Slashdot Mirror
Online Pranksters Mock Trump's $149 Christmas Ornament, Rename Trump Tower on Google Maps (yahoo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a Digital Trends story about a suspicious malfunction on Google Maps:
At some point yesterday, Donald Trump's Fifth Avenue home was given a rather unceremonious rechristening, and a search for "Trump Tower" revealed a pin for "Dump Tower" instead. It was rather tricky to find for some, and required zooming in on the building itself at just the right angle (which is perhaps how the culprit got away with the stunt in the first place). At a separate angle, someone else (or perhaps the same person) transliterated the skyscraper's name in Russian Cyrillic, perhaps meant to be a jab at Trump's alleged ties to President Vladimir Putin and company... While the team [at Google Maps] managed to put out this first fire, another quickly arose to take its place (as is often the case on the internet), and later in the day on Saturday, Trump International Hotel and Tower in Columbus Circle was renamed Dump International Hotel and Tower.
Meanwhile, another anonymous reader writes:
Earlier this week Donald Trump emailed his supporters selling a $149 collectible "Make America Great Again" Christmas ornament finished with 14k gold, to raise money for both his campaign and the Republican party. But Yahoo News reports that it's now getting some suspicious negative (and politically-charged) reviews on its page on Amazon. ("One Star. "It tried to put my nativity figures into an internment camp.") And another reviewer even wrote a satirical story about how their family decided on the ornament for the tree. "During our family meeting we overwhelmingly chose the other ornament but somehow we still ended up with this one. We're not sure what happened."
I bet you're a hoot at parties.
I bet they can't even vote.
After eight years of it being racist, mocking the President as well as other dissent is patriotic once again. That alone made voting for Trump worth it...
And to think, it almost became sexist instead!..
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Today they write supposedly comedic Amazon reviews.
And they wonder why the word "pussy" is the first one that comes to mind. I guess Trump grabbed you really good.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
He did warn you. And you called him a "Pants on Fire" liar for it. Suck it up, cupcakes...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I'm guessing you didn't do that well in your torts class. We aren't talking defamation, we're at least potentially talking about trademark tarnishment.
There of course has never been any case like this one would be -- a trademark so intimately tied to a personality who is also a public political figure. My guess is what *should* happen is First Amendment should beat trademark law, in that the intent was political rather than commercial.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
If there are that many illegal immigrants voting, shouldn't we have a nationwide recount to weed them out?
(For the record, I don't think there are that many illegal immigrants voting and I'm not really in favor of the recount. If Jill Stein can fund it with donations, fine, but otherwise I don't think things were close enough. As much as I hate Trump, I've accepted that he's going to be President and I'm moving forward to help mitigate the damage I think he'll do. I just think that the argument that "we shouldn't have a recount" doesn't jive with the "millions voted illegally so Trump really won the popular vote" story - which has no actual evidence backing it.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Ah, the sweet display of irrational fear. Civics question: Which branch of government passes laws?
No, they mean 2M.
People said I was dumb, but I proved them.
Yes I do, and yes they vote. I don't blame him for trying to escape mexico , but illegals shouldn't be voting.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Are you trying to be oxymoronic? You simply cannot quote the parts of the constitution and ignore the specific parts pertaining to the election of the president to claim someone who failed those parts is the legit elected. Furthermore, you are basing this stupidity on the preamble to the constitution which describes the purpose for which is laid out within the constitution that you are actively ignoring.
Do they not teach simple civics and government in high school any more?
The electoral college was specifically set in place to allow "states" to elect the president of the united "states" instead of the people. The federal government has a president of the United States not the United "People". The congress and senate is the people's house and originally the senate represented the states (which is still does to a certain extent even after the constitution was amended to allow direct elections of the senators). The house of representatives was supposed to represent the people which is why all laws implementing taxes are supposed to originate there. The senate represented the states and the president is and was a figurehead to enact the sovereignty given up by the states. You have to remember, after the revolution, the thirteen colonies became 13 countries which eventually joined a confederation which ended up forming a constitutional republic that ceded only portions of their sovereignty. This is the entire purpose of the 9th and 10th amendments and article 1 section 8 that defines the original powers of the federal government.
I don't know if you actually understand this and are simply trying to convince the ignorant to be useful idiots or if you seriously never bothered reading past the preamble and skipped school during your civics classes or something. Either way, this isn't hard to find out which you probably should have already done if you actually care about the issue as much as your post pretends to. It is not like this isn't the first time that a president has won the electoral college but not the popular vote in your life time if you are actually old enough to vote. God help us if you actually claim to be educated higher than a high school level too.
Only if you count illegals. We have no idea what the vote count would be if you didn't count illegitimate votes in California, which is where her lead is coming from.
So not only do you think there were millions of illegal voters, but you think these millions of people are in such an effective air-tight conspiracy that not one of them is willing to spill the beans. And they performed this conspiracy, which risked jail time and/or deportation for every person involved, to run up the score in a state in which Clinton would have won anyway.
That is literally an insane idea.
The simply reality is that the US doesn't bother trying to account for voter fraud because the Electoral College makes it mostly pointless.
Which is why GOP politicians go on massive hunts looking for voter fraud after every election, and never comes up with anything but a small handful of people who were just confused.
I stole this Sig
Hillary lost. Get over it.
If you're confident of that (as I am, actually), then you have nothing to fear from a recount, right? There's nothing wrong with double-checking tight races.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
If there are that many illegal immigrants voting, shouldn't we have a nationwide recount to weed them out?
That's unrealistic. The only people who work landscaping these days are Latinos. Why would they weed out their own votes?
Never Happens
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/09/22/cbs4-investigation-finds-dead-voters-casting-ballots-in-colorado/
That's clearly a right-wing, biased publication, no?
Broerman said after their deaths, the Sosas remained on active voter rolls and mail ballots were still sent to their home because they did not meet the criteria to have their names deleted from eligible voter rolls.
Notice how mail-in ballots, the one voting method where voter fraud is actually very easy to commit, is never a target of GOP efforts to combat voter fraud?
I wonder why?
I stole this Sig
Compared to Trump, George W Bush was a regular Pericles.
You're going to see mockery on a level never before seen in human history. And the Orange Daddy earned every bit of it.
You are welcome on my lawn.
One of the reviews was very insightful in that it pointed out that this $149 ornament was MADE IN CHINA. Trump supporters are suckers. He doesn't give a flying fuck about you. Neither does Hillary, but she isn't selling $149 ornaments. What a joke.
I guess they don't teach US civics in Russia.
You are welcome on my lawn.
There's nothing about the last election that should be 'gotten over'. Everything that's wrong with modern politics and America happened there. I would have said that either way regardless of who won the presidential election.
It's cause Obama isn't shit his pants stupid
Let's ask Donald Trump what he thinks of the electoral college:
https://twitter.com/realDonald...
And let's ask him about how people should just suck it up and accept the results of the election:
https://twitter.com/realDonald...
https://twitter.com/realDonald...
So let's apply what you said to Donald Trump, first and foremost, huh?
You are welcome on my lawn.
We never elected biff tannor before
Voting for a racist was a great way to make your point.
The thing is, whenever anyone criticizes trump or even questions whether he has conflicts of interest with his businesses the standard reply has become "B-b-b-b-b-but Hillary!".
We know Clinton lost the election. Get over it!
If you look anywhere online the standard response is "Hillary lost, get over it." Hey, we weren't even talking about her. Why do trump supporters keep bringing her up?
My wife tried to vote absentee from Canada, her last residence was in NC. She never received a ballot or any other follow-up.
He's just copying Trump's tweet from tonight. Yes, Trump actually believes this. It's from a conspiracy nut job blog who makes shit up.
He's trying to invalidate our system of government. Blinding people with bullshit.
Sadly, it works. At least enough to get to president-elect.
But he hasn't passed the EC yet, and they most definitely are watching him.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Civil war veterans in NC
http://thefederalist.com/2016/...
There's plenty more, how much over the reports nobody knows because the Democrats spent decades making it impossible to find out.
And Trump's trying the old 'stir shit up redirect' because of the NYT coming out with comprehensive article describing Trump's world wide conflicts of interest.
http://boingboing.net/2016/11/...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11...
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Clearly, I must be one of those self-hating, heterosexual white males.
Strictly speaking the rules are that the Electoral College picks the President, and the Constitution gives very few rules as to how they do that. Now I think the EC picking someone other than Trump would be an even worse disaster than picking Trump, but let's be clear as to what the rules actually are. And let's also be clear that Trump's vast international business network poses a potential Constitutional crisis if he doesn't divest himself of it soon.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Let's just say the whole Birther thing is a bit of a tell, then the not renting to black folks in NYC is kind of a give-away as well.
Guess what?
Federal bribery does!!
Business deals for trade deals is ... wait for it ... bribery!
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
After eight years of it being racist, mocking the President as well as other dissent is patriotic once again. That alone made voting for Trump worth it...
And to think, it almost became sexist instead!..
Mocking Obama was always fine.
Mocking Obama in a transparently racist manner was racist. Just like mocking Hillary with obviously sexist insults was sexist.
Just because it's possible to mock Obama or Hillary without being racist or sexist doesn't mean that any offensive thing you say magically becomes not racist or sexist.
I stole this Sig
she's a progressive. Not necessarily a great one, but she is at least trying. You're massively underestimating the height of the bar she was trying to leap, the amount of effort needed and the compromises required to get even close to what she was trying to do. For one thing, she was poised to put single payer back on the table (Mr Clinton was going around talking about it).
Well, America just pissed that all away for good 'ole fashion apathy. Trump got the Republican base out just like Rhomey did. Clinton couldn't get the Blacks and Latinos out. She couldn't get them excited with vague promises... Meanwhile Trump promised them the world. Lies, all lies of course. But it _felt_ good.
Sad thing is those Blacks and Latinos are really going to regret staying home. Trump's cabinet isn't going to do them any favors, and somebody's got to fill all those private prisons...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Well he didn't accept the voting results. In his own words millions of illegal votes were cast.
So I am right there with him. This is very upsetting. We need a do over. I suggest Obama declares a state of emergency until we can figure this out.
Your caps lock got stuck.
I don't think people like you get it. If the election were repeated Trump's win would be monumental.
C'mon, it'll be fun!
And this way the rest of the world doesn't have to mull over the uncertainty if Trump was just an electoral accident, or if he actually reflects a batshit crazy electorate.
I am all for clarity.
Fair enough. So you're the right person to ask: Was he bullshitting then or is he bullshitting now? Or was the electoral college really an abomination in 2012, but is a beautiful thing now? Was resistance the right thing to do in 2012, but is a Very Bad Thing now?
Or are the very concepts of logic and consistency rigged? How far will you debase your ability to reason in order to support this corrupt urinal cake?
You are welcome on my lawn.
It's called historical context, you stupid anonymous fuck. Pick up a history textbook that's not from Texas and learn something.
I don't respond to AC's.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And Trump will appoint two, maybe three Supreme Court Justices.
Suck on it, brother.
Trump belongs to the most protected class of all: millionaires.
You are welcome on my lawn.
He threatens lawsuits, but as expected, he doesn't follow through. Trump will never sue anyone for libel or releasing or reporting on a private conversation, because he worries about what would be learned in the discovery phase. This is a guy who was comfortable with his teenaged daughter being called a "piece of ass". He's a urinal cake.
https://variety.com/2016/tv/ne...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Since when has anyone who is not an Obama critic been concerned with a Constitutional crisis?
For crying out loud, our current President negotiated a treaty with a hostile foreign power with no consent from the Senate! He just created it out of thin air, and worse, the Senate just rolled over and let him do it!
If a President negotiates a treaty with a foreign power, that is not a Constitutional crisis. Quite the contrary: under the constitution, that's his job. And it's the job of the Senate to ratify such a treaty with a supermajority. I'm not sure where you get the idea that the Senate is not in the picture.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
So he was lying?
Well, yes, the electoral will vote as indicated despite death threats because the trusted by both sides selects them.
Unfortunately, Hillary - despite her election rhetoric
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11...
Is going to be just as stupid as gore was
http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...
And Gosh, where did the money come from for the 1% green party to challenge the vote come from?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Neither. Like Obama & Hillary on the subject of same-sex marriage... he 'evolved' on the issue ;)
Ask that once we have a final answer as to why 'dissent is patriotic' 2001-2008, racist from 2009-11/8/16, then back to patriotic come 11/9/16?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
The Russian Jews sent my still living uncle to a gulag back before WW2....
That's the strangest spelling for 'communist'[*] I've ever seen.
...we don't hate the jews, we just wish stupid people like you learned a bit more about history.
Why, because it would save you the trouble of learning actual history?
------------
[*] Oh, OK, if I must: YES, there were Jews among the party apparatchiks at a couple of points in the Leninist/Stalinist period. They were trusted to varying degrees, but were subject to purges, too, depending on a number of factors, not the least of which was endemic anti-semitism among the Russian populace in general. But yes, some of them actually prospered under Stalin when millions of others were dying. This was not typically because of their Jewishness, but because they had other survival skills, some of which were less than admirable, this being Stalin's Russia and all. The Baltic states suffered terribly under the Soviets, but not because of The Jews.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
Being unable to change isn't the same thing as accepting. In virtually every poll, people have supported the idea of the national popular vote by a large margin, but as long as the party in control of most states benefits from the current system, they're not going to change the laws.
Why don't voters just elect new representatives? Because of project REDMAP. The GOP has been funneling money disproportionately to down-ballot state races to gain governors and state congressional majorities, and from there, appoint friendly justices, gerrymander the district maps, and change voting laws to entrench Republican control, ensuring future victories even with a minority of votes. It's a deliberate nationwide effort to override the votes of a steadily increasing Democrat majority, through local representatives bought and paid for and beholden to the national party.
This isn't a conspiracy theory; this is straight from the GOP:
As the 2010 Census approached, the RSLC began planning for the subsequent election cycle, formulating a strategy to keep or win Republican control of state legislatures with the largest impact on congressional redistricting as a result of reapportionment. That effort, the REDistricting MAjority Project (REDMAP), focused critical resources on legislative chambers in states projected to gain or lose congressional seats in 2011 based on Census data.
The rationale was straightforward: Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn. Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade.
After REDMAP’s success on Election Day 2010, Republicans held majorities in 10 of the 15 states that gained or lost U.S. House seats and where the legislature played a role in redrawing the state legislative and congressional district map. In the 70 congressional districts that were labeled by National Public Radio as “competitive” in 2010, Republicans controlled the redrawing of at least 47 of those districts; Democrats were responsible for 15, and a non-partisan process determined eight.
REDMAP’s effect on the 2012 election is plain when analyzing the results: Pennsylvanians cast 83,000 more votes for Democratic U.S. House candidates than their Republican opponents, but elected a 13-5 Republican majority to represent them in Washington; Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress. Nationwide, Republicans won 54 percent of the U.S. House seats, along with 58 of 99 state legislative chambers, while winning only 8 of 33 U.S. Senate races and carrying only 47.8 percent of the national presidential vote.
Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans.
You can read more from their old site: http://www.redistrictingmajori...
Or see the results here: http://rslc.gop/map-center/
And yes, it's still going: http://rslc.gop/blog/2015/07/1...
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Why is it not racist to mock Trump on his hair, his skin color, his small hands?
Because "bad spray tan" and "ridiculous hair extensions" is not a race.
And the "small hands" thing is generally just needling him since he's bizarrely insecure about the size of his hands.
Well I do care. I don't care for Trump, but I do care that apparently it is okay to be racist against white people, but everything a white person says can be considered racism.
It's not OK to be racist against white people.
Thankfully it's also relatively rare (at least compared to racism against non-whites).
I stole this Sig
After losing an election following six months of sneering, elitist, classist "mockery," clearly the answer is to... double down.
You gotta admit they are consistent. Before the election they said it was going to be rigged. Now that it's over they are still saying it was rigged - even though their guy won !
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I don't know if you were alive these last 8 years, but anyone who mocked or belittled the President was immediately shouted down as racist. With Trump in office, it will become OK to criticize the President again, which is a huge improvement.
Perhaps you were just saying racist things? I am a progressive and I have conservative friends and we mocked President Obama all the time, but we mocked some of his policies, we never attacked his children (unlike some people on the right) nor his wife, his race, culture or religion. Perhaps you need to take a hard long look in the mirror (you do not need to tell us the results) and ask yourself if you are really being honest with yourself.
I wish Obama WAS the guy Republicans kept saying he was... that guy would use his constitutional right to appoint Garland in the recess period and give the senate a last major fuck you.
The actual Obama is too damn nice to you idiots.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I don't know if you were alive these last 8 years, but anyone who mocked or belittled the President was immediately shouted down as racist.
I disagree. I shared that image on social media, sadly it failed to take, probably because I didn't add any snappy text caption. I thought the bottles did the job, but I guess not. I got zero accusations of racism. Absolutely zero, and I have some pretty PC types in my feed. I come from Santa Cruz, see? Only the racism was necessarily called racism.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Clearly, it doesn't matter to you.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I'm sure we can get the Republicans to purge the people who say mean things right after the Democrats purge their cop killers, their terrorists and sympathizers, and the KKK.
The KKK voted for Trump, so it's the reps who are going to have to purge them. The vast majority of terrorist attacks on American soil have been by white conservatives, so that's the republicans again. And the democrats will purge the cop killers just as soon as the republicans purge the killer cops. It's the safest time in history to be a cop in America, but they're killing more and more citizens every year. It's not a war on cops. It's a war by cops.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you can prove your identity and residential address well enough to get a driver's license (the exact criteria vary by state), and you check the box on that paperwork certifying that you are a citizen and you wish to be registered to vote, you will be registered to vote.
The "Motor Voter Act" requires all states to do that, and to have a similar checkbox for many applications for public assistance (food stamps, Medicaid, housing, etc.).
The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot require evidence of citizenship beyond the federal requirements of the applicant checking the box and signing the form.
Since when has anyone who is not an Obama critic been concerned with a Constitutional crisis?
For crying out loud, our current President negotiated a treaty with a hostile foreign power with no consent from the Senate! He just created it out of thin air, and worse, the Senate just rolled over and let him do it!
If a President negotiates a treaty with a foreign power, that is not a Constitutional crisis. Quite the contrary: under the constitution, that's his job. And it's the job of the Senate to ratify such a treaty with a supermajority. I'm not sure where you get the idea that the Senate is not in the picture.
Actually, the Senate doesn't ratify most treaties with a supermajority. We rarely use that process. Normally what we do is to enact the terms of the treaty as ordinary federal law, with simple majorities in both houses and a signature from the president. This process produces what's called a "congressional executive treaty".
It should also be pointed out that the president can and does sign many treaties without the participation of either house. He does this when the terms of the treaty can be enacted entirely on his own authority, for example as Commander in Chief. The most common example of this sort of treaty (called a "sole executive treaty") are the Status of Forces Agreements (SoFA) that are signed with the various countries who host US military bases. These agreements specify how the US forces will interact with the host country and because the Commander in Chief has the power to tell the US military what to do, the president can simply sign them.
Of course, the president can sign anything he likes, but if the treaty obligations exceed his authority, then he needs Congress to weigh in, either a simply majority of both houses or a 2/3 majority of the Senate.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
And the Orange Daddy earned every bit of it.
Why? Seriously, how is he even a patch on life long politicians who have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people around the world like Bush and Hillary?
People that have added massive debt to the U.S. that has our kids names on the bills and forced crap like ObamaCare on us. Oh, he MIGHT be as bad at some point? Perhaps, but he hasn't done anything yet.
The hatred is astounding.
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
Bullshit. It was the communist party. They stole from everyone, including the Jews. Jews had NOTHING to do with it. Your grandparents are just raging bigots.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
It's acceptable anywhere.
What you are whining about is putting people out. The problem is that EVERYONE is put out by getting a proper ID. It's just that most of us already do it for our JOBS. So using it for voting is redundant.
While the clear intent of voter ID laws is clearly racist voter suppression, it really only discourages the "can't be bothered" crowd. The answer is not to whine about how things are unfair but to tell people to get off their lazy asses.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Have you never heard him talk about Mexicans and the need for the wall? Have you never heard him talk about Muslims?
Learn to love Alaska
And the Orange Daddy earned every bit of it.
Why? Seriously, how is he even a patch on life long politicians who have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people around the world like Bush and Hillary?
People that have added massive debt to the U.S. that has our kids names on the bills and forced crap like ObamaCare on us. Oh, he MIGHT be as bad at some point? Perhaps, but he hasn't done anything yet.
The hatred is astounding.
Oh come on. Your post is ample evidence that the previous president hardly escaped astounding hate. There might be something in there about how the left and right cope with not having the presidency differently, but in practice, neither side lets the other side take power without bitching and whining for the entire four years. We just had eight years of Republican bitching and now we will have at least four of Democrat bitching.