Aside, there were 16 Republican politicians vying for an executive position. Trump was the most experienced as an executive. The others were better qualified for political positions such as in the Department of State but not for the position of Chief Executive.
Hm, what about communism as a popular movement where those who believe in communism start, freely, working to the best of their abilities then, freely, sharing the profits of their work with those of less ability? Let's see that happen. Let's not see communism forced upon us.
What exactly was the (no longer secret?) interference? Was it a video? If so, do you have a link for it (assuming that it won't take control over my mental faculties--turning me into a Manchurian Candidate)?
Maybe deflation is occurring because businesses that Amazon.com is competing with are filing for bankruptcy protection or defaulting on loans because they're losing business to Amazon.
Loan defaults and bankruptcy makes "money" disappear and that is deflation.
We can blame Google and Facebook for displaying click-bait as "top stories."
If they want their "top stories" to be more credible they should have humans review them for veracity and logical conclusions before they're shown to users.
Also, they should post conflicting versions of stories and events to help readers make better informed decisions as to whether or not a news item is believable.
Yes, I remember pizzagate. I also remember post-election riots, a recount in several states that appears to have fizzled-out, accusations of Trump colluding with Russia, Republican congresspersons being shot by an leftist inspired by anti-Trump news stories (from "legitimate" network and cable news sources), etc.
You also seem to have forgotten the multi-sourced reports before the election that Trump, at most, had a one-in-four chance of winning. That may or may not have discouraged potential voters from voting for Trump but it certainly discouraged potential Trump campaign contributors: 2016 election/campaign finance.
Yes that Trendingsticky header on the top right of Facebook pages appears to be dedicated to publicizing each and every news item that was or is expected:
to spell the end of Trump's campaign to be the Republican nominee
to spell the end of Trump's campaign to be U.S. president
to spell the end of Trump's presidency.
???
Anyhow, can anyone tell us exactly which fake news caused them to not vote for Hillary and instead vote for Trump? Was her private email SERVER fake news? Was her involvement in the ousting of the Egyptian and Libyan heads-of-state in 2011 fake news? Was it fake news that she read, from a prepared speech, that millions of Americans belonged in a basket of deplorables? Anyone ever wonder what a basket of deplorables (i.e., a place where you would put those persons you deem irredeemable) would look like?
It seems like Google has made it clear that their work environment is definitively hostile towards anyone who dares question feminist dogma
Are you really so naive to think that - are you on your Dad's account or something or did we just get you before the first coffee of the day?
It's not about any *ism. It's about being critical of the company wide employment policy and ultimately the CEO himself. Any correspondence with feminist or any other dogma is co-incidental. Pick a very public fight with management on an emotive issue, get it into the press and shit happens. Of course he got fired. He was demonstrating a lack of loyalty in a very public way and the issue itself doesn't matter. How relevant is feminism in the millenial "bro" locker room environment of Google anyway? It's just a bullet point in the hiring policy to stop the place looking like a juvenile sausagefest to the outside world.
Ok, let's have all employees, who attempt discussions about diversity and inclusion, be fired.
The document is an invitation for discussion regarding how "bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion."
It's wasn't the Russians. It was Seth Rich who leaked DNC's info to Assange.
Why is this marked as "Troll?"
Assange stated that the DNC emails were not leaked to Wikileaks by "The Russians."
Assange did comment on Seth Rich's murder while coyly mentioning the dangers that "leakers" are under.
It's quite understandable that someone could easily interpret Assange's statements on the matter to imply that Seth Rich was murdered as punishment for leaking DNC emails to Wikileaks.
If someone is able to walk they can hang from a chinup bar or perform some yoga moves to address their pain. Chiropractic may not be BS in that some people like to be "adjusted" but, it is not a science-based medical treatment.
If "The Right" is powerful in the U.S., where is the evidence of this power? The U.S. is strongly socialist with virtually no capital punishment and no centralized and powerful major religion. This is antithetical to right-wing philosophy.
You are confusing political parties with political philosophies. Think outside the box but don't forget what is in the box.
I am not a member of the "entrenched left-wing elite." By definition (elite), most people are not members of that group. I can only assume what you mean by "you guys" though you are using it in the manner of a disparaging epithet. You appear to be arguing with someone else.
There is one major difference between "The Left" and "The Right." You have to look to countries such as Iran to find rightists in power. "The Right" is a fringe group in the west. If you don't think this is true try a thought experiment: list five issues that leftists are always for and rightists are always against and vice versa. Do you see a pattern?
If "climate change/global warming" was so critical, why didn't President Barak Obama and his Democrat super-majority in Congress forego the piddling little issue of health insurance and instead make some real changes to address "climate change/global warming?"
Let's call them Everyday Americans. They have been conditioned to reject any programs with Orwellian names such as "Net Neutrality." "Net Neutrality" is very reminiscent of The Fairness Doctrine. "The Fairness Doctrine" was re-visited in 2008 as a way to suppress talk radio shows (cf, minority media) such a "The Rush Limbaugh Show."
Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation.
The Kremlin going up against the U.S. alphabet agencies (CIA, FBI, NSA,...) would be an incredibly expensive battle. What would be the benefit to them? It's a much easier explanation to assume an "inside job." There's certainly evidence of this with the multiple "leaks," of Trump administration activity, to the media - most notably the leak of General Flynn's private conversation with a Russian ambassador. We're pretty confident that "THE RUSSIANS" were not the source of the leak.
Please contrast and compare Hillary Clinton's and her associates' "intimate connections" with the Russian government and the Kremlin with those of Trumps' and his associates'. Unless, of course, you completely choose to ignore any connection between Democrat Party members and Russia.
Occam's Razor says it's not "The Russians." "The Russians" do not have the resources to control U.S. (social) media. It does appear that some entity is using the media to create deeper political division in the U.S. It must be very expensive to do this but, it would be much less expensive for U.S. government agencies to do this instead of a foreign entity. Occam's Razor says this is an inside-job. If any entity is influencing the media it is much more likely to be the CIA rather than the Kremlin.
Slashdot Mirror
How did Trump's 1987 full page newspaper advertisement criticizing the U.S. government factor in your assessment of his motivations?
Aside, there were 16 Republican politicians vying for an executive position. Trump was the most experienced as an executive. The others were better qualified for political positions such as in the Department of State but not for the position of Chief Executive.
Hm, what about communism as a popular movement where those who believe in communism start, freely, working to the best of their abilities then, freely, sharing the profits of their work with those of less ability? Let's see that happen. Let's not see communism forced upon us.
What exactly was the (no longer secret?) interference? Was it a video? If so, do you have a link for it (assuming that it won't take control over my mental faculties--turning me into a Manchurian Candidate)?
Agreed! Tom's comment deserves special recognition.
China is NOT worried about CAGW dolt. CAGW is simply another foreign money maker for them and strategically exploits the US.
Urban particulates for black lungs, NOx, SOx are their immediate problems.
Somebody with MOD points please MOD the parent comment up!
Aside: In addition to the toxic cloud they call air enveloping them, China's cities are sinking.
Maybe deflation is occurring because businesses that Amazon.com is competing with are filing for bankruptcy protection or defaulting on loans because they're losing business to Amazon.
Loan defaults and bankruptcy makes "money" disappear and that is deflation.
Who could ever forget The Glorious Meept!!?
Score 2 on a response to comment by someone who didn't read all three lines of the comment?
Anyhow: "... post conflicting versions of stories and events ..."
We can blame Google and Facebook for displaying click-bait as "top stories."
If they want their "top stories" to be more credible they should have humans review them for veracity and logical conclusions before they're shown to users.
Also, they should post conflicting versions of stories and events to help readers make better informed decisions as to whether or not a news item is believable.
Yes, I remember pizzagate. I also remember post-election riots, a recount in several states that appears to have fizzled-out, accusations of Trump colluding with Russia, Republican congresspersons being shot by an leftist inspired by anti-Trump news stories (from "legitimate" network and cable news sources), etc.
You also seem to have forgotten the multi-sourced reports before the election that Trump, at most, had a one-in-four chance of winning. That may or may not have discouraged potential voters from voting for Trump but it certainly discouraged potential Trump campaign contributors: 2016 election/campaign finance.
Agree but not just for the last 100 years. Rational voters vote for the least worst candidate. Kool-aid drinkers vote for their messiah.
Yes that Trending sticky header on the top right of Facebook pages appears to be dedicated to publicizing each and every news item that was or is expected:
Anyhow, can anyone tell us exactly which fake news caused them to not vote for Hillary and instead vote for Trump? Was her private email SERVER fake news? Was her involvement in the ousting of the Egyptian and Libyan heads-of-state in 2011 fake news? Was it fake news that she read, from a prepared speech, that millions of Americans belonged in a basket of deplorables? Anyone ever wonder what a basket of deplorables (i.e., a place where you would put those persons you deem irredeemable) would look like?
Are you really so naive to think that - are you on your Dad's account or something or did we just get you before the first coffee of the day?
It's not about any *ism. It's about being critical of the company wide employment policy and ultimately the CEO himself. Any correspondence with feminist or any other dogma is co-incidental.
Pick a very public fight with management on an emotive issue, get it into the press and shit happens. Of course he got fired. He was demonstrating a lack of loyalty in a very public way and the issue itself doesn't matter.
How relevant is feminism in the millenial "bro" locker room environment of Google anyway? It's just a bullet point in the hiring policy to stop the place looking like a juvenile sausagefest to the outside world.
Ok, let's have all employees, who attempt discussions about diversity and inclusion, be fired.
The document is an invitation for discussion regarding how "bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion."
The purported full text of the document with active links is here: Google's Ideological Echo Chamber.
Please read it.
It's wasn't the Russians. It was Seth Rich who leaked DNC's info to Assange.
Why is this marked as "Troll?"
Assange stated that the DNC emails were not leaked to Wikileaks by "The Russians."
Assange did comment on Seth Rich's murder while coyly mentioning the dangers that "leakers" are under.
It's quite understandable that someone could easily interpret Assange's statements on the matter to imply that Seth Rich was murdered as punishment for leaking DNC emails to Wikileaks.
If someone is able to walk they can hang from a chinup bar or perform some yoga moves to address their pain. Chiropractic may not be BS in that some people like to be "adjusted" but, it is not a science-based medical treatment.
The FDA provides information about their standards. For example, To date, the FDA has set specific lead levels for a variety of foods. We set a guidance level for candy likely to be consumed frequently by small children (100 ppb). Assuming lead exposure decreases I.Q. and assuming I.Q. has some bearing on quality of life, children born in the U.S. after 1980 have benefited greatly from the reduction in enviromental lead.
If "The Right" is powerful in the U.S., where is the evidence of this power? The U.S. is strongly socialist with virtually no capital punishment and no centralized and powerful major religion. This is antithetical to right-wing philosophy.
You are confusing political parties with political philosophies. Think outside the box but don't forget what is in the box.
I am not a member of the "entrenched left-wing elite." By definition (elite), most people are not members of that group. I can only assume what you mean by "you guys" though you are using it in the manner of a disparaging epithet. You appear to be arguing with someone else.
There is one major difference between "The Left" and "The Right." You have to look to countries such as Iran to find rightists in power. "The Right" is a fringe group in the west. If you don't think this is true try a thought experiment: list five issues that leftists are always for and rightists are always against and vice versa. Do you see a pattern?
Try thinking outside the box.
If "climate change/global warming" was so critical, why didn't President Barak Obama and his Democrat super-majority in Congress forego the piddling little issue of health insurance and instead make some real changes to address "climate change/global warming?"
Please people, try to think "outside the box."
Tesla has major "cred" with the entrenched left-wing elite. In other words, they've got a pretty reliable get-out-of-jail-free card.
Let's call them Everyday Americans. They have been conditioned to reject any programs with Orwellian names such as "Net Neutrality." "Net Neutrality" is very reminiscent of The Fairness Doctrine. "The Fairness Doctrine" was re-visited in 2008 as a way to suppress talk radio shows (cf, minority media) such a "The Rush Limbaugh Show."
My compliments at your clever ad hominem.
Have you reviewed John Podesta's emails at WikiLeaks?
Date: 2015-12-21 12:09 ... Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin ...
and
The Podesta Emails; Part One
Is Julian Assange a "conspiracy theorist?"
Is John Podesta not an "insider?"
Am I using someone else's "talking points?"
Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation.
The Kremlin going up against the U.S. alphabet agencies (CIA, FBI, NSA, ...) would be an incredibly expensive battle. What would be the benefit to them? It's a much easier explanation to assume an "inside job." There's certainly evidence of this with the multiple "leaks," of Trump administration activity, to the media - most notably the leak of General Flynn's private conversation with a Russian ambassador. We're pretty confident that "THE RUSSIANS" were not the source of the leak.
Please contrast and compare Hillary Clinton's and her associates' "intimate connections" with the Russian government and the Kremlin with those of Trumps' and his associates'. Unless, of course, you completely choose to ignore any connection between Democrat Party members and Russia.
Occam's Razor says it's not "The Russians." "The Russians" do not have the resources to control U.S. (social) media. It does appear that some entity is using the media to create deeper political division in the U.S. It must be very expensive to do this but, it would be much less expensive for U.S. government agencies to do this instead of a foreign entity. Occam's Razor says this is an inside-job. If any entity is influencing the media it is much more likely to be the CIA rather than the Kremlin.