Slashdot Mirror


145 Tech Leaders Say 'Trump Would Be A Disaster For Innovation' (cnn.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via CNN: "We have listened to Donald Trump over the past year and we have concluded: Trump would be a disaster for innovation," wrote 145 technology leaders in an open letter Medium post published Thursday. Some of the leaders are from tech giants like Google, Facebook and Apple, others from small startups, venture capital firms, nonprofits and universities. "We believe in an inclusive country that fosters opportunity, creativity and a level playing field. Donald Trump does not," reads the letter, which was signed by well-known names like Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak, Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield, IAC's Barry Diller, Reddit's Alexis Ohanian and Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales. "His reckless disregard for our legal and political institutions threatens to upend what attracts companies to start and scale in America. He risks distorting markets, reducing exports, and slowing job creation," reads the letter, published by chief marketing officer at Color Genomics and former VP at Twitter Katie Jacobs Stanton. Moreover, Trump has shown "poor judgment and ignorance about how technology works," they wrote, citing his proposal to "shut down" parts of the Internet and the fact that he has revoked reporters' press credentials. "We stand against Donald Trump's divisive candidacy," the letter concludes. "We embrace an optimistic vision for a more inclusive country, where American innovation continues to fuel opportunity, prosperity and leadership." Meanwhile, Jon Swartz writes from USA Today that "If there was any lingering doubt as to tech's favored presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton put an end to that Tuesday with a tech plan that reads like a Silicon Valley wish list."

360 comments

  1. Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Translation: Trump would do something about importing cheap H-1B workers while Her Majesty wouldn't.

    1. Re:Translation by Hylandr · · Score: 1, Insightful

      +1 Insightful

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    2. Re:Translation by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I was going to say. Now, do those industry leaders think they are fooling anyone?

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    3. Re:Translation by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right. There's a big difference between being a "disaster for innovation" and being "annoying because innovation may cost a bit more because we can't import indentured tech servants to replace local professionals that were forced to train their foreign replacements."

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except he backtracked on that and said he wouldn't...

      "I'm changing. I'm changing. We need highly-skilled people in this country. If we can't do it, we will get them in. And we do need in Silicon Valley, we absolutely have to have."

      And he's flopped back and forth a few more times since then.

      Trump will say whatever the hell he thinks will get him elected. You'd have to be retarded to believe that he means any of it.

    5. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality:

      The President does not control H-1B. Congress does.

    6. Re:Translation by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump would be a disaster... ok, but that doesn't mean Hillary would be a disaster is any less true.

      It's been interesting to see how much people rely on saying bad (and at least somewhat, although usually not totally) true things about the "other" candidate, but usually fail to make the case at all as to why "their" candidate is any better.

      The candidates don't exist in a vacuum. Saying Candidate X is horribly Y doesn't actually compare them to their opponents and thus feels more like calling names than having a reasoned discussion.

      I'd listen to more of this if it actually brought up something which wasn't already public knowledge, or tried to at least do some kind of comparison rather than just being a one-sided political attack.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    7. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These companies employ both domestic (US) and foreign workers. They also earn revenues globally.

      Trump and his children outsource all of their work, including (historically) construction.

      Why trust Trump when the those American CEOs, while maximizing profits, also represent an industry that often pay excellent wages to Americans.

    8. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the only insightful reply I've seen so far to the GP post. That's why it will likely be modded down.

    9. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IF only I could believe anything he says. He lies as bad as she does. It would make him much more desirable if it were actually true. He loves foreign cheap workers as evidenced by the people he has employed. At some point democrats were supposed to support unions and help keep out the cheap imigrants.

    10. Re:Translation by wernercd8122 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why trust Trump? Because Trump knows and has used the system to build his Empire... Who else would know what needs to be changed other than someone who has worked it from the inside?

      As opposed to "To simple minded to know what '(c)'" means? A known war hawk? Supporter of all the trade bills that are fucking the American Middle Class? A woman who, but many reports, has endorsed the highest donators to her "Charity"? Is pro women yet supports regimes that treat women as property, defends pedophiles and rapists (her husband)? Is pro LGBT yet accepts donations from countries that murder them? Is pro minority yet calls them "Super Predators" and is partially responsible for legislation that has led to generations of them in prison?

      Trump is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from perfect... but on his WORST day He's still more trustworthy than Hilldog.

    11. Re: Translation by backslashdot · · Score: 0

      If you increase the capital cost you increase the risk. When there is a risk people don't invest. Why do you think the lottery has to offer a 1 million to 1 return on investment before anyone will buy a ticket.

    12. Re:Translation by Tailhook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trump will say whatever the hell he thinks will get him elected.

      Right. And Hillary is going to be scrupulously truthful in all things and depend on voters giving her credit for her long history of honesty.

      o_O

      One thing Hillary has said that you can absolutely take to the bank, however; she'll give instance and permanent resident status to however many millions of people the "stem" degree mills of Asia can graduate. Thus our tech leader obsequience.

      Cool how the employers of one of the most black free labor forces in the US can't seem to wedge enough "inclusive"s into their press release.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    13. Re:Translation by dugancent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "...but Hillary" is hardly an excuse for the bullshit that Trump is spouting.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    14. Re:Translation by tehlinux · · Score: 2

      Further, these guy are hiding trillions of dollars overseas. They are worried Trump will find and tax that money.

      --
      Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
    15. Re: Translation by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      LOL I am supposed to believe you care about bringing pedophiles to justice when you would support Trump's plan to kill family members of terrorists? He also plans to use methods of torture worse than waterboarding even on people who aren't properly proven to be involved in terrorism.

    16. Re:Translation by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Seconded. Now has Trump opined on patent trolls at all?

    17. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like "...but Bush" has been for the past eight years?

    18. Re: Translation by dugancent · · Score: 1

      Exactly like that.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    19. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Kind of like "...but Bush" has been for the past eight years?

      Bush caused a ton of crap. Obama's just been cleaning that up. That's why everyone says, "But Bush...." Hillary hasn't caused any crap, dishonest Fox News propaganda about Benghazi notwithstanding.

    20. Re:Translation by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't Jimmy Wales be off panhandling visitors to his site with his picture?

      (Wait - Maybe Hillary learned her Wall Street/Clinton Foundation act from him...)

    21. Re:Translation by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      The mistake all of the anti-Trump arguments make is that they attack Trump "Why trust Trump?" because he is not a proven liar and hypocrite like most politicians. Very few people support Trump because of his virtues, whatever they are. They support him because they are convinced that his opponents have NO virtues, while Trump appears to at least have a few.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    22. Re:Translation by quantaman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Translation: Trump would do something about importing cheap H-1B workers while Her Majesty wouldn't.

      Translation: Trump is an absurdly poor choice for a President for a multitude of reasons that have been repeated endlessly, the fact he actually got nominated has turned the US into the butt of an inappropriate joke that leaves the rest of the planet amused, mystified, and terrified.

      The question of whether or not he'd infringe their ability to import HB-1s is barely on the radar, if they were simply concerned about their personal wealth they'd probably support Trump for the ridiculous tax cuts he wants to give the rich (except of course for the massive recession his election would trigger).

      --
      I stole this Sig
    23. Re: Translation by wernercd8122 · · Score: 1

      He "says" he will... while Obama is responsible for killing people with Drones... and his policies have left a vacuum in the middle east that is the cause of how much pain, suffering, strife?

      And Hillary will be better than Obama how? She's "behind" his strategy lock, stock and barrel? She's voted for every war put before her and by many reports is a driver of the policies responsible for the train wreck that is the middle east...

      At the end of the day... real changes (including more torture) will go through congress... and personally? I'd much rather terrorists KNOW that we will bomb their neighborhoods - and we'll accept "collateral damage" when they hide in mosques/hospitals/schools/etc... Instead of being to afraid of saying the DREADFUL words "radical Islam" and letting Americans die while leadership debate what uniforms to wear...

    24. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: Trump would do something about importing cheap H-1B workers while Her Majesty wouldn't.

      Off course the Trump creature is only doing this out of the goodness of it's heart!
      Rich guy telling me that he's gonna take care of me, sounds convincing.
      Only three reason people are motivated to do anything. Money, Friendship or Prestige (Some other self interest). Trump doesn't look all that friendly so...

    25. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Given Hillary as an alternative, in your humble opinion, whom should we be voting for that has any chance at all ?

      I would rather pick a random citizen from a lotto than put Hillary in that position.

      I would rather put PUTIN in that damn chair before Hillary. I trust him far more than I ever will her.

    26. Re: Translation by quantaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given Hillary as an alternative, in your humble opinion, whom should we be voting for that has any chance at all ?

      I would rather pick a random citizen from a lotto than put Hillary in that position.

      I would rather put PUTIN in that damn chair before Hillary. I trust him far more than I ever will her.

      Well in that case I think you have terrible judgement.

      Clinton has issues, and the email thing was a definite screwup, but otherwise I think she's above average candidate and I'm not going to pretend otherwise just because the Internet is convinced that she's the wicked witch of New York.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    27. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Her email fiasco and inability to keep Confidential Secrets secret notwithstanding, Drumpf is deliberately "bad"

    28. Re:Translation by execthis · · Score: 1

      Screw the oligarchy. Screw H1B. If you can't run a company in America with American staff, get out.

      The more the oligarchy pee their pants over Donald Trump, the more appealing he actually becomes to the American people who know they're being screwed massively.

    29. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you increase the capital cost you increase the risk. When there is a risk people don't invest. Why do you think the lottery has to offer a 1 million to 1 return on investment before anyone will buy a ticket.

      I regularly participate in raffles, i.e. smaller lotteries with smaller pots, and larger investments, and even occasionally win. Then again, those tend to be for the benefit of something or someone.

    30. Re:Translation by cavreader · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A vote for Trump would be a vote against Democrats, Republicans, and the biased media who fall all over themselves trying to elect anyone who would validate their editorial lines. A vote for Trump means there will be a whole bunch of rich people and companies who will see the billions of dollars they have pumped into their candidate of choice has been wasted. The Democrats and Republicans need a serious timeout to reflect on how bad they have fucked up the country.

      The office of the President doesn't allow any candidate to actually accomplish anything they say while campaigning. The policies Trump speaks about cannot be dictated by the President. Trump is hated by both Democrats and Republicans equally. Does anyone see Congress approving anything Trump asks for? Dissolution of signed international treaty's cannot be abrogated by the President alone. Even declaring a war needs to be justified and unless someone lobs a few nukes at the US the legislative branch will never fund a war. For all those wishing the US would stop wasting money protecting foreign ingrates then Trump is your man. If he was to even come close to exceeding his Presidential authority he would be impeached in an afternoon since he has no party support. Anyone wanting to see a President tell some foreign leader to fuck off and defend themselves on their own dime than Trump is your man. The bottom line is a President cannot destroy a country without help from lots of others in the Legislative and Judicial branches.

    31. Re:Translation by ElectricHellKnight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except he backtracked on that and said he wouldn't...

      "I'm changing. I'm changing. We need highly-skilled people in this country. If we can't do it, we will get them in. And we do need in Silicon Valley, we absolutely have to have."

      And he's flopped back and forth a few more times since then.

      Trump will say whatever the hell he thinks will get him elected. You'd have to be retarded to believe that he means any of it.

      Except here's him being consistent in his opinions since 1980. That's a better track record than all the real politicians, especially Hillary "Marriage should be between a man and a woman oh wait not anymore" Clinton.

    32. Re:Translation by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Translation: Trump would do something about importing cheap H-1B workers while Her Majesty wouldn't.

      That's probably true and I hope Trump defends himself by pointing that out and giving plenty of examples and details in speeches.

      I won't vote for Trump because I believe his "awkward" diplomacy will likely get us in trouble with the world.

      But, I'm glad he's running and glad he speaks his mind and doesn't fear offending the establishment or donors, even if half of what he says is nutzo. Raw honesty can be beautiful and ugly: he's a laxative to the political system; it needs it.

    33. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree. Besides who cares about about SV. We are seeing more success from other areas than the flash and pomp of SV startups that fail more frequently than not. Hillary is getting desperate. There is a real chance that she could loose. She's already sold her soul, sacrificed her self respect, and any honor she may have had vanished in the wake of the email scandal. Selling America must seem a cheap price to pay at this point.

    34. Re:Translation by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      Translation: unemployable low level IT crybabies who fell behind and can't find a job in a field that is hilariously easy to find work in blame everything on the Visa boogeyman.

      One problem: Trump's not going to help with that.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    35. Re:Translation by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      His Empire? Trump would be richer if he took the money he had inhereted and just put it in a medium risk don't-touch fund. The man has made himself less poor than he could have been based on where he started. The people who think he's a made man simply don't know how money works to begin with, which is why he appeals so much to the lower class.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    36. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama has created a lot of his own crap

    37. Re:Translation by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      s/less poor/more poor/ of course

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    38. Re:Translation by BradMajors · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trump has never changed his position. He stated that the current H-1B system as being done is bad for the country. However, the idea behind H-1B visas of importing highly talented persons that the US work force can not supply as being good. The media has no interest in writing about such a nuanced opinion.

    39. Re:Translation by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      It is in this case because it's an election year, and the candidates are either Trump or Clinton. None of the other party candidates have a remote chance this year. It's not a false dichotomy, one of them will be president, which is the least worst?

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    40. Re:Translation by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Informative

      H-1B is sold as snatching up Einstein fleeing from the Nazis. H-1B in reality is Haroum taking your 1st level helpdesk job.

      Everyone is in favor of picking up exceptional people, but the media tried to pretend that the question had been about the H-1B program. Trump gets tripped up by trick questions like that sometimes because he wasn't raised from birth to be a politician.

      He has, however, been totally consistent about putting Americans first for at least 25 years, based on interviews he's done in that time. (Head over to youtube if you want to watch them.) I trust his principles and his instincts.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    41. Re:Translation by khallow · · Score: 1

      Only three reason people are motivated to do anything. Money, Friendship or Prestige (Some other self interest). Trump doesn't look all that friendly so...

      Terrible argument since motivation is less important than outcome. Sure, if someone is promising something because it furthers their goal of destroying the world, then sure, I'm concerned. But your rule of motivation supposedly applies to everyone not just Trump. Why does Trump's motivations matter more than anyone else's? He's not the only one running for US president, for example.

    42. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The email thing wasn't a screw up, the email thing was designed deliberatley hide her actions from oversite and public purview. Why would anyone go to that effort? Because they are utterly corrupt.

    43. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, a vote for Trump is exactly one thing: a vote for Donald Trump. His entire life has been a long and well-documented exercise in schmoozing people into the sell and almost IMMEDIATELY fucking them over the instant he has what he wants.

    44. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cite?

    45. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      faggot

    46. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats exactly what i thought. Also, did i not just read a story that we have 245,000 tech jobs that cannot be filled? Who are these theoretical jobs being created for anyway?

    47. Re:Translation by Braintrust · · Score: 1
      --
      Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
    48. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hee, hee, sounds like a master plan.
      1. Get Trump elected.
      2. Impeach Trump and his VP
      3. Ryan becomes president
      4. ???
      5. Profit

    49. Re:Translation by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hillary hasn't caused any crap

      Military secrets to China. Uranium to Russia. Accessory before and after the fact to the rape and murder of Ambassador Stevens. That's 3 counts of treason for which she should be indicted, tried, convicted and executed.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    50. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Implying Trump understands nuanced opinion indicates either satire or delusion, and I honestly have no idea which in this case.

    51. Re: Translation by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      One group hates the other group's corruption, and will give their group's corruption a pass. The converse is also true.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    52. Re:Translation by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      But Drumpf has literally no virtues. He's all bad.

      Even if the only virtue Hillary had was not being Drumpf (and it isn't her only virtue), she would still be a far better choice.

    53. Re:Translation by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      US policies have been considered a joke by many foreigners for over half a century. We're still better off than they are.
      The proof is in the pudding.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    54. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump will say whatever the hell he thinks will get him elected. You'd have to be retarded to believe that he means any of it.

      Agreed. Even if I believed he would cut the H1Bs to zero, I wouldn't vote for him. I grew up knowing a few rather slimy used car salesman. He reminds me of them. This link seems appropriate. trump's used cars

      Personally I think H1Bs as they are need to end. Sure I could sort of buy them for maybe a year, but after that you need to become a full citizen, and likely renounce your citizenship of birth or leave. H1Bs create a non represented class with fewer rights in this country. That is just not something we want to encourage.

    55. Re:Translation by bricko · · Score: 1

      Well, there we have it. Vote Trump

    56. Re:Translation by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Actually, because of the 1954 Immigration and Naturalization Act, the President can deny access to anyone he or she wants. Just like Jimmuh Carter did.

    57. Re:Translation by Bartles · · Score: 1

      How did Hillary get so rich?

    58. Re:Translation by ClickOnThis · · Score: 0

      Trump has never changed his position.

      On H-1Bs, perhaps not. On everything else, he has adopted, in the words of one analyst, "more positions than the Kamasutra."

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    59. Re: Translation by VanGarrett · · Score: 1

      Soooo... Instead of an informed, or at the very least, considered, rebuttal, you resort to name-calling? Look at this website. Does this seem like the kind of place where people read a half-baked accusation and go, "GASP! He's right!"? Try again when you've finished puberty.

    60. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary hasn't caused any crap

      Military secrets to China. Uranium to Russia. Accessory before and after the fact to the rape and murder of Ambassador Stevens. That's 3 counts of treason for which she should be indicted, tried, convicted and executed.

      This sounds rather like you are trying to incite violence against a presidential nominee with your lies. Isn't that illegal?

    61. Re:Translation by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Does anyone see Congress approving anything Trump asks for?

      Yes, for example, from his platform, a Republican congress would approve repealing Obamacare (they've already done it what, a dozen times already?). They would likely increase spending for mental healthcare as a way to handle mass-shootings (again, Republicans have already tried to do that in the last year).

      Will they vote for the wall? Maybe, if Trump can actually get Mexico to pay for it. If Trump gets his way, he'll have a bunch of copycats, and then congress will be filled with hucksters. Wait.....

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    62. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So far, everyone I dislike has been complaining about Trump. Could they possibly make the choice even easier?

    63. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol

      You mean the type of fund that didn't exist when he got his inheritance and consistently underperforms compared to the actual moves in the market?

      Seriously, go grab some trading simulation software and try to do what you're claiming would have been better.

    64. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you personally profit from the importation of H1-B workers?

    65. Re:Translation by davester666 · · Score: 1

      expanding it? his hotels sure could use even cheaper labor.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    66. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you even mention his corrupt-to-the-bone opponent, that's "whataboutism" and it really kills the "debate".

      Nevertheless that screeching harpy must go down along with her status quo.

    67. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude will you stop with all that whataboutism please?

      You are directing the debate away from important topics like Trump's hair and his small hands.

    68. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you honestly believe that Killary has virtues, then please do vote for her.

      Sane voters will outnumber your kind.

    69. Re:Translation by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > Trump would be a disaster... ok, but that doesn't
      > mean Hillary would be a disaster is any less true.

      The most damning criticism of Hillary I've heard (And I hear a LOT of them. I count a number of hardcore Bernie Sanders supporters amongst my friends, and bashing Hillary on Facebook seems to be a full-time job for some of them.)... aside from the whole-cloth inventions from the fox "news" crowd anyway... is that she "represents the status quo" and "four more years of Obama" and that she's "the DNC establishment candidate".

      Now, I voted for Sanders in the primary as well, and I would have preferred him as the nominee. But, you know what? The status quo of four more years of Obama policies wouldn't actually be that bad. Granted, we're not where we wanted to be by the end of his term when we elected him. He squandered a lot opportunity for progress, during the two years he controlled congress, by trying to be friendly with the republicans instead of shoving them aside and getting things done. And he's been hampered by their obstructionism ever since. He's not a perfect president, and he's not had a perfect term.

      The more fair measure it to compare his term to what we had before. We're mired in fewer overseas conflicts and have fewer troops deployed in the ones we are involved in. The economy has not just rebounded, it's soared. Unemployment is at record lows. Recruiters solicit on email and LinkedIn daily. Some persistently enough to hunt down my, and several coworkers', work email and phone number. For it's faults... and the ACA does have them... we have universal health care. We've made a great deal of progress in civil rights for the LGBT community. And Osama bin Laden's dead ass is somewhere at the bottom of the Indian Ocean.

      Yes. We still have problems. The millennials are graduating with too much student debt. ENDA is not yet passed. Obamacare stopped short of a public option, much less single payer. Terrorism is still a thing. The housing market has actually rebounded too much, driving prices up to troublesome levels. And even after the Orlando massacre, the politician who's grown enough of a pair to tell the NRA to go fuck itself and actually work on fixing our gun problem is still a rare beast indeed.

      But at the end of the day, when I compare the Obama years to the Bush years and contemplate the notion of eight more years of similar policy and progress, I think of the old talking point from the enemy side, and ask "Are we better off now than we were eight years ago?". And the answer is most definitely yes.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    70. Re:Translation by guacamole · · Score: 0

      That's a great observation. We still have separation of powers between the branches of government at the federal and the state level (as well as between federal and state governments). The president will not accomplish "much". However, quite shockingly the Bush junior did drag the USA into the disastrous Iraq invasion, and he did manage to increase the defense spending from under 300 billions a year, to about 1 trillion a year the year he left the office. At the same time Obama did also accomplish quite a bit in the office. (some of that is positive, like The Affordable Care Act, which is why republicans hate it so much).

    71. Re:Translation by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

      If he's flip flopped so many times, then which side does he believe?

    72. Re:Translation by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      Unless you go nude at your job, there is no such thing like clothing "Made in USA". The entire textile industry is already offshore for a long time.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    73. Re:Translation by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      Tell that to the family of the young man he had flown across the country for medical treatment when commercial airlines would not allow him to board their planes.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    74. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except he backtracked on that and said he wouldn't...

      "I'm changing. I'm changing. We need highly-skilled people in this country. If we can't do it, we will get them in. And we do need in Silicon Valley, we absolutely have to have."

      And he's flopped back and forth a few more times since then.

      Trump will say whatever the hell he thinks will get him elected. You'd have to be retarded to believe that he means any of it.

      At least if Trump does not keep his election promises, he can be assassinated without fears of racist allegations heaped upon the assassin.

    75. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary hasn't caused any crap

      Military secrets to China. Uranium to Russia. Accessory before and after the fact to the rape and murder of Ambassador Stevens. That's 3 counts of treason for which she should be indicted, tried, convicted and executed.

      This sounds rather like you are trying to incite violence against a presidential nominee with your lies. Isn't that illegal?

      No, it is covered by freedom of speech. There are no direct statements to physically or psychologically harm the presidential nominee. If the OP had written, "The nominee will be passing by K Street and Delaware Avenue at 4:23 PM on Tuesday, July 19th. There is a perfect sniper's nest in the hotel across the intersection facing into the sun at the time the motorcade will pass further obscuring your position at the moment you make the kill shot," that would be illegal if any of the preceding is truthful enough to enable an assassination attempt.

    76. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      importing highly talented persons that the US work force can not supply

      The problem is that it's an inherently nonsensical idea. Offer enough money, and Americans will come out of the woodwork to do any conceivable task. They'll come out of retirement, take classes, switch careers. There is no labor shortage in the USA, there's a job shortage.

    77. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      She lied to the family of someone who died on the job for her, for political reasons. Only a sociopath would do that, a complete sociopath.

      The email thing only confirmed how easily she will lie, even under oath.

      Spin spin away, but Hilary lies constantly, even about stupid things, like landing under sniper fire. Brian Williams lost his job reporting the news over lesser lies. What I hear from you is news anchors are held to higher standards than presidents, and that is a pretty low standard to start with.

    78. Re:Translation by pjrc · · Score: 1

      Should the trial be conducted as you've described, with a presumption of guilt and the ultimate sentence always determined?

    79. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Rape", what kind of crack are you smoking? It must be good!

    80. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like when Disney fired it's ENTIRE staff and replaced them all with H1B workers, that was the worker's fault for being "crybabies"?

      Get raped, you evil cunt.

    81. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. He won't. You think Republicans want to change that? You're living in a delusion if you believe that. Conservatives talk a talk they will never back up to keep their close minded union labor workers on their side. I know unions are more of a Democrat thing. However it seems the vast majority of uneducated closed minded union workers call themselves Republican.

      Allowing corporations to bring in cheap labor is a golden dream of Republicans. It will never change and is empty speak from any political party.

    82. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly.

    83. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush was the biggest spender ever (not including WWII), until Obama. Obama and the liberal social programs he championed fully doubled our debt to the tune of over $60,000 per man. I seem to remember Obama criticizing Bush about how Bush's spending was, in his words, "unAmerican", and it was. The problem is, not only did Obama put us in debt to an unbelievable extreme, he recently cut spending to only DOUBLE what Bush's max was. This by itself should be enough to make anyone realize that Obama is a huge failure, but don't let facts get in your way.

    84. Re:Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The last 2 years of Bush and the 8 of Obama has been a steady slide into a quagmire of debt and fading opportunities. It only looks better by using smoke and mirrors and playing with numbers. You could be doing better possibly but as a country we are not. I doubt Trump could fix it since he's not part of the system and I'm pretty sure the people behind the scenes pulling the strings will make sure he's not elected in any case. It looks as if the elites in the Republican party have been instructed by their masters to sabotage his election and I'm pretty sure these people will be perfectly happy with Hilliary at the helm or Cruz or Rubio or any of their other bitches they fund. Don't look for anything to change except for the worse.

    85. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the answer is most definitely yes.

      Clearly you haven't been personally affected by this BLM bullshit that's been going on the past few months, or you might have noticed it. Or was that all Bush's fault?

    86. Re:Translation by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I think there are a lot of people over estimating the amount of damage he can actually do. The office of the President isn't all powerful. There are a lot of checks and balances (by design). At worst the only thing that would happen is that not a lot might get done for a couple of years and he may be a ineffectual President. At best he might shake things up and instigate a lot of change. I expect with Hillary you get the status quo, which is probably why she is backed and funded so well, and why she will probably win.

    87. Re: Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure Hilliary will do whatever she's told by her bosses at Goldman Sachs. I suppose that's better than Putin. She pretty much IS the average candidate, a lying dishonest politician. Her biggest fault is her arrogance where she thinks we all believe her bullshit because she is Hillary RODHAM Clinton. Personally, as a conservative I'd have preferred Bernie Sanders. I know he's nuts but at least he's not owned by the same people trying to turn the middle class in America into peasants.

    88. Re:Translation by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 1

      I could not agree more. Like you, I also voted for Bernie, and while some of his ideas were a little extreme for me, I was generally on board with what he was trying to accomplish. Similarly, I have many friends who are evidently the "Bernie or Bust" types, and they all seem to have the same non-sequitur criticisms of her (i.e. "she's just like the rest of them", "she hates women because she defended a rapist", "she is the reason we're stuck with NAFTA", etc).

      It's ridiculous the crap that people try to come up with as factual evidence as to why she'd be bad as a president, going so far as to say she'd be as bad or worse than Trump.....which is simply the most laughable thing I think I've ever heard. If anyone believes for a moment that a woman with her experience and capability is remotely close to the shit show that is Donald Trump, then you're simply not dealing in reality, and I highly suggest an appointment with a psychiatrist....like TODAY.....time is of the essence.

      Of course she's not perfect. No one is saying she is. But look at the shit that gets brought up most often about her. Benghazi? Absolutely NO ONE has been able to determine that that was "her fault". Hell, a Republican congress hired a Republican military analyst to look over the facts of that case, so you can say with certainty that they all were working together to TRY to find something wrong. Guess what? He found nothing. Sorry it happened, kids, but you can't lay that on her. Oh, and while we're on it, let's keep in mind that she was not the president at the time of NAFTA. Just because her husband signed it into law does not mean that you can lay all of the issues with NAFTA at her feet.

      The "Hillary defended a child molester" bit is ridiculous too. Guys, it WAS HER JOB! She was a defense attorney, and was the molester's court appointed attorney. If you're going to demonize her for doing her job, then you better do that for every single solitary defense attorney in the world.....and there's a shit ton of them.

      Trump is an imbecile with absolutely no government ability, and if you look carefully, no real business acumen. His bankruptcies are well documented. He will not win, but some folks like to think he will. There's just no way we're going to throw our country into the toilet by electing a clown to thumb our nose at "the system".

    89. Re:Translation by tbannist · · Score: 0

      So Trump hasn't learned anything new since 1980 and that's a good thing?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    90. Re:Translation by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Which ever side will get him more money and/or votes.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    91. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're touched in the head. What exactly has gone well in the last 8 years? Wage stagnation is great, I guess, for the people who bought Hilary, but not for the 99% of us who haven't had a meaningful raise. Unemployment's low, which is great, unless you're in the swelling ranks of long term unemployed who will never find a job. No, look at who's buying the politician. Hilary? completely sold out, and proud of it. Trump? Fuck if I know, but still better than blatantly sold out. You do also realize that if we stop believing the overlords that we can actually vote 3rd party?

    92. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah.....well, except for Canada, and Sweden, and New Zealand, and Norway, and Australia, and...well, pretty much all of Western Europe.......

      Apart from that though the US is going great guns ! Take THAT Somalia and Venezuela !!

    93. Re:Translation by tbannist · · Score: 1

      According to Forbes, "though speaking engagements, book deals, and consulting gigs".

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    94. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has he been totally consistent with putting America first in how he uses illegal immigrant labor when constructing his buildings? How about when he manufactures clothing with his name on it in China?

      Trump doesn't get tripped up by trick questions -- he gets tripped up by any question that requires thinking.

      You're right that Trump wasn't raised from birth to be a politician. The only thing he was raised to be is a narcissist.

      dom

    95. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he would shine light on what is already occurring in this country where the pussies can no longer turn a blind eye.

    96. Re:Translation by atgaaa · · Score: 1

      I am not retarded. I believe him more then I believe his opponent.

    97. Re:Translation by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Wait, wait, wait. We're supposed to vote for Trump because he will raise taxes on businesses?

      Doesn't that go against everything Trump, the Republican party, and their generous contributors stand for?

      Oh wait, Grover Norquist has endorsed Trump's tax plan, so it seems unlikely that taxes will be raised on anyone, unless the tax plan is full of lies... Which, admittedly, is certainly a possibility with Trump.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    98. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Obama is just cleaning up, he needs to put on a butler's uniform.

      And seriously, "blame Bush" still after 8 years?

    99. Re:Translation by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Translation: Trump would do something about importing cheap H-1B workers while Her Majesty wouldn't.

      I definitely think that's part of it. But I think Trump might also harm relations with Asia, which would be devastating to most tech companies. A more sensible person with his objectives might try to come up with a plan to slowly ween us off the crack, and build a more independent America, but Trump seems to favor bold moves.

      Of course Cersei will keep us on the crack until we die from it. So there's that, and having worked for tech companies I know there's an active dislike for long term planning.

    100. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DELETE YOUR ACCOUNT

    101. Re:Translation by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Horseshit. There are clothes made in the USA, even if it's a small fraction of the industry. If Trump wanted to walk the talk, he could have, but he didn't.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    102. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong! Google made in America clothing. If you actually give a damn start buying from those companies.

    103. Re: Translation by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      Trump is trying to get funded by the same people and organizations as every other republican.

      It is amazing that the same "working class" that who during the Reagan years were so eager to tell poor people to "pick themselves up by their bootstraps, and stop blaming the government for all their problems" are now complaining about the government and not being able to get ahead.

    104. Re: Translation by wernercd8122 · · Score: 0

      Where is my racism? At what point does anything in my statement list anything close to race? How about, instead of yelling BIGOT! RACIST! SEXIST! when someone disagrees with you... you instead form thoughts and turn them into sentences that back your claims.

      And... you forgot to blame Bush and the NRA as well... your troll is weak.

    105. Re: Translation by dynamo · · Score: 1

      The same can be said for her.

    106. Re:Translation by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes. I was in the Castro when the BLM crowd decided to attack the bars and clubs there last year (It was January or February I think; definitely winter tho. So we're up to at least a year and a half, not just the "past few months" you mention.). My friends and I made ourselves scarce and moved our night out to Ruby Skye. It was obnoxious and they're a bunch of tools for lashing out and attacking random uninvolved third parties... and raging hypocrites for targeting the LGBT community... instead of staying focused on the police. At the same time though, they have a 100% valid and legit complaint. The police's abuse of the african american community is totally unacceptable. It's almost as if black people are being gunned down for sport by the cops at this point. And it absolutely has to stop.

      But it's neither Obama's nor Bush's fault. It's the police's. This has been going on far longer than the presidencies of either. And I don't believe for a second that the situation is worse now than before. It's just that pretty much everyone has a camera built into their phone now, and it's far more common for their abuses to be brought to light.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    107. Re:Translation by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      It's not just me. Literally everyone I know is better off now than we were under Bush. I scroll down through my friends list in Facebook and it's:

      "Income has more than doubled"
      "Got her dream job at Tesla"
      "Escaped from ohio and works as a game developer"
      "Just bought a house"
      "Successfully started her own business and is helping her brother do the same"
      "Escaped the dead-end banking job and now runs the finances for a startup"
      "Advanced from Jr. QA tester to Sr. Test Automation Engineer"
      "Got his citizenship"
      "Finally found a partner and, thanks to the recent SCOTUS ruling striking down prop 8, was able to marry."
      "Just successfully defended his dissertation"
      "Moved from ohio and works as an embedded systems engineer" (Come to think of it, is kind of weird how many people I know moved here from ohio. I can think of at least four, off the top of my head. Not that I ever doubted that it must be a pretty dreary place though. So who can blame them?)
      And so on and so on and so on.

      And we're hardly "privileged 1%-er Wall Street oppressors". We're just a bunch of ordinary people living our lives. In fact, according to salary.com, I'm now a touch below the median for my position/experience. And that's because salaries have been going up, and it's ALWAYS been the case that most companies issue raises slower than average salaries increase and you have to change jobs to chase the curve. Scrolling to the bottom of the list, the only way I can see that any of us are worse off now is that we're all eight years older and some of us have had health problems in that time; both of which fall under the category of "life happens".

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    108. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... the legislative branch will never fund a war.

      So what the hell are we doing in the middle east? I'm pretty sure they're funding that, and it seems awfully war-like.

    109. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not even sure that Trump is working the angle of "just say what will get you elected."

      Have you ever noticed how few speeches he gives? He just talks extemporaneously. He likes the sound of his own voice and the attention he gets. He's very much like Hugo Chavez in this respect; Chavez and Trump can ad-lib for hours on stage. Very different politics to be sure, but similar personalities in this respect.

      This is one of Trump's key weaknesses. While you are talking you aren't listening, and Trump is never 'not talking'. Trump has the whole world figured out and he's gonna tell you how it is; he's not really interested in your opinion, your story, your point of view. Trump spends time on Trump and that's the way he likes the world.

      I will say however, that his ability to be comfortable on stage and ad-lib in front of a crowd is impressive. He has that part nailed.

    110. Re:Translation by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing with Bernie vs. Hillary is for all of the specious hate from the Bernie Bros, how similar their positions really are. Over the course of the primaries, I took a fair number of those "which candidate matched my positions" quizzes; on of the more comprehensive literally being "isidewith.com".

      Not that I needed the sites to know I'd be voting Sanders in the primary, and whichever Democrat got the nomination in the general. But it was nice to have all their positions consolidated in one convenient place. No surprise, I came up with a 97% match with Sanders. Thing is, Clinton was still a 90% match. And while that's not as good as Sanders, obviously, it's still a A; barely, but still an A. The highest-rated republican was John Katich, with a score in the 50s'; already an F. Trump was somewhere in the 20s; a catastrophically failing grade.

      If the republican candidate were someone like Schwarzenegger, who I guesstimate would come in somewhere in the low-to-mid 80s; I might even cross the aisle come November. Because, to be perfectly honest, Hillary does have issues and as a general principal, I don't like political dynasties and anointed dauphins, be they Bushes, Clintons, or even Kennedys. But vs Trump? The decision is crystal clear.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    111. Re:Translation by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      So you think anyone who rethinks a political position is unreliable? That every politician should hatch with a fully formed rigid ideology burned into his or her cortex?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    112. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much all politicians will say whatever they think will get them votes. Very few of them ever vote in ways that reflect anything their voters give damn about.

      The real surprise is that the voters keep repeating the mistake of voting for politicians who very obviously don't care what the voters want, and are easily swayed by the politicians' pretenses during their campaigns.

    113. Re:Translation by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      No.

      But Donald Drumpf does.

    114. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do whatever son. The rest of the world doesn't give a shit and will happily takeover whatever you feel too good about.
      The world does not end where the US does. Half of America seems to think this, which is no wonder because they are absolutely oblivious as to what is happening in the other 90% of the world. Fucking rednecks, lol. I hope this clown wins so the rest of the world can have a good laugh for four years or more, while the US slowly but surely becomes the third world country at least a third of its citizens deserve. If you think trump will be good for you I am pretty fucking sure your brain is not working like it is supposed to in humans.

      Democracy is nice and all, but I swear, most people should not be allowed to vote,they are just too fucking stupid. I know, not a very popular opinion, but you don't let your fucking kids vote if they should go to school or not. For the love of God, please introduce some kind of minimum IQ a voter needs. This world...

    115. Re: Translation by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I think people in the US just have no good idea what living under an actual repressive government would be like. I say what I like without government interference. I can move freely within the US (although air travel is unnecessarily screwed up). I work at a job of my choice, and spend my money (aside from a reasonable amount of taxes) as I choose.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    116. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I vote according to my feels too.

    117. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. At worst he can royally piss off various foreign powers who then offer reprisals. He's simply not good for policy in or out of the country.

    118. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a huge difference between 1) changing your mind after years of research and speaking with people, and (most importantly) recognizing the winds of change, and 2) saying completely contradictory things several times per week.

    119. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone see Congress approving anything Trump asks for? Dissolution of signed international treaty's cannot be abrogated by the President alone.

      Actually, in many cases all it would take is leadership.

      Like so much else created by the legislative branch, many treaties violate the Bill of Rights. But the Bill of Rights is the highest law in the land, and Congress has no authority to violate any rights the people decide are "retained by them" (9th Amendment) or "reserved to them" (10th Amendment).

      In short, the power to create treaties is inherently limited.

      This makes perfect sense, since if Congress could infringe any right desired simply by putting it into a treaty, they could do anything they wanted with a quick bribe to another country.

      Since many elements of treaties are in fact illegal, just as many things in the various legal codes of government in the United States (federal, state, and local) are illegal, really all it takes is leadership to run over the opposition of the corrupt and unethical elements in society that bought those illegal treaties and/or laws in the first place.

    120. Re:Translation by ElectricHellKnight · · Score: 1

      So you think anyone who rethinks a political position is unreliable? That every politician should hatch with a fully formed rigid ideology burned into his or her cortex?

      That's a very simplistic way of interpreting my point. I mean that Trump has been far lass "flippy floppy" than Hillary.

    121. Re:Translation by ElectricHellKnight · · Score: 1

      So Trump hasn't learned anything new since 1980 and that's a good thing?

      Or maybe it means his ideas (a good deal of them, anyway) were right to begin with.

    122. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because lottery makers know people are bad at math.

    123. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree with your assessment of Trump's effect. I also think you would be surprised at the effect an IQ cutoff of 95 would have.
      While there are a few smart people who lean left, the vast majority of left votes come from generational welfare dependents. Do you want to guess at what IQ they have?

    124. Re: Translation by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      While Clinton is the only one with a position on murdering or wrecking the career of anyone in their way.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    125. Re:Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I and millions of others make the same or less than we did 8 years ago. Many are still unemployed yet aren't counted as such because they've dropped off the radar. Many just said fuck it after years of trying.

      And before you start with the Fox News bullshit this is CNBC the people who specialize in sucking Democrat dick.

      http://www.cnbc.com/2015/05/20...

      I'm glad you and your friends are doing well but as I said you don't represent average citizens.

    126. Re: Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      A government that actively promotes policies that damage the US economy is a problem. NAFTA did huge damage and now they want to jack that up by several orders of magnitude with the TPP deal. Get ready to bend over and spread 'em American workers. The politicians are getting ready to sell you out. You'll notice the really, really fucked up shit gets huge bi-partisan support? That's because the same fuckers that own the democrats own the republicans. They could care less about bullshit like abortion and gay marriage and trannys in the ladies room. Those are just issues to confuse and divide the people so they can fuck us over. The corporations that run this country don't really give a shit about party lines.

    127. Re: Translation by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      So what do you think happens when we start trade wars? The price of everything goes up we import causing us to pay more and the price of everything we export goes up making it harder to compete. Why is it good to artificially inflate the wage of the "working class" via tariffs and import restrictions but not good to increase the minimum wage?

    128. Re: Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Don't go down the other extreme. I'm not terribly enamored of tariffs and trade wars either. The point is there is middle ground. It's possible to come up with a trade deal that benefits everyone, not just the corporations.

    129. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would any US citizen give two shits about some foreign leader getting upset? And reprisals? I have some news for you. The US still has all the military and financial power it needs to ruin anyone looking for a fight. And the world definitely needs the US than the US needs them. It's just time to acknowledge that fact and readjust your world view.

    130. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what? Fuck you, that's what. Fuck you and the rest of your san francisco yuppie faggot friends. San Francisco is not the whole fucking world. Try leaving california sometime. Go to ohio, that place you bemusedly imagine "must be pretty dreary." It's called the rust belt. It's "pretty dreary" bucause all of the manufacturing jobs have gone to china and the people are poor, desperate, and not making six-figure tech salries. Shit. Try just leaving the bay area and going to the central valley, where shit tons of farmers are struggling under the effects of the drought that's still going on and destroying their livelihoods while you steam your imported quinoa with hetch hetchey valley water. Or just look at the straight couples in san francisco that are spending their money to support their children, instead of pissing it away partying every weekend on Castro street. I bet you don't know or associate with anyone outside Frisco. And I bet that if you even know any straight people, they're childless like your faggot self. We can't all be DINKs. Someone has to continue the species, even if it produces more faggots.

      And Black Lives Matter didn't "attack" the Castro or "the LGBT community."" And it wasn't just any random day in the winter. They PROTESTED in the Castro and BRIEFLY disrupted happy hour in the major bars on MARTIN LUTHER KING weekend! And they focused on the Badlands and Toad Hall because of Les Fucking Natali. I bet you don't even know who owns, or the history of, the places you go troll for cock evrery weekend. Look his name up in google. Black Lives Matter didn't attack anyone. They protested the Castro because it's a predominantly white scene that can hardly be bothered to take notice of the systematic opperssion of people of color. They protested the Castro because you were treating MARTIN LUTHER KING weekend as just another long weekend and goign about your business as usual of getting shitfaced with a dick up your ass... while black people were and are being slaughtered in the streets. But no, you and the rest of your shithead faggot friends saw the negros coming and retreated to the douchiest most Marinaish club you could find, where the bouncers were sure to turn away anyone who's unstylishly dressed or colored.

      And don't mention your asian or latino freiends/coworkers/tricks/whatevers. You fucking Frisco liberals and your asians and latinos. So smug about your your Chinese, Filipinos, and Peruvians; so convinced that becaause you hang out with some kinds of non-white-people that you're not a racist, can't possibly be part of the problem, and the Black Lives Matter are just a "bunch of tools". I got news for you, shithead. Asians and latinos have their noses buried so far up the white man's ass that they're basically white themselves. So don't think for a second that your San Francisco "majority minority" demographics make you truely diverse.

      Oh, and again. Fuck you.

    131. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the same can be said for increasing operating costs you increase the risk and reduce the investment in new facilities and this a reduction in jobs but many of the Hilaryvsupporters and Oboma supporters push for companies to pay a little bit more . Oboma care , raising minimum wage and forcing labor unions on companies all increased the cost and reduced investment and thus jobs . I am sensing a double standard

    132. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not nice to call many democratic voters stupid .

    133. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Hillary will say whatever she needs to get elected . Every watch 13 min of hillary lies on YouTube . One day in liberal my she is for same sex marriage , the next day in conservative ohio she is against same sex marriage .
      Fyi most stuff people say about trump is basses on second hand highly edited news pieces
      He want to reform H1-b so companies like Disney can't bring in h1-b for positing that are not in areas where there is employee shortages . No shortage of American qualified workers in networking and corporate network support

    134. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't like fox news - look at some at other source - the clinton scandals have been going on longer than foxnews has been around.

      Obama cleaning up? Good grief I've never seen a president refuse to do his job as a political tool. He can't even implement his signature health care law because it would piss people off. I was really waiting to see how those supposed death panels would really work in practice - as just one example of something that was punted.

    135. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One suggestion - maybe by cruise - is you could have as many as you want - as long as you pay a high minimum wage for them. The idea being you would pay it if there is really a shortage.

      We know there is no STEM person shortage because otherwise salaries for those jobs would be much higher. As it is now the bureau of labor and stats says the outlook for stem people is rather sad - for the next 10 years!

    136. Re: Translation by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      There is no trade deal that doesn't cause prices to go up. You have to make it cost less for companies to manufacturer in the U.S. than overseas. The only ways to do that is to raise the cost of importing goods or subsidizing manufacturers - with taxpayers money.

    137. Re:Translation by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In the first place, I don't believe you. There's a lot of nonsense going around about Trump.

      In the second place, being consistent in your political opinions for thirty-six years suggests some form of dementia rather than logical thinking. The world has changed since Reagan was elected, and we've learned things.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    138. Re: Translation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Maybe we could try to remove all the impediments to selling US goods overseas. I know there are several nations that purport to have free trade but really there is no such thing. Tariffs aren't the only method to impede trade.

    139. Re:Translation by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      This is an extremely poor time to cast a protest type vote. The supreme court has one vacant position right now, and likely 2-3 more coming up soon.

      Trump has already mentioned some names of possible nominees. They are very conservative, and likely to be approved if the house and senate remain in Republican control. And given it is a lifetime appointment, a vote for Trump is a vote to swing the supreme court hard right for 30-50 years.

      So just be aware of what you are voting for when you vote for Trump. It isn't a powerless position at all. Executive orders alone are very powerful. And the timing of this election will shape our country's legal system for decades.

    140. Re:Translation by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      That really picks and chooses carefully to make him seem more consistent. The Daily show and lots of others have made similar videos where Trump is literally saying the exact opposite on dozens of issues.

      And he was a registered democrat from 1990'ish to 2000'ish. I forget the exact years, but he's switched from Repub to Dem, back to Repub, as well as praised Hillary as an excellent choice for President during the 2008 primaries.

      It was right after Obama got elected that he started becoming conservative (in his latest incarnation of it), talking about the birth certificate and all the crazy stuff. It was obviously to build 'street cred' with the conservative primary voters.

  2. that's almost all of the tech leaders. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a lot... there are what like 146 tech leaders total?

    1. Re: that's almost all of the tech leaders. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's most of the top companies. Even Steve Wozniak signed. Btw how many support Trump and his lack of concern for foreigners? Peter Thiel is the only tech leader that supports Trump. And he is hardly a tech person when you consider he hasn't invented anything.

  3. Hillary for more H1Bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So Zuckerberg and other tech billionaires are on board.

    Also, how is she going to roll out high speed internet to every household in America? Seems like a clueless and empty promise.

    1. Re:Hillary for more H1Bs by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      He'll run the fiber and make AT&T pay for it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Hillary for more H1Bs by rmullig2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Simple, the government redefines high-speed Internet as 56Kbps. Problem solved.

    3. Re:Hillary for more H1Bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It worked for the unemployment rate under Obama. Just redefine what it means to be employed and the rate suddenly drops down below 5% again.

    4. Re:Hillary for more H1Bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hahahahahaha nice..

    5. Re:Hillary for more H1Bs by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      AT&T should pay for it after all the money they've made over charging and abusing their customers.

  4. First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Post!

  5. basically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they just want to continue having access to cheap imported labor, which hillary has agreed to give them

  6. Candidate not for sale by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not a Trump fan but I get the impression that many who like him believe he isn't bought and paid for like Hillary probably is. If they are right, it makes sense that these guys wouldn't want to lose their investment and have someone elected that isn't beholden to them.

    1. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, Trump is the one who does the buying and paying. He's still just as corrupt as the rest of them.

      Although it appears he doesn't always pay his bills.

    2. Re:Candidate not for sale by deadwill69 · · Score: 2

      While that might be the case up to this point, it will not be going further into this election cycle. Predictions are that unless he picks up a massive groundswell of donations from his supporter he will be in the same boat as Hillary within weeks. He will quickly loose the most appealing thing about him: he was self funded for the most part. There is know way he can afford to spend, the predicted 2 billion it is expected to run a successful campaign to completion, out of his own pockets and he doesn't (from what I've seen) picked up a donor base like Sanders did. Maybe he can talk Sanders into turning over his supporters, but he's already backed Hillary so this would be a dream at this point.

    3. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is bought and paid for -- he's 100% in the pocket of Trump Industries.

    4. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not an American, but old enough to know of Trump for the last 30 years. Has he ever been involved any any venture not designed to enrich his coffers? (I'm not saying the same is not true for Clinton.)

      Historical - provable - data tells you that you cannot trust Trump on this issue.

    5. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you knew that he was out for himself foremost. Clinton got rich supposedly helping the little guy. During her stay as Secretary of state, the state dept gave a university 55 million in grants while Bill got payed 16 mill as their honorary chancellor.

    6. Re:Candidate not for sale by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      The question wasn't whether or to what degree he is corrupt. However a better question along the same lines is would you rather have someone in office that is bought and sold or someone who buys and sells?

    7. Re:Candidate not for sale by dasgoober · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump is just taking out the Middle Man.
      Hillary is selling the electorate to her backers, for the backers' benefit.
      Trump is selling the electorate a bill of goods for his benefit.

    8. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a better question along the same lines is would you rather have someone in office that is bought and sold or someone who buys and sells?

      If Trump is corrupt—which he is, and more than Hillary is, even though you so smugly want to ignore that entirely—then I would rather have Hillary in office. I don't like Hillary, and I voted for someone else in the primary. But the choice is between her and Trump, and there's no comparison. Trump loses by far.

    9. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get the impression that many who like him are happy somebody's come along and said straight out what the subtext of the Republican party has been for years. The majority of people of this persuasion are far more concerned with making themselves feel superior to Mexicans/Muslims/Gays/Women than give a crap about, you know, sustaining a thoughtful democracy that works patiently and diligently to advance American ideals in a global context. No doubt money talks in our imperfect system, but to think that somehow Drumpf will make a better leader -- because he's beholden only to his own selfish and narcisstic whims, rather than the capitalistic pressures of modern politics -- is laughable. His support comes from racists and the uneducated, with just enough pseudo-intellectuals in the mix to lend him the same credibility as the "PhDs" touting Kentucky's new Ark "reconstruction."

    10. Re:Candidate not for sale by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Hillary is corrupt throughout and without limit. Hillary, almost as much as Obama, is a conscious enemy of the United States of America. Trump at the least is pro-America.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    11. Re:Candidate not for sale by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Your reasoning is as good as your use of the English language.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    12. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump is a con man who probably despises his supporters, just as he despised the customers of every single business he's ever owned. Look at how he ordered Trump University to promise people the moon with "master the art of the deal" this and that, and then grab as much of their bank accounts as they could. He did the exact same thing selling units at many different condominium complexes.

      BUT his supporters give him a free pass, because...

      They're chumps.

    13. Re:Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary is corrupt throughout and without limit. Hillary, almost as much as Obama, is a conscious enemy of the United States of America. Trump at the least is pro-America.

      Yes, she helped create the Chip program that got kids health care because she is an enemy of America. Yes she worked hard to help everyone get affordable health care because she is an enemy of america. Yes, she did a credible job representing New York because she is an enemy of america America. She also did a credible job as secretary of state, so of course she must be an enemy of america. Why if she was a friend her and bill could have just made a living on speaking fees, but no, they had to setup a really impressive charitable organisation, because you know hating the world.

      Trump on the other hand is pro america, because he tells sitting supreme court judges that they are idiots. Yes, he is pro america because he basically tried to incite hatred and possible violence against a perfectly hard working and credible judge who even helped him out by delaying the case on his trump university fraud scheme. Yes, he is pro america, because inciting violence against non americans and calling them criminals and rapists actually advances america's foreign policy interests. Yes, he is pro america because he throws out appeals to fear and emotion left and right. Only anti american nazi's throw out actual facts and reason. Trump will be a great statesman for america, assuming of course he doesn't start world war III with his idiotic bluster, but he must be pro america, because he listens to the smartest people, such as the one he sees in the mirror.

    14. Re:Candidate not for sale by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Well, Hillary Clinton is credible at promoting herself to you at least. From my perspective Donald Trump has been credible at promoting himself for far longer. We can't tell who is more corrupt; the whole problem with corruption is that no one actually shows their cards. Trump and Hillary share certain traits that Trump doesn't try to hide and Hillary does. And she's worse at it than she realizes. With Trump I feel like I'll have a better heads up of the troubles I'll face when he messes up than when Hillary messes up, and whichever one makes it in, will. I just don't know for sure who will mess up worse. When Trump messed up in business he declared bankruptcy publicly. When Hillary messed up as Secretary of State she deleted emails and said "What difference does it make?"

      I would prefer a person who was pro-humanity, but neither seem to be that parson. Donald Trump has an America versus the world mentality, whiled Hillary seems to think that it takes a village to raise a globally minded citizen, when all villages tend to raise are people with a tribe versus the world mentality.

      I think Trump has a mentality that would be okay whether the bathrooms match gender mentality or not, while Hillary has the mindset of how the world must suit the mindset of individuals, all awhile engendering qualities in others that are ill suited to shaping the world to your will. Which is to say that Trump is the sort of man who changes the world to suit him, while Hillary is the sort of person who pleads to the world to change lest bad things happen to people.

    15. Re:Candidate not for sale by gtall · · Score: 1

      Trump's relationship with money is just like the Breshnev Doctrine: What's mine is mine and what's yours is open to discussion. He doesn't mind stiffing over investors, how is that different from stiffing over voters?

      Truth be told, cats live by the Breshnev Doctrine as well, yet you don't see them insulting household members with tweets.

    16. Re: Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My parents are from Mexico. I have a Masters degree. I will be proudly voting for Trump. Sorry about your narrative.

    17. Re:Candidate not for sale by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      No one outside of prison, and few inside, are more corrupt than Hilliary.

    18. Re:Candidate not for sale by xtsigs · · Score: 1

      Trump at the least is pro-America.

      Trump is pro-Trump. He has never been pro anything else. No one should expect him to change into someone who suddenly cares about anyone or anything else.

    19. Re: Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to school and learn something please, if it isn't too late already.

    20. Re: Candidate not for sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having a degree doesn't automatically make you not stupid. Oh boy....

    21. Re: Candidate not for sale by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Ruling Supreme Court justices are stupid? Well, close enough. But the whole of the ruling class, Trump included are stupid and malicious. They pass laws to set us at odds with each other, because a divided people is an easily manipulated people.

  7. De-incentivizing outsourcing harms these folks by HBI · · Score: 1

    No surprise here. Their ox is going to get gored.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  8. Making a buzzword of "innovation"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    has already been disastrous for innovation.

  9. Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is how Brexit happened... Who are these experts and why do they think their opinions should matter more than wishful thinking?

  10. What are their positions on outsourcing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are the position of these "leaders" on outsourcing?

  11. They don't like him?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well now, I'm beginning to see him in a different light.

    Remember, those are all the same tech giants who lied and said Americans don't have the qualifications so they need more H1-bs and they need to offshore to India. And some of them said that programmers over 30 don't get it.

    So, they are just trying to protect their billions by convincing us peons that our interests are the same as theirs. Fuck'em - all of them!

    And the word 'innovation' coming out their mouths is just insulting. Most of them are just goddamn advertising companies and makers of shiny toys. Gimme a fucking break. The last innovation that came out of Silicon Valley was routers/Cisco. Yep, everything since then has been consumer grade crap and just the reinvention of the wheel.

    Those people need to get a dictionary and look at Hewlett and Packard's history - THOSE guys were innovators and THEY are MY benchmark.

    Anyway, all the Silicon Valley people are just arrogant dicks with huge amount of self-importance and entitlement.

    1. Re: They don't like him?! by backslashdot · · Score: 1, Informative

      What about Steve Wozniak? He signed the letter, he is not an innovator? What about the founders of companies like Splunk, Qualcomm, eBay, Yelp, Twitter, and Wikipedia? And even though they didn't sign we know from their public statements that the founders of Microsoft, Cisco, Google, YouTube, Tesla/SpaceX, and Facebook support immigrants.

      Who are the anti immigrant tech leaders?? Besides Peter Thiel (who btw didn't invent anything) and I suppose maybe one or two others I assume .. there aren't many. I guess high intelligence correlates with a higher caring about fellow human beings.

    2. Re: They don't like him?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Woz is just a bleeding heart liberal, like most tech leaders reared in The Land of Fruits and Nuts.

    3. Re: They don't like him?! by lgw · · Score: 1

      It's all just virtue signalling. America now votes along class lines more than ideological lines. Trump represents working class people who (gasp!) likely didn't even go to college. Can't have that sort of embarrassment, no way, we must appear sophisticated above all else!
       

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re: They don't like him?! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Trump supports immigrants as well. Just not ones here illegally, or with unknown/highly-suspicious backgrounds. Seems a reasonable position to me.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    5. Re: They don't like him?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What should we expect from a bunch of Compyootah Nutters?

    6. Re: They don't like him?! by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      Everyone has an "unknown" background to some extent. That's a hell of a thing, have you videotaped your entire existence? Yes it's true we can check where you went to school who your relatives are etc. but how do we know u haven't done bad stuff at some point or maybe you do it secretly even now?
      Fact is, if you are automatically paranoid of "unknown" you can harm people. While paranoia might reduce your own risk overall more people are hurt by paranoia than are helped.

      If the narrative that illegal immigrants increase crime how come the number, and especially the rate, of murder and violent crime has drastically reduced over the last 25 years? In fact we are at historic minimums in terms of crime. In fact, statistically, there is a strong case for the fact that illegals have caused a violent crime reduction.

      Refugees, nearly always, can't prove their background. If they are fleeing persecution do you think they had time to get all their background checks and certifications done? I will bet money that a majority of people who hate illegals will not hesitate to illegally immigrate somewhere if they were facing a dire situation at home. Like many people claim they won't steal under any circumstance. What if your and driving with family and get in an serious accident on a desolate road and your family is hurt in it .. there is no cell phone service but there is a locked holiday cabin with a phone and first aid supplies. I bet cash money most people will break into the locked holiday cabin to steal the first aid kit and make a phone call to get help.

      Yeah so all the hate on illegal while maybe 1 out of 10 might be bad don't forget about the other 9. We have had a huge influx of illegal immigrants yet there has been a REDUCTION in violent crime.

  12. All About the H-1B by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The tech executives just want to keep the gravy train of cheap, captive H-1B visa holders. I have been a Democrat all my life, donated many times to President Obama--and would vote for him again in a heartbeat. Hillary Clinton is the first Democratic presidential candidate in my life that I cannot support. I am senior enough in my field to have never had my personal job touched by an H-1B visa holder. (They are dishonest morons.) The way it's run, the entire H-1B visa program is a scam. So, I will be voting for Dr. Jill Stein. I will be damned if I will vote for Clinton. I've done that enough. She supports rich tech billionaires--not me--and I will return the favor. I would rather suffer through 4 years of Donald Trump instead of allowing Hillary Clinton to screw us.

    1. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'd knowingly support an insane person, just so you wouldn't get your feelings hurt. That's smart.

    2. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if in the short term, predict for me what will happen to the global economy if Trump is elected? The immediate after effects for Brexit on the global markets was a loss of some $3 trillion. (Short term). I believe the British pound is still at a relative low to the USD.

      How will your trading partners, critical for US standard of living, react, even if subtly for the long term.

      Even if Clinton is equally self-serving, at the very least the economic status quo will be maintained until the field of candidates improve from both parties, No independent will take the White House.

      I suggest that Americans think, "country first" rather than voting on their pet peeve. As the largest (or is that second largest) economy on the planet the number of factors and interactions that impact your socio-economic well being goes well beyond scapegoating - at an individual level or coming from a demagogue.

    3. Re:All About the H-1B by tomhath · · Score: 1

      You'd knowingly support an insane person

      You have to vote for one of them, so pick the least insane of the bunch. No way I'd vote for Hillary.

    4. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would rather suffer through 4 years of Donald Trump instead of allowing Hillary Clinton to screw us.

      perhaps you may not even need to 'suffer through' a full 4 years with either one...

    5. Re:All About the H-1B by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would rather suffer through 4 years of Donald Trump instead of allowing Hillary Clinton to screw us.

      If it were only 4 years ... The next president will get to nominate a minimum of 2 judges to the Supreme Court. Probably 3. This will influence life in the USA for decades.

      While I don't think that Clinton is a good candidate, I think that Trump will be far, far worse. He is already beholden to wealthy people (his campaign hasn't been self-funded for a long time now), his statements show that he has an utter lack of concern for the liberties that the Framers wanted people to have. His real policies may not be for the benefit of tech billionaires, instead, it is for the benefit of billionaires. Trump is a proven liar. He used charity money to buy himself a vacation (now he has paid, but only after being called out on the issue).

      What's in his tax returns that he is hiding? It's obviously something that shows him in a bad light. My guess is that it shows that his income and net assets are actually far lower than he would like people to know. In other words, his claim to be such a great businessman are in part smoke and mirrors.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    6. Re:All About the H-1B by dugancent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "You have to vote for one of them"

      You absolutely do not have to and shame on you for saying that.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    7. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Team Trump had to vet the charities. Without the proper paperwork, they might end up giving money to a bad charity. That takes time.

      Where's that speech Hillary gave to Goldman Sachs? Maybe she's contradicted herself for the millionth time yet again?

    8. Re: All About the H-1B by backslashdot · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What about all the foreigners trump will deliberately torture, maim and kill. And yes, he has stated he wants to target family members of terrorists (i.e., not just the terrorists themselves). This is no big deal to
      you?

    9. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (They are dishonest morons.) The way it's run, the entire H-1B visa program is a scam.

      Are you special ed? These linkedin links talk about how to spot fake H1B's and OPT/CPT/F1 not that these programs are scams.

    10. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off shill. Your shaming tactics won't get anyone to vote for that disgusting crook Hillary.

    11. Re:All About the H-1B by tomhath · · Score: 2

      So go ahead, let other people elect your representatives. But don't complain about who gets elected.

    12. Re: All About the H-1B by dugancent · · Score: 1

      I'll complain if I damn well please. I'm a citizen, I pay taxes and I didn't vote for them.

      I'm going to vote for presdient, I'm just not picking Trump or Hillary.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    13. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, pray tell, is it that makes you think Jill Stein is insane?

    14. Re:All About the H-1B by sheetsda · · Score: 1

      Where's that speech Hillary gave to Goldman Sachs? Maybe she's contradicted herself for the millionth time yet again?

      Look through all the posts in this discussion and I think you will find that no one is arguing that Hillary would make a good president. What I think you will find is lot of people arguing that Trump would make a dangerous one.

    15. Re:All About the H-1B by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What was said in those $700,000 speeches Hillary gave to Goldman Sachs? No, my entire life I have been taking the safe road, and invariably I see the people who I thought were decent enough turn around and hire Larry Summers and fill their cabinet with ex Goldman Sachs members. I am so fucking sick of the elite buying off our politicians and of our politicians then joining the elite, as has happened to Hillary and Bill Clinton. That she thought it acceptable--two years before she planned to run for President of the United States--to give a series of quarter-million-dollar speeches to Wall Street, just blows me the hell away. Either she is breathtakingly incompetent or worse, she is deeply and profoundly cynical and knows that we have no other choice but her. I worked hard for Bernie--and the likes of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz took advantage and stacked the deck for Hillary (exactly like the Republicans always do for their chosen ones) and then W-S attempted to block regulation of the payday loan industry, and I realized that I could not support these people. I know in the long run the Republicans are dead but I am simply and frankly so pissed off at the freaking decades of bad behavior by politicians that I am beyond holding back, making the "smart" choice. I am tired of the incrementalism. I want to burn down the house. I want Americans to wake up and register what they want this country to look like. I want to take America by the face and give it a slap. Yes, two Supreme-Court Nominees. Yes, continued fight on Climate Change. But really, if Hillary Clinton gets in there is no way she would turn the country on a dime like Bernie would have. Trump will not but... he seems kind of malleable. He's not your average Republican idiot like a Jim Inhofe who holds a position with no thought. I realize Trump is an idiot but an idiot is better than a sly and crafty adversary. I think Hillary is polluted with wealth and exposure to the idle rich.

    16. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you have no position on various social issues, you have to vote this November. The president nominates judges and the Senate confirms - get them both "the wrong way" and issues you hold dear might turn out badly (no abortion/keep abortion, no non-straight/all non-straight rights, ...). A whole, whole lot's at stake. If you can't tolerate the top of the ballot, there's lots of other people you can vote for.

    17. Re:All About the H-1B by TheSync · · Score: 1

      "Should the government increase or decrease the amount of temporary work visas given to high-skilled immigrant workers?

      Jill Stein's answer: Increase" (source)

    18. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you vote you don't have the right to complain.

    19. Re:All About the H-1B by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

      These links spot a larger question, which has been all over the news, of fraud in the H-1B program. I feel no need to make that case has already been made. Say what you like, Jagdish.

    20. Re:All About the H-1B by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

      Then I write in Bernie Sanders, who I supported with $$ in the primary. The central point here is that I, a Democrat, feel compelled to support someone other than the candidate coronated by the DNC.

    21. Re:All About the H-1B by aevan · · Score: 1

      The Ogre Choice: Would you like to be eaten alive, or would you like me to kill you first? Remember, if you don't pick, you don't get to complain.

    22. Re:All About the H-1B by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Green Party. Q.E.D.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    23. Re:All About the H-1B by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The EU was a suicide pact for Great Britain. The English were fortunate to get out while they still could.

      The current trend is down, so maintaining the policies that created the trend does no good.
      Life is change. Status quo is death.

      Trump is largely ignorant of the free market. Hillary is an active enemy of the free market. Which does our economic health more harm?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    24. Re:All About the H-1B by Bartles · · Score: 1

      After reading the first two sentences I realized that your judgement is terrible, so I didn't read the rest.

    25. Re:All About the H-1B by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Then I write in Bernie Sanders,

      That's my plan. I don't live in a swing state, so there is little to no chance that voting this way will allow Trump to win my state, but it sends a message.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    26. Re:All About the H-1B by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      What's in his tax returns that he is hiding?

      That one's obvious.....he doesn't have as much money as he claims.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re: All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll complain if I damn well please. I'm a citizen, I pay taxes and I didn't vote for them.

      I'm going to vote for presdient, I'm just not picking Trump or Hillary.

      If you really believe that it is more important to make a statement that you cannot accept either one than to support the candidate you dislike least, then that is a perfectly valid statement to make, and I fully support that. It is infinitely better than not voting at all. In fact, if everyone who stayed home voted for say the same third party candidate, then that candidate would likely win.

      Personally I'd love to have some kind of voting scheme where you could either vote multiple times or do ranked voting. (After the first vote you would remove some of the losing candidates and vote again.) I'll be voting for Hillary, though I thought Bernie was a better choice. He was consistent his whole career.

      Sometimes people say they have no power since the elections are mostly decided except for a handful of states. Well, there are also local issues and positions, and even then, they tend to be predictable because so many stay home. I almost hate to write it, but I'd rather see a trump voter vote than stay home, though I'd rather see a truly informed voter, which I think would see fewer trump voters. I don't think he is good for much unless we need our own baghdad bob.

    28. Re:All About the H-1B by TooManyNames · · Score: 1

      I don't know why people are so opposed to this line of thinking. Including third (or forth) party candidates in the process seems like something that would be especially useful this time around -- if only to drive more discussion and call Republicans and Democrats on their bullshit -- but it's not going to happen if people reserve their vote for "the lesser of two evils." Also, let's face it, individual votes don't really matter for determining the outcome of most states, but they can matter, in aggregate, in giving a third party a voice on the national stage.

      --
      "Is not a sentence" is not a sentence. Well damn.
    29. Re:All About the H-1B by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that voting for a third party candidate may mean that the worst candidate (from the voter's perspective) may win.

      However, my message is aimed at the DNC grandees who selected Clinton. I hope you don't believe that the voters selected Clinton through the primary process. It's glaringly obvious that the process was rigged. Which brings an interesting question, if the DNC rigs their primaries, what about the Republicans? Was Trump really their preferred candidate, or was there a massive tide of voter discontent, large enough to overcome the rigging? Or did they simply not rig it?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    30. Re:All About the H-1B by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      My guess: with a lower-taxes President in place, and a guy who wants to streamline business operations, any temporary hiccup will be quickly replaced by faster growth. Add in the promise of a repatriation amnesty and you'll see investments in the US spike pretty readily.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    31. Re: All About the H-1B by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Just continuing the policy established by President Obama...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    32. Re:All About the H-1B by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

      After reading your first sentence fragment, I realized you're an idiot.

    33. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jill Stein isn't insane, and he didn't say anything about his feelings. If your best response is to make a sarcastic strawman, then you ought to step back and reconsider the argument.

    34. Re: All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they sound exactly like the people who were ranting about Obama destroying America. He didn't, just like Trump won't. Stop fear mongering.

    35. Re: All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, defending ourselves from people who have sworn to kill us is not a concern. Dipshits like you who want us defenseless are far more dangerous.

    36. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No... there is a Johnson in the room.....

    37. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I may think Trump will be worse in the short term, he'll probably be better in the long term. My hope is that if he wins it will shake up the political system enough that they will put forward decent candidates in the future.

      Not that I get a vote as I'm not american and don't live there, but if I didn't I wouldn't vote for either. If someone offered you a choice between a "shit sandwich" and a "shit pie" which would you choose?

    38. Re:All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's like when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq and GWB thought it was a good idea to depose him because anything else would be better, right?

      Well, I'm pretty sure that now everybody would prefer Saddam to the "ISIS global campaign of terror" that he got replaced with.

      So maybe Hillary is as bad as Saddam Hussein, but do you really want to risk ISIS? I don't think so.

      dom

    39. Re:All About the H-1B by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Like it or not, Hillary was the choice of the majority of democratic voters in the primaries. She was chosen by the voters in the primaries.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    40. Re:All About the H-1B by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      All arguments you give against Trump can be made against Clinton as well, and more often than not they are worse against Clinton.

      I'm not an american and thus I won't get to vote on this issue. But I seriously think Trump would be much better for America than Clinton. Clinton will be the same old same old that has been slowly screwing the country over decades. Se will want to place friends and to please everyone in her party. That's screwing any chance of seeing a deep reform.

      Trump has the good idea of being new blood. He's already wealthy beyond his own needs and I (personnally) think he will be in a position to do more reforms that Hillary ever will be.

      And no, he is not crazy, nor racist.

      That said, as I mentionned I will not vote and I'm only throwing an external eye at the issue.

    41. Re:All About the H-1B by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Look through all the posts in this discussion and I think you will find that no one is arguing that Hillary would make a good president.

      Actually, I like her policies in general and believe that she has what she needs to get things done. I think she'll be a good President. She won't be a perfect one.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    42. Re:All About the H-1B by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Trump has the good idea of being new blood. He's already wealthy beyond his own needs

      Is he really wealthy, though? Or is it all smoke and mirrors? This article suggests that his whole campaign is a money-making scam, and as has been pointed out elsewhere he may have made less than $500,000 in 2015.

      And no, he is not crazy, nor racist

      No, he is only channelling Hitler: Just exchanging Jews for Muslims and Mexicans. Technically, that's not racism, practically, it's no different.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    43. Re: All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahaha - suuuuuuuuuuure

    44. Re: All About the H-1B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You got a source for any of that bullshit you just spewed that isn't the DNC?

  13. Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So... I'm getting the idea that if big-business hates Trump, then he must be somehow good for the average Joe?

    Or are they saying Hillary isn't a disaster waiting to happen?

    The way I see it: with Trump we'll have an internal disaster (recession, perhaps horrible immigration policies, etc.,) and with Hillary we'll have an international disaster (perhaps bombing Russia near the Ukrane border, or something similarly borderline-suicidal).

    1. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would we have an international disaster with Hillary but not with Donald?

    2. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      because she is globalist war-hawk?

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re:Hmm... does that mean he's good? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is also your enemy.

      Hillary will be more of the same, she's really very similar to Obama in policies, more crooked personally, but that's not going to matter.

      Drumpf would be a disaster.

    4. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      Compared to Drumpf, who has called for indiscriminate bombing?

      She's practically a flower child.

    5. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Trump has enough negatives that you really don't have to use a stupid nickname that makes you sound like a wild-eyed crazy person.

    6. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Hillary isn't smart enough to figure out the consequences of her actions. She promoted "Arab Spring", which was a major step into the current middle-east mess.
      An alternate explanation is that she doesn't give a damn about the consequences, so she doesn't bother thinking about them.

      Trump, on the other hand, probably understands the that idea of "peace through strength" means that our enemies must know that we can and will turn them into dust if and only if they screw with us.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proving once again that liberals haven't progressed mentally past the point of the average American teenager, who himself practically has the mentality of a name-calling 8 year old.

    8. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He uses that stupid nickname because he secretly lusts for the dick of a bad British """comedian""" to be in his rectum.

    9. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by tbannist · · Score: 1

      In case anyone doesn't know why DarkVader is using Drumpf, Donald Drumpf's last name was legally changed to Trump many years ago.

      Most likely, DarkVader is using it because Trump had a giant hissy fit over John Stewart's last name actually being Leibowitz, presumably after John Stewart said something less than complimentary about Trump. Trump accusing John Stewart of being an anti-Semitic coward is hilariously stupid.

      But yeah, it's unnecessary and a bit childish, just like Trump.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    10. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you want some of Drumpf's tiny little pecker frothing up some santorum in your bunghole.

    11. Re: Hmm... does that mean he's good? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      I told my kids a long time ago that a joke or story doesn't get funnier the more times you tell it.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  14. Not just innovation by backslashdot · · Score: 2, Informative

    What about the distaste trump would be for human rights?

    Trump openly supports torturing non-citizens without even a trial to make sure they are guilty of anything.

    Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

    Knowing these two facts, which Trump has proclaimed and stated repeatedly .. How can anyone support Trump? You would have to be evil.

    1. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the only difference from now, is the "openly" part? Because that is going on now, the chief is just pretending it doesn't.

    2. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaaaaaan BHO uses drones to blow up terrorist families. He also blew up a US Citizen who had been traveling with terrorists.
      HRC will continue to do the same or have said Muslims come to this country to kill US Citizens.

    3. Re:Not just innovation by twotacocombo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What Trump says and what will actually happen are obviously two different things. There are still checks and balances to keep him from running roughshod over human rights by himself. The H1B travesty is real, happening, and can only get worse under Clinton. I'd rather have a redfaced blowhard spouting off nonsense than this slippery bitch plunging the knife in even deeper than it already is. They're both clearly unfit for the job, but Trump entertains me while Clinton makes my blood run cold for multiple reasons.

    4. Re:Not just innovation by quantaman · · Score: 1, Funny

      What about the distaste trump would be for human rights?

      Trump openly supports torturing non-citizens without even a trial to make sure they are guilty of anything.

      Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

      Knowing these two facts, which Trump has proclaimed and stated repeatedly .. How can anyone support Trump? You would have to be evil.

      But Clinton was really careless in using a personal email server at the state department.

      I mean even Hitler didn't go that far!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    5. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Trump openly supports torturing non-citizens without even a trial to make sure they are guilty of anything.

      We've been doing that for at least 15 years now. When does Gitmo get shut down? Oh, yeah....

      > Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

      Obama has actually *done* that, but we just can't seem to get enough people to complain about it to stop it.

      > How can anyone support Trump? You would have to be evil.

      I don't seriously think Clinton would do any better and I think she'd be more sneaky about it as well as more likely to get away with it.

      That aside, I don't honestly plan to vote for *either* of them.

    6. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the distaste trump would be for human rights?

      Trump openly supports torturing non-citizens without even a trial to make sure they are guilty of anything.

      Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

      Knowing these two facts, which Trump has proclaimed and stated repeatedly .. How can anyone support Trump? You would have to be evil.

      Not only has Hillary supported the idea of torture and collateral damage to innocent family members (Obama's wars) she has had the power to stop drone strikes and not done so. As US Secretary of State she could have stood firm against rendition and did not do so. Where you posit what Trump will or will not do you support an alternative that HAS done what you demonize. How can you do that?

    7. Re:Not just innovation by swillden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What Trump says and what will actually happen are obviously two different things.

      "What he says he'll do is so insane he can't actually do it", is a frighteningly bad argument for supporting a candidate for the most powerful office in the world.

      They're both clearly unfit for the job, but Trump entertains me while Clinton makes my blood run cold for multiple reasons.

      Clinton will be another four years of the status quo, basically, but Trump's brand of insanity could well start WWIII.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Each major party candidate says the other would be horrible for America.

      Both are correct.

      Don't vote for either.

      And as far as you statement about anyone voting for Trump would have to be evil goes? Well... check HIllary's record on wars and uses of military force. Same applies to her.

    9. Re:Not just innovation by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Could you cite both of these accusations, please?

    10. Re:Not just innovation by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Richard Nixon certainly didn't go that far, with the 1970's equivalent.

    11. Re:Not just innovation by TooManyNames · · Score: 1

      Just remember this: every time you say Trump will start WW3 or compare him to Hitler, you create another 10 Trump supporters.

      I'm not a Trump supporter, by the way, and I agree that "what he says he'll do is so insane he can't actually do it," is a really bad position to take, because he may actually mean some of what he says, and he may actually have the means to accomplish it. He will not, however, have the means to start a war without provocation, nor will he actually be able to round up people already residing in the US of a certain race or religious creed. That would take more than the powers granted to the office of the presidency, and given how little favor he has among both parties, he's exceptionally unlikely to persuade enough politicians to get on board with him to do anything of that magnitude. He can, however, influence things like tax policy and government spending, pointing to a mandate if he wins. In these areas, he really would be a disaster, but I guess it's far more satisfying -- and far less convincing -- to paint him as an evil tyrant.

      --
      "Is not a sentence" is not a sentence. Well damn.
    12. Re:Not just innovation by swillden · · Score: 2

      He will not, however, have the means to start a war without provocation

      As commander in chief? Yes, he would. I'm not saying he'd actually do it, but he'd certainly be in a position to... and it's not impossible that he would do it.

      nor will he actually be able to round up people already residing in the US of a certain race or religious creed

      He could probably get away with a fair amount of it in the short term, though the courts would step in pretty quickly (although that doesn't necessarily mean that much, remember Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears). But he could do a tremendous amount to inflame all sorts of deep resentments and spark a great deal of violence... and his potential reaction to that violence is terrifying to think about. Yeah, yeah, posse comitatus, but it seems entirely possible that he'd be willing to ignore the law, and I'm not really certain that anyone would be in a position to tell him no, in the short term.

      That would take more than the powers granted to the office of the presidency

      You vastly underestimate the powers actually possessed by the president, particularly after the massive expansion those powers have seen over the last four presidential terms.

      I guess it's far more satisfying -- and far less convincing -- to paint him as an evil tyrant.

      "Evil tyrant" is giving him too much credit. I'd go with "dangerously egotistical and short-sighted buffoon", myself.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    13. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clinton will be another four years of the status quo, basically, but Trump's brand of insanity could well start WWIII.

      You have that backwards. Obama has spent years laying the groundwork for WWIII - stationing nuclear missiles in Europe, expanding NATO to Russia's doorstep, erecting missile "defense" shields in Eastern Europe and then expecting people it's to reign in Iran (who themselves have had no nuclear weapons program), and running the largest military operations in Eastern Europe since WWII as war games to prepare for Russia's aggression.

      And Hillary is ten times the hawk that Obama is. Trump is a fucking dove in comparison to the Megathatcher.

    14. Re:Not just innovation by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      That the US doesn't recognize that it is at war with Islamism, does not mean that such a state of war doesn't exist. Members of a terrorist's family are giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Failure to act accordingly means the end of freedom in America and an escalating death count of Americans. Better that they should die.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    15. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What checks and balances for human rights? The congress that supports the Patriot Act and torture, or the supreme court he'll be appointing?

    16. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump is the one that was against the war in Irak, and Libya
      Trump is the one that doesn't want america to be the worlds policeman
      Trump is the one that wants to close US military bases in Europe
      Trump is the one that gets along with Putin

      Hilary is the one that wants (direct quote) "a more muscular foreign policy"
      Hilary is the one that wants to police the world
      Hilary is the one that wants more saber rattling vs Rusland
      Hilary is the one who's policies created a power vacuum in Libya that is now being exploited by ISIS

      If your main concern is the president starting WW III
      then quite frankly Trump is the saner choice by far

    17. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you cite both of these accusations, please?

      Here and here.

    18. Re:Not just innovation by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      If they are giving aid & comfort to the enemy, then they are obviously enemies too. But then he should have said "people who are giving aid and comfort to the enemy" .. it's obvious his intent is to go after family members who may have zero involvement or even knowledge of the terrorists intents. Seriously you think a 2 year old kid is deliberately giving aid & comfort to the enemy? Going after innocent people is not going to help in any war effort. Anyway I am sure many people don't want to win by harming innocent people.

    19. Re:Not just innovation by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Lol. Maybe he could cite the actual information that was used to formulate those accusations.

    20. Re:Not just innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

      So does the current administration. Just as an example look at all the weddings that get attacked by drones in the Middle East. If you think Hillary would stop those drone strikes if she wins you are a fool. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

  15. So you're a "tech-leader"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and the best you can do is post on medium.com. Syeah, right impressive, that.

    I don't get the hate on Trump. Sure he's a vapid self-aggrandizer, but, you know, we've had these sorts of POTUSes before and re-election is not a problem for most of them. He really isn't that special. He's certainly not so special as he himself would like to think. So it would be good to think about where this all comes from. If all you have is hate on the other candidate, then what do you expect (your sockpuppet) to bring to the presidency, hm?

    1. Re: So you're a "tech-leader"... by backslashdot · · Score: 0

      Did you not bother to see that most of the people who signed are founders or co-founders of top tech companies. It was even signed by people like Steve Wozniak, who I am sure you never even heard of -- but anyone in computers will know.

    2. Re: So you're a "tech-leader"... by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      I don't get the hate on Trump.

      Really? Despite the fact that he clearly and deliberately goes out of his way to spew as much controversial vitriol as he possibly can?

    3. Re: So you're a "tech-leader"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you telling me you're on Slashdot and you dislike trolling?

  16. What they say and what they mean by JustNiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >> We believe in an inclusive country that fosters opportunity

    Translation: We prefer a corrupt government so we can get an endless supply of H1B visas to replace all our US workers with cheap foreign labor.

    1. Re: What they say and what they mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are selfish. What about some concern for all human? #AllLivesMatter

    2. Re:What they say and what they mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Translation: We prefer a corrupt government so we can get an endless supply of H1B visas to replace all our US workers with cheap foreign labor.

      Translation: I prefer a corrupt market where I can charge what I want for my services because of who my parents are.

    3. Re: What they say and what they mean by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      When the selfish H1B guys who are taking our jobs start worrying about us. #QuidProQuo

  17. What they are really saying is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We need someone who will gut the tech middle class with H1-B visas. Crooked Hillary will play ball; Trump will not."

  18. We're screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary won't get any progress done with the excuse of a vast right-wing conspiracy. She'll put Bill in charge of the economy which is code for funneling more $$$ into their pockets.

    She's more conservative than Trump and we'll end up in another war, probably Iran. She may even try to rationalize tactical nuke use.

  19. Only for the establishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump is the first and only that I've heard bash H1B. Trump and Sanders are the only ones I hear bashing unfair trade. Hillary is promoting TPP which is bad for America, jobs, and will increase our deficit! She voted for it 45 times already and only voted against it when she started running for pres. You see #Killary is owned by corporations, she owes them. She owes all the morons who paid her $250,000 for speeches. The Clinton Foundation owes many foreign interests. Stop the #ClintonContamination. She is toxic for this country.

  20. disaster for profiting from cheap foreign labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's amazing how I wasn't even fooled for a fraction of a second about what they really meant.

    As a tech worker who lives on paychecks rather than dividends, I couldn't give half a fuck about their huge margins or their eternally climbing share price. I'm sure that a lot of the C-levels will weep and gnash their teeth if they have to pay me an extra 10 20 or even 50 percent salary but how in a million years does this hurt me?

    And no, I know it won't result in unemployment because I know that my work generates millions of dollars a year in ROI (summarizing here but I automate the jobs of insurance adjusters, call center employees and the like). My salary is a tiny fraction of the value I provide. There's an enormous amount of money on the table here. We're talking about companies employing thousands of employees and generating billions in profit. All the unlimited visa abuse does is put more of it in the pockets of C-levels, shareholders and the banks.

    And frankly, fuck them. I have never wanted to vote republican so much in my life. All the right people are recoiling in horror at Trump. Know someone by their enemies indeed.

  21. HRC understands Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Her staff removing "Secret" from them, meant that there were no secrets in her emails?
    It was the only email account she used as Secretary of State and she got no "Secret" information?
    I guess BHO was keeping her OUT of the loop.
    Which is worse, lying about getting info or being so clueless that nobody sends her info?

    1. Re:HRC understands Tech by david_thornley · · Score: 0

      She mishandled classified information. She didn't do it intentionally, and she didn't cause any apparent harm. That level of mishandling is not normally handled with criminal prosecution, but by administrative sanctions. Hold it against her if you like, but she didn't get favorable treatment because of who she was.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  22. Who to vote for? by DickBreath · · Score: 0, Troll

    Decisions, decisions.
    I could vote for:
    1. the candidate with the biggest balls
    or
    2. the wimpy candidate who is a proven liar

    I think I'll vote for the candidate with the biggest balls because, the alternative of voting for Trump is unacceptable.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:Who to vote for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what you meant.

    2. Re:Who to vote for? by Sparowl · · Score: 1

      So, not voting for either of the two major parties, huh?

  23. TECH LEADER DEEZ NUTS THOUGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is another CIA stunt on CIAdot. 145 tech who?

    How can they even fucking speak of innovation when they can't discuss the public debt?

    The sub-prime mortgage crisis and all the bailouts are cookie fucking monster compared to the situation right now.

    So what this article story bullshit lies composition whatever you call it.. implies is go Hillary. Well, Hillary is stupid as fuck and you can't command a military (Commander in Chief) if you can't charge your iPad without asking in email from your home server/state dept. server. She did that. Search for that email.

    The CIA pipe dream is have to have a woman, a total puppet, with enough subsequent discord that their brainstorms are not questioned. Total dickhead story. CIAdot fuck your mamas.

    Sincerely, dead giveaway.

  24. Re: disaster for profiting from cheap foreign labo by backslashdot · · Score: 0

    Wait so your job is to take away the jobs of call center operators, insurance adjusters etc?

    I guess if someone takes your job you will feel the same sympathy you felt towards the people whose jobs YOU eliminated? No problem doing to others what you don't want done to you?

  25. Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... poor judgment and ignorance about how technology works ...

    Wasn't a certain democrat found to have broken the law through her ignorance and poor judgement? Strange that isn't mentioned, given their rant is exactly about bad leadership.

    ... an optimistic vision for a more inclusive country, where American innovation continues to fuel opportunity, prosperity and leadership.

    It's interesting they can name at least one person who will disappoint them but can't name a successful leader.

    ... Google, Facebook and Apple ...

    Now, we have faceless, artificial people deciding who real people should vote for: At least it's not like the churches; using god's supposed approval to decide how the congregation must vote. Maybe that will be the next step for Silicon Valley.

    ... reckless disregard for our legal and political institutions threatens ...

    Unlike those corporations who openly break the law to avoid paying money to employees and the US IRS, then bring in sweat-shop immigrants and sack the locals. Nope, none of that can be construed as threatening.

  26. Almost.... by thesupraman · · Score: 1

    'Trump has not yet promised to maximise the protection of our position and profits, Which, of course, Hillary has done!'

    I hope everyone is enjoying this episode of dumb and dumber. thank god its just a tv sitcom... oh, wait..

  27. non-enforcement enforces violation by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

    The President does not control H-1B. Congress does.

    The President DOES control the INTERPRETATION and the ENFORCEMENT of the rules - including choosing to avoid enforcing them.

    When the laws are not enforced, businessmen who follow the law are at a severe competitive disadvantage to those who violate them. In a highly competitive market this quickly shakes out so that there are two categories of businessmen:
      - Those who violate the law and get all the contracts.
      - Those who don't violate the law, don't win any contracts, and are now out of business.

    We saw that up close and personally when we did some home improvement a few years back. We couldn't find ANY contractors whose line workers weren't illegal aliens.

    (We discovered this in the case of, and had it explained by, our siding contractor,. We went to take photographs of the added wiring in the walls when the siding was off, and all his workers became very upset that cameras were in use.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:non-enforcement enforces violation by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Glenn Beck related an interesting story about this phenomenon. Being the visible person he is, with the politics he has, meant he had to be careful in hiring a contractor. In the end, the contractor himself had to do the work, because none of the contractor's staff who were actually Americans stayed on the job long enough to get it done. It took a long time because one person is a lot slower than a whole team.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  28. You're fucking retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US military can already do what you are listing due to the NDAA Act. All they have to do is label you a "terrorist" and that's it, you no longer have human rights. They are already gone genius. Trump can not take what is already gone. Understand?

    Of course some retarded repeater puppet such as yourself doesn't even realize this fact (also, I actually list a source to support my claims).

    How about protesting the democrats to who fully legalized this form of unconstitutional torture?

    Oh that's right, think of the poor non citizens. Put the Illegal aliens and islamic needs in front of Natural Americans once again, who's rights have already been totally eroded by the NDAA and Patriot acts. You have further ushered in the spying state on steroids whilst all the time promising "hope and change"

    You mean to tell me Trump is going against a book written by man , which praises a god who's murdered more people in his name than any other entity in recorded history, is soooo evil?

    And some

  29. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tech leaders' brand of "innovation" is past due for a disaster. Ask yourself: what do all of these silly business majors know about "innovation" besides how an office with five Indians can do the needful for less than one American.

  30. Super-rich threatened with loss of slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's 1860 all over again.

    Filthy rich racist plantation owners are outraged that a Republican is going to deprive them of their cheap labor force.

    Watch out. In 1860, the plantation owners went crazy and declared an actual war after the Republican was elected. They conned all the poor southern whites into thinking that the enslavement of blacks was in thier best interests and that the fight was about "states' rights" (which IS a legitimate constitutional principle) but the only "State's Right" the plantation owners were concerned with was the one that was not a right: the right to own cheap slaves. Poor southern whites were concerned with their actual rights, but were so completely propagandized by the plantation owners and their newspapers that even to this day 150 years later thier descendants still stupidly think their ancestors were fighting for their own personal rights. Tradgic and Sad really. The new plantation owners are using Asians and Hispanics instead of Blacks, but they are still as racist as ever (oh, lots of WORDS about "tolerance", but still ACTUAL cheap labor of poor ethinc groups), and our society will pay for this evil for many decades to come, just as we've been paying for the earlier slavery.

    The super-rich who get richer on the backs of slaves will generally stop at nothing to get richer, owning slaves after all is proof that, all pretenses aside, they have no morals. They also tend to be very good at convincing stupid poor free men to support them with vague promises that they too are getting some sort of spill-over benefit from the slavery. These silicon valley snakes will, no doubt, convince a bunch of stupid hicks that they will lose something if Apple has to bring work back to the USA. iPhone addicts will probably be most-easily convinved to help Tim Cook and his buddies make billions more for themselves while evading taxes. They'll even convice morons that Apple is on "their side" with a bunch of left-wing talk about "fair share" and "income inequality" - as Apple takes maximum advantage of cheap foreign labor, thus maximizing wage inequality and stuffing wads of cash into the pockets of all the liberal politicians who've been given Apple stock...

  31. Amazing how people are upset with What Trump says. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Clearly Trump is rough around the edges. He is not a politician. Yet people hate him for what he says, rather than hate the politicians for what they do. Politicians lie, but the people are used to that. Someone who is angry like you and me, is not fit for government? I contend then you are not fit to vote.

    Get over it and go for change, maybe the professional politicians will get the clue if Trump wins. We can always vote him out, and congress has demonstrated that it able to effectively halt all legislation. How much damage can Trump do?

  32. You should not by SeattleLawGuy · · Score: 1

    "You have to vote for one of them"

    You absolutely do not have to and shame on you for saying that.

    Actually, it's more nuanced than that. The real question is about what you should do, not about what you have to do.

    If you are in a swing state you should vote for one of them, assuming they are not equal in your eyes, because you are one of the few people with the power to influence the outcome. (Unless your pride in supporting a third-party candidate who will lose is more important than the difference between which of Hillary and Donald has the power to shape, or destroy, the world.)

    If you are not in a swing state then you already voted, in your primary, and your vote for president doesn't matter any more. Research and vote on your local candidates (e.g. for congress or your town).

    --
    Real lawyers write in C++
    1. Re:You should not by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

      Indiana.

  33. Vote Left by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    for me I'm still gonna vote for the most left wing candidate I can get, and thanks to Bernie and the strings he pulled at the DNC that's now Hilary. Yes, Hilary is going to be beholden to the 1%. So is Trump. Our entire political system is fueled by money. We've got horrific systemic issues that go back to the 80s when Karl Rove and his ilk formed the unholy alliance between the evangelicals and the 1%ers tired of their 90% tax bracket after the first 10 mil (adjusted for inflation). It took us almost 40 years to get this screwed up, we're not gonna fix it overnight. There will be compromises. Nasty ones. Keep voting for the most left leaning, pro worker candidate you can get, and for God's sake vote in your mid term election. That's how you'll see reform. It'll take years and it's going to be painful. But if you really want something done the solution is to shift the country back to the left and Roosevelt and away from the far right of Rove & Reagan.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Vote Left by stinerman · · Score: 1

      Depending on where you live, the farthest left candidate on the ballot is probably Gloria La Riva of the Party of Socialism and Liberation.

    2. Re:Vote Left by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Check the revenues per capita, and adjust for inflation. You'll find the Federal Government brings in over TWICE today what it did back in the 50s and 60s with that 90% tax bracket (today we cap out well below that, down below 40%). The reality is that the average tax load, per taxpayer and adjusted for inflation, has greatly increased - along with our debt.

      Of course, most people believe we had a real surplus back in the 90s, when the fact is the US national debt (which is a cumulation of all deficits) has gone up every single year since 1957 when Ike was President - and we paid half the effective tax rate as well.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  34. Trump doesn't understand technology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was HILARY when asked if she 'wiped her hardware' she said 'you mean with a cloth?'..and if she was joking it was in extremely bad taste not to mention she further used the argument about here private e-mail server that she didn't know how it worked etc. So sorry, Trump isn't the only one that 'doesn't understand technology' & I certainly wouldn't want Hilary in charge of the 'keys to the technology kingdom' which would guarantee the Internet would be a complete 'for sale' environment.

  35. We don't need no stinking experts by bestweasel · · Score: 2

    "Trump would be a disaster for innovation," wrote 145 technology leaders in an open letter

    In the UK, Michael Gove, an Oxford graduate, Times journalist, Cabinet minister and leading campaigner to leave the EU, said recently, âoepeople in this country have had enough of expertsâ.

    His side of course won (though he personally hasn't, now being out of government) and that is the constituency Trump appeals to, one which no longer trusts rationality and expertise and is often, sad to say, receptive to any old rubbish as long as it's simple, appealing and delivered with conviction.

    Who can blame them? They're told each time, "Experts say vote for me and everything will be great", only to find that decades on, they're no better off, their town has become slightly more crappy and their kids can't find jobs.

    It's hard to say what Trump himself believes in; so far it looks like Trump and money.

  36. Have any of these people ever voted Republican? by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just wondering. To the extent I know their political orientation, they are all quite partisan Democrats.

    One tech person who was interviewed on Leo Laporte's "Triangulation" podcast a few weeks ago had an interesting perspective. Basically, there's a lot of very bad stuff entrenched in Washington DC that needs to get broken. The candidate most likely to break stuff is Trump; hopefully, he'll break more stuff that needs breaking than stuff that needs to not be broken.

    Me, I'm probably going to vote Libertarian; I won't vote for either of the D or R <obscene characterization redacted>."

    1. Re:Have any of these people ever voted Republican? by Viewsonic · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at the 2016 Republican Party Platform?

    2. Re:Have any of these people ever voted Republican? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember back in 2000 when people didn't like Bush or Gore so they voted for Nader? Well, enough people voted for Nader instead of Gore that Bush became president. How did that work out for you?

      And remember how GWB thought that stuff was broken in Iraq so he deposed Saddam Hussein? How do you think that worked out for him?

      Do you really think that "breaking" things is such a good idea?

      dom

  37. Clintons are Death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary Clinton and the Demoncraps would be death to America...
    Watching their flag burning, rioting, violent supports attack businesses, police cars, Republicans, Christians - hurting people and burning buildings...
    The Democrats and Socialists are not compatible with a free society.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlmxtPseRFk

    Vote Trump if you want to live - Make America SAFE again.

    The streets are full of TRUMP supporters and ''145 tech leaders'' are no match for the Patriots, Border Patrol, Police Departments, NRA, Veterans, and all Americans that have seen our flag like this:
    http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2014/05/14/ap685480942209_wide-c2e1764e7c28905efe5c7731005e69a2efad775c-s1600-c85.jpg

    Love America - or G.T.F.O.

  38. If you elect Trump then you deserve it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Electing Trump would be stupid move but then if country wants to shoot itself in the head then who am I to judge.

  39. tech leadersmy a$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Each one of those tech leaders bit off the heads of their competition and poored cement and cheaseburger bubgs into the plumbing of leguslatures to prevent any competition or successor technology from walking in the same footsteps. Not to mention the menacing favadr behind each fat mouth would still prove there are more underpayed individuals whose work is being earmarked as though it was company property and not invented by Joe Plumber or Bob the Builder. Bosses suck like snakes. Moses threw down a staff that became a serpent to eat tje other serpents. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

  40. 145 tech ldrs said Trump would end H1B violations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone else read that headline as "145 tech leaders say Trump is telling the truth about stopping H1B violations"?

    I mean seriously, other than actually enforcing the Gorham law, what do they want is to think Trump is going to do?

  41. and i forgot to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These fcking.vfat tech leaders smearing trump is equivalent of saying Linus Torvalds invented the inline code comment and all kernel contributions are his property therefore voting for Linus is a vote fore Daffy Duck instead of the Donald dUck

  42. Of course tech companies endorse Clinton. by Snufu · · Score: 1

    She advocates everyone should buy a personal email server.

  43. The Hands of Al Gore Are Apparent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, the smelly hands of Albert Arnold Gore are apparent.

    Using the Climate-Gate emails Cartel as a model, Gore an Apple Inc. Board Member has now plagiarized the Climate-Gate emails to get the "Tech Innovation" Cartel.

    Congrats Al Gore!

  44. Trump will offer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too little opportunity for graft and corruption.

  45. Re: disaster for profiting from cheap foreign labo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its called automation. Its been taking away jobs over the past hundred years or so. Its nowhere near the same thing as lying about being able to find someone locally who can do the work just so you can import cheap foreign labor.

  46. Glad we know where you stand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That did it for me. With that glowing endorsement from the most leftist organizations on the planet, I am definitely voting for the Donald now. I was never going to cast a vote for Lying Felon Hillary, but I was considering a third party candidate for the 1st time ever, but learning that these people hate Donald so much, tells me everything I needed to know.

  47. ummmm ok...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary was SECRETARY OF STATE while she and Obama were ACTUALLY droning civilians to death according to the Obama administration's OWN REPORT which almost certainly puts the most-positive spin possible onto the matter.

    There's a certain insanity that seems to ravage the brains of Obama and Hillary supporters who will rant that Trump has SAID he will do things even as their preferred candidates actually have DONE the same or worse.

    As for "torture": Are you one of those who says Trump would be evil to splash water on the face of a couple terrorists at Gitmo with doctors standing by to make sure they are not actually harmed, but who is fine with Obama and Hillary blowing the same people to bits with missiles?????

    As for killing the families of terrorists: are you one of the morons who rants that Trump would be guilty of a terrible war crime for killing the Bin Ladens, but who things it was great to win WWII in part by killing hundreds of thousands of civilan familiy members of NAZI soldiers as the allies bombed German cities rather than only attacking German tanks on battlefields????? Are all the heroes of WWII actually war criminals in your book? Should Hitler have been allowed to win?

    Just how bizarrely selective is your moral indignation? Just what on Earth are your moral standards tethered to? Oh and please, no more Biblical references that make it clear you've never actually read the book. There are web sites and propagandists who cherry-pick sentences out of context from the Bible for use by liberals in political arguments. They and their fans seem to think that citing individual versus is like putting a coin into a gumball machine - that it will automatically win an argument with a Christian. The problem for you is that serious people (Christian or not) who read entire books (like you're SUPPOSED TO do with those things called "books") see right through these scams and recognize the people using them for the dishonest or stupid people they are. I'm betting you reject the Bible on many subjects (homesexuality? marriage? divorce? not eating if you do not work?) but just want to use it (falsely) here, pretending it is authoratative when you yourself actually reject it. FYI: The very same Bible that contains verses about love and forgiveness also has the ancient Hebrews being ordered to massacre all the civilians in certain specific war situations (incidentally: very unlike the Koranic call to do many violent things at all times to all opponents), which seems contradictory to people who've never read the entire book but is perfectly rational and consistent in-context. Same thing with WWII. There are situations in war against a supremely evil enemy when policies aimed at protecting innocent civilians are not to be employed to protect the not-so-innocent civilians.

  48. The Sock Puppet Force is Strong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How dare you say something anti-hillary or pro-trump. It's amazing that there are not even any "keep a level head" posts moderated up in this thread. Well, not really "amazing", but eye opening that so many shill accounts exist. Nasty anti-trump with the same baseless rhetoric I can get from 99% of the TV channels are being up modded.

    Posting anonymously because even the people pointing out the shilling are getting moderated down while anonymous shills are getting up modded.

    That alone is enough to make me say "Avoid HILLARY AT ALL COSTS"

  49. "Poor judgment and ignorance about technology" by TooManyNames · · Score: 1

    I love how they can seriously write this with a straight face in the wake of Hillary's email scandal. I mean, I'm not arguing that Trump knows what he's doing either, but come the fuck on! Hillary's grasp of technology was so grossly negligent that, had she actually continued on in her cabinet position, she'd have been asked to resign, and yet they bring up technological incompetence as a talking point. This is just ludicrous and pathetic.

    --
    "Is not a sentence" is not a sentence. Well damn.
    1. Re:"Poor judgment and ignorance about technology" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here -- it simply makes no sense.

  50. Shocks, all that money they pumped into Dems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is going to waste.... BTW writing protest letters instead of negotiating solutions if very short sighted

  51. Your condition is clinical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Karl Rove forming an alliance between 1%ers and evangelicals in the 1980s???? Dude! you smoked some BAD SH%T!!! Get Help! Quick!

    As to the religion rants: This country was founded by 12 OFFICIALLY protestant Christian colonies and one officially Catholic colony (there were not any colonies that were Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, etc. though there WERE a small number of Jews present and there were certainly secular people present). Non-Christians have always been allowed in the US and allowed to believe as they believe, as a natural consequence of the protestant Christian belief that each persons's soul is in his/her own hands and his/her fate is between that person and God. That's VERY different from societies based on religions with so-called "collective salvation" beliefs where every person must agree to believe what the society demands because the souls of all depend on the salvation of all (incidentally: Obama who identifies as Christian, bizarrely also claims to believe in collective salvation - a fundamentally anti-Christian belief). There is simply no honest way to claim anybody in recent history has made America more Christian than it was founded to be. Yeah, I know, there are founders like Thomas Paine who said the nation was not founded as a Christian country, but you're reading out-of-context and in historical ignorance. If you take the time to read much more of what they wrote, you know that the founders at the time spoke about the "Christian Religion" as a synonym for established and often tied-to-monarchies Christian denominations.

    As for all the money rants: (a) NOBODY ever paid 90% federal income taxes! The politically-connected got their politicians to create all sorts of loopholes, which is why both JFK and Ronald Reagan brought in MORE tax money by simplifying the tax code and also lowering the rates, and (B) NO LEFTIST in the US EVER actually goes after the super-rich who fund them. The left-wingers only every use RHETORIC. They SAY the rich should pay more (and lead you to think they will tax the STUFF, the ASSETS, of the super-rich) but they only every put-in more income taxes that hit the middle class and that have no effect on the super-rich who often only pay themselves salaries of a few dollars (and YOU stupidly CHEER for these guys when they loudly advertize how little they are taking as PAY while they hope you do not notice how they get their actualincom as NON-SALARY income not subject to those big left-wing taxes).

    Get help!

    Get the drugs out of your system, then learn to pay attention and THINK!

  52. Clinton 42 signed DMCA, CTEA, URAA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clinton 42, Signed the following into law:

    Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) (1998)
    Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) of 1998
    Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) (1994)

    Likely this clinton would do the same or worse.

  53. Consider the enemies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the distaste trump would be for human rights?

    Trump openly supports torturing non-citizens without even a trial to make sure they are guilty of anything.

    Trump supports killing the innocent family members of terrorists (this while claiming to be Christian even though the bible specifically forbids killing family members of criminals).

    Knowing these two facts, which Trump has proclaimed and stated repeatedly .. How can anyone support Trump? You would have to be evil.

    Ok, consider the people America is dealing with. The Taliban murder families of Afghan translators and police. al qaeda in Iraq in 2007, and I quote

    "The book guides followers of Al Qaeda how to interrogate and torture captives.

    The drawings and cartoons depict ways to use electric drills and irons, meat cleavers and other devices to force victims to talk or harm them.

    Some of the drawings show how to drill hands, sever limbs, drag victims behind cars, remove eyes, put a blowtorch or iron to someone’s skin, suspend a person from a ceiling and electrocute them, break limbs and restrict breath and put someone’s head in a vice."

    Then there is ISIS, whom engages in actual slavery. ISIS keeps its HIV rate low by selecting HIV carriers for suicide bomber duty. Boko Haram also engages in the slave trade.

    Iran supports insurgents to hurt US forces. Pakistan plays a double game to ensure a flow of 'aid'. Less hateful nations merely try to figure out how to falsify terrorist counts to get money from US govt (Yemen). Some middle east countries want Assad dead, and don't care about what terrorists it will spawn. Remember, Saudi Arabia supported the Taliban in the 90s.

    So, the US does too much in the Middle East, and is too nice.

  54. The anti-Trump witchunt is getting ridiculous. by guacamole · · Score: 1

    Trump never said that we should end all immigration. All he promised was to end the illegal migration into the USA by building the "wall" and banning the Muslims from entering the country. After winning the republican nomination, he backtracked on the second issue and said that only refugees from Syria and other trouble spots will not be allowed because we don't have an easy way to judge whether they have terrorist link. But now every leftie in the world (not just the US) as well as much of the news media has painted him as an isolationist racist who will halt all trade and end all exports and imports.

    But in reality, Trump's trade plans are very simple. In the environment we already have, the government trade policies put the international corporations first, and the workers are just the scum to be exploited by them in every part of the world, be it USA, Mexico, or Asia. Trump wants to end this, and wants the trade to benefit everyone, and specially the American people, instead of just the faceless international corporations.

    In the light of the Hillary Clinton's secretive and illegal record of putting her work mail on private servers, including top secret government communications, it's even doubly cynical to be accusing Trump of "reckless disregard for our legal and political institutions".

    1. Re:The anti-Trump witchunt is getting ridiculous. by tbannist · · Score: 1

      But in reality, Trump's trade plans are very simple. In the environment we already have, the government trade policies put the international corporations first, and the workers are just the scum to be exploited by them in every part of the world, be it USA, Mexico, or Asia. Trump wants to end this, and wants the trade to benefit everyone, and specially the American people, instead of just the faceless international corporations.

      Ha, ha, ha.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  55. So Hillary bought the un-American tech sector. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    At least we know who's sponsoring Hillary.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  56. Re: disaster for profiting from cheap foreign labo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not worry. These lazy ass bastards can not get any job.

  57. If these "fine folk" don't want Trump, it implies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump has something going for him, and whatever they think he might do might actually be good for the USA.

  58. Choose: The businessman or the product he bought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's very funny to see Hillary supporters claim Trump's the bad/corrupt guy who bought politicians.... including Hillary who he got to attend his wedding

    ...and then...

    they praise Hillary, the politician who put herself on the store shelf and sold her services (and the public trust).

    Two importand things to consider:

    Hillary was a "public servant" who took an oath to serve the people who elected her and who paid her to look out for them. She clearly sold herself to every businessman and even every foreign scumbag dictators who would funnel millions of dollars into the Clinton Family slush fund while still collecting a public paycheck and then deleting tens of thousands of documents that might have shed a light on her activities. Let's be honest here: NOBODY risks federal jail time deleting e-mails that are only about yoga or a daughter's wedding dress.

    Donald was a private citizen working to be successful within an increasingly corrupt political environment. Donald never took any oath to serve the people, never sought their power via their votes, and never sold them out to any foreign dicatators who prosecute women for getting raped and who murder gays for being gay. Now in 2016 Donald comes to the voters, having NEVER broken an oath to serve them, and offers himself as a hammer to smash the corrupt and entrenched in DC. Do you trust him? More or Less than Hillary? He's already very rich and they are both old to be running for that office. At his age this will likely be his last rodeo, so you people who think this is some get-rich scheme on his part (which has already cost him LOTS of business) have to answer just how much financial benefit you think this will be to him and just why you think he is worse than Hillary who has already PROVEN to enrich herself at the public trough.

    You choose - but like the elderly Knight warned Indy: "choose wisely"

  59. Slashdot buried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting how this story got buried once the comments went off the rails.

  60. Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...but Hillary" is hardly an excuse

    Agreed, but then again, no incomplete sentence qualifies as an excuse.

  61. Only two parties? by Kevin+Oldman · · Score: 1

    Can you only vote for one of two people in a U.S. election?

    1. Re:Only two parties? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all practical purposes, yes, in the case of POTUS. The problem is that if one candidate does not get a 50%-plus-one majority of electoral votes, it invokes the Twelfth Amendment, where Congress gets to pick the President from the top three candidates, and the Senate gets to pick the VP from the top two. No consideration is required to be given to what the voters wanted, even if one of the candidates dropping out would have caused the second-place candidate to get an absolute majority, or even as to whether P or VP are from the same party. There is no run-off election. So far, it has only happened once, in 1824.

      So if a third-party candidate gets a meaningful number of electoral votes, it becomes very likely that no candidate will reach 50% of electoral votes, thus rendering the whole public voting process moot.

  62. Politicians by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    You pretty much described every politician ever. Some of them are just better at it than others.

    Gone are those that actually stood for something. Probably because if you do like poor Bernie Sanders you get labeled something like "socialist" and can't get yourself elected either by your party or the people. People that stand for something will have people that oppose you. If you take the middle road, are vague, don't really say anything, or flip flop around, you have the potential to get both sides of the vote. The trick is not to get neither side of the vote. That is pretty much the modern political game in a nutshell.

  63. Debt by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    The next crisis that everyone knows about and will eventually occur is another involving trillions of debt, student debt. The system has been, and continues to be abused, that value is only getting bigger, and the students graduating finding no jobs due to corporations lobbying for ever more powers to move jobs to cheaper places. At some point that cup will overflow, and we'll have another housing crisis type event.

    1. Re: Debt by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      It's not the corporations fault that students and their parents are taking out outrageous loans to go to expensive schools to get degrees in markets that aren't in demand. Most of these students could stay at home, go to a two year college much cheaper and transfer to an in state public college and not have huge student loan debt.

      I went to an unknown state college, stayed at home and within three years I was making just as much as people going to expensive private colleges.

    2. Re: Debt by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      I'm not really talking about the traditional collages or even the expensive ivy league schools. There is a whole new brand of schools out there offering useless degrees to anybody. They market themselves to those eligible for government loans, which are guaranteed by the government so the school gets paid no matter what. The debt does not go away with bankruptcy. The people graduating with the useless degree have no prospects of paying it back. They should not have gotten a loan for the crappy school to begin with. The schools are entirely geared to marketing and gaming the government loan system. It is pretty much a mirror of the banks giving large loans to people who will never be able to pay it back, making the money of the debt. These student mills of course lobby government to keep the current system the way it is, because it is basically free money for them. A 2 second google search puts the value of student debt to 1.2 Trillion dollars, second only to (you guessed it) mortgage debt... As I said, sooner or later, as this value grows, as does unemployment, and dropping wages, well something will eventually give.

    3. Re: Debt by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      But who is ultimately responsible? If you're under 24, it's pretty hard to get over your head in student loan debt without having a parent to co-sign.

      We set the expectations with both of our children that we would not co-sign a loan for them at all for the first two years, and that the first two years was their responsibility.

      That means they would have to either get a scholarship - my state offers free tuition for any state college if you meet the requirements -- or get loans in their own name up to the limit of what they could get for themselves (around $6000/year). They could stay at home and we would provide a car for them.

      After the first two years and if they kept a 3.0, we would pay to make up the difference in cost to go to a public college in state and pay room and board if they wanted to go off to school. If they lost their scholarship, they would have to go to a school that they could commute to from home.

    4. Re: Debt by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      You could say the same thing about the housing crisis. Who is ultimately responsible? The institution who recklessly gave you a loan? The person accepting the terms and conditions of a loan they can't afford? Well as has been seen it really doesn't matter in the big picture, because everyone will end up paying for both the reckless lending, and the personal lack of responsibility. When banks and the like are being bought out, you pay for it with your taxes. Just like when several Trillion dollars of bad student debt with no hope of repayment, well you'll pay for it regardless of how responsible and frugal you personally were in your own situation... Which kind of makes it unfair. However if you want to point the finger, it is hard to be really angry with the unemployed poor guy with a useless degree and no prospects, and a bit easier to be mad at the very wealthy corporate student debt factory basically sucking up your tax dollars from government using the poor and vulnerable as their patsy...

  64. We seem to be living in a post-factual age by grunter · · Score: 1

    ... where you can't effectively fight emotive but nonsensical arguments with facts - witness the recent Brexit vote, all the Leave arguments were basically lies - but people still believed them, because they'd been convinced that they were "victims" (always a good populist tactic that). You can have all the facts and business and economic experts you like, all saying "Trump would be a disaster" (and I have no doubt that Trump with his I'm-so-smart egocentricity would be a disaster), but the people who are lured by simplistic nonsense like building walls and excluding Muslims won't listen to "elites". Calling him out as a fraudster (Trump University) or as an aggressively unreliable business partner (look for any number of interview on Youtube with poor guys that won a contract to design or carpet or wire up one of his property ventures and got screwed badly) probably has broader relevance, because there are a lot of small business owners and people who have been ripped off out there that might relate better.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, all our base are belong to YOU!
    1. Re:We seem to be living in a post-factual age by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      The Brexit "leave" voters, like Trump voters and many Sanders voters, aren't so much irrational as dissatisfied. They do not perceive that the system is working for them, and therefore they intensely distrust people who are tied up with the system. They'll listen to people who claim to want to break up the system as it exists, in the hope that they'll be better off when everything settles again. When the "elites" promise them more of the same if they vote the right way, they vote some other way.

      The problem here is that the American Dream is simply not working for a lot of people. Many people graduate from college with large student debts and few good job prospects, and there's at least the perception that more jobs than ever require college degrees. In the 1950s, any reasonably able white man could get a factory job that paid enough to support a family in a small house (or at least that's the myth), and get a decent if limited lifestyle and retirement pension off nothing but hard work. Currently, minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, and many employers cap hours at 30 a week to avoid having to provide any benefits, meaning that many of the working poor have to work two jobs. Pensions have largely gone away, and many of the ones that did exist were underfunded or looted and didn't pay out what they were supposed to.

      Talk to these people and tell them about how life is better, and they don't believe you. Tell them that voting one way will bring a collapse of the system, and they don't care. What these people need is fundamentally an opportunity to work hard forty hours a week for a halfway decent lifestyle, and a certain amount of security. One thing that would help greatly is some sort of health care system that would be separate from employment and prevent medical issues from turning into bankruptcies. Also, these people are not going to be sympathetic to other people, because of their own problems they can't escape.

      As long as there's a large number of quietly desperate people, candidates like Trump will have drawing power. We're not talking about intellectual giants with a nuanced appreciation of the political landscape here, for the most part, and tactics like blaming people's problems on scapegoats has a lot of appeal. That's a tactic that has been tested time and again.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  65. And Patent Hoaders AREN'T?!?! by geekmux · · Score: 1

    " Trump would be a disaster for innovation," wrote 145 technology leaders....Some of the leaders are from tech giants like Google, Facebook and Apple...

    How ironic that the worlds largest tech giants are trying to label a single man as being a "disaster for innovation", when it is rather obvious that patent hoarding by tech giants will utterly destroy innovation.

    Tends to be a bitch to even innovate when patent monopolies and their legal armies are poised to shut your ass down in order to exact the control they want, and morph the tech world to their wants and needs.

  66. And how much money was blown on Solyndra? by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    And bunchteen other green projects? Not to mention how much money was blown on a crappy healthcare.gov website to a Canadian company. These 145 guys need to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.

  67. Re:Amazing how people are upset with What Trump sa by tekrat · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they said that about Hitler... oh wait, did I just Godwin this thread? But voting for someone who swaggers, is obviously racist, will probably declare Marshall Law to keep himself in power, and will nuke anyone who sends him an offensive tweet is *not* a good idea unless you are hoping for a world war and to become the most hated country on Earth.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  68. And how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus fucking Christ what a bunch of pussies.

  69. Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will force us to give USA citizens opportunity, and creativity.
    Rather than import more H1 people and put more USA citizens out of a job.

  70. Re:Amazing how people are upset with What Trump sa by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    If Trump is elected, I think lots of us will then hate him for what he does. I'm already not at all fond of what he's done as a private person.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  71. Exception, not the rule. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    While you might be inordinately lucky to have a very good sample, the rest of us aren't. That and not all of us can move from Ohio.

    Not sure what area you're generally speaking, but things have been worse than you expect.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  72. Cunton would be a disaster for everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks, liberal pricks, for advancing the WORST POSSIBLE candidate

  73. With Clinton's murder trail, yes. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    N/T

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  74. ...all of which have died at US hands. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Of course, those individuals found themselves usually on the wrong end of US owned and operated military hardware.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  75. Your turn will come. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Your hubris precedes you. It's gone on long enough to affect anyone (of any skill) with a US/1st World country citizenship.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  76. So you support a murdering liar? by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    That's her platform.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:So you support a murdering liar? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Please show me where her platform includes murder and lying. You are irrational and gullible enough to consider her a murdering liar, but she's not running as one.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  77. Irony by overlook77 · · Score: 1

    Trump would be a disaster...possibly. What about "Facebook Makes Little Progress in Race and Gender Diversity"? This PC bullshit is why people are flocking to Trump in the first place.

  78. The truth says she is a murdering liar. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    When someone stands in her way, or has become politically useless, bad things happen to that person. Minimally, that results in intimidation while the other end is to be suicided or murdered.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.