I was in the military with Clinton as my Commander in Chief.

Here are few examples of how Clinton's scandals were thought of back then:
http://articles.latimes.com/19...

If disgust with the current crisis depresses women's votes in November, we will see an anti-women's rights majority in Congress roll back the gains for women of the past 30 years," said a joint statement released Thursday by 15 feminist and civil rights organizations.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01...

The initial public reaction of feminists and other women's advocates to President Clinton's latest trouble can most charitably be described as restrained. They have a problem:

How do you defend a man whose relations with individual women, at least in some cases, are widely believed to have been irresponsible, disrespectful, exploitive and profoundly destructive?

And yet how do you attack a President with the best record ever on issues related to women?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Throughout Clinton's dealing with the sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Paula Jones and more recently with allegations that he had sex with Lewinsky, a former White House intern, women generally have supported him, and leaders of liberal women's groups have remained neutral on, if not sympathetic to, his plight.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) complained yesterday about what has been "the deafening silence" of women's organizations after their criticism of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas and then-Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) in recent years.

With the various issues those articles bring up, the recurring theme is what I pointed out: the feminists are happy supporting a sexual predator and accused rapist, as long as he supports abortion.

I used to volunteer as an election judge in an MD county that used Diebold touchscreen voting machines. One election, a woman called me over and said that the machines were changing her votes from Republican to Democrat.

Clearly not, everyone knows that Diebold machines change votes from Democrat to Republican.

I asked her to show me what was happening and sure enough she would touch the Republican candidate, which would light up as selected, and as she removed her finger, her long fingernails would then touch and select the Democratic candidate listed above. I told her to turn her finger sideways as she voted to make sure this did not happen.

So yes, it is very easy for (poorly coded) touchscreen systems to magically change votes.

and also stops promoting torture

Me, too, and it seems he already has.

From TFA:

On the issue of torture, Mr. Trump suggested he had changed his mind about the value of waterboarding after talking with James N. Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general, who headed the United States Central Command.

“He said, ‘I’ve never found it to be useful,’” Mr. Trump said. He added that Mr. Mattis found more value in building trust and rewarding cooperation with terrorism suspects: “‘Give me a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers, and I’ll do better.’”

“I was very impressed by that answer,” Mr. Trump said.

Torture, he said, is “not going to make the kind of a difference that a lot of people are thinking.”

Mr. Trump repeated that Mr. Mattis was being “seriously, seriously considered” to be secretary of defense. “I think it’s time, maybe, for a general,” he said.

The Dems could have won this election had they played fair and let Bernie beat her.

I doubt this. Bernie never would have gotten the minority support that HIllary was able to get.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03...

Of course, I guess this NY Times article could be fake too :-)

Umm, riiiight. Bernie couldn't have won BECAUSE THE NY TIMES SAID SO

Clinton has Solid Lead in Electoral College, Trump's Winning Map is Unclear

The Dems could have won this election had they played fair and let Bernie beat her.

I doubt this. Bernie never would have gotten the minority support that HIllary was able to get.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03...

Of course, I guess this NY Times article could be fake too :-)

Umm, riiiight. Bernie couldn't have won BECAUSE THE NY TIMES SAID SO

Clinton has Solid Lead in Electoral College, Trump's Winning Map is Unclear

Criminal litigation or civil lawsuits alone don't solve the problem. There are lots of criminals looking to capitalize on short-term opportunity, then close up shop before Lady Justice brings the pain. We need regulators who can actively sniff out fraudulent activity.

Otherwise, any fly-by-night company looking to make a quick profit will be happy to sell counterfeit Copper Clad Aluminum data cables, which can easily catch and spread fire, or cheap batteries that are also more fire prone, or toys with lead paint, or counterfeit medicines, and so on. It's like the snake oil salesmen of yore...by the time the townsmen realize they were sold an empty promise, the salesman has already packed the wagon and moved onto the next town.

Lawsuits only work on the Walmarts, business who aren't going away anytime soon.