From personal experience and what friends in the industry tell me, the biggest areas that need help are LOD artists and texture artists. There's plenty of mesh(static and moving object) makers even animators, if anything there's an over abundance of both. And that's because schools(inc. fly-by-night, and low-end schools) pushed the big "animation is where it's at!" stuff for years. But 2D artists and things like that? If you can colour, draw in a texture, and so on? You can basically take your pick of jobs from low to high end. Even the h-games I've worked on, the biggest problems we've always had were finding actual artists who could draw assets. It's why on sites like(FYI all NSFW -- basically digital storefronts like Steam/Origin/etc) DMM.co.jp, getchu.com or DLSite.com you'll see such similarities in drawings, it's not that people are copying(though there is some of that). It's there's a lack of actual artists, and they're in such demand that their services go to the highest bidder. You can also look at big projects like Skywind and other total conversion projects. It's always the same thing 2D texture makers and LOD/static mesh artists.
It's easy to "upsample" a texture and make it prettier which is what a lot of those texture packs that gamers like to use. But finding someone who does it by hand? Rare. And they usually already work in the industry.
The FCC isn't the only organization that this falls under. ISP's in Canada use cogent as well, and oversight falls into the domain of the CRTC. We also have net neutrality rules, cogent operates offices here and in turn is subject to Canadian laws.
Having looked a bit at history and other cultures, I'd say: no.
1950s America is not the definition of Humanity. Deal with it.
Haven't looked very hard then. I suggest looking at the existing matriarchies in the world. When you do, you'll figure out that western society did in deed grow out of the norms. Most other societies have not, which is why women aren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia. And in islamic countries, they're considered not only inferior, but worth less then children in the eyes of the law.
Their ideas aren't "strange" about the political left. Those are the ideas that the left espouse on a regular basis. Pick your favorite search engine, and you'll find that those aren't minority opinions among the left. They're majority opinions, and it's also the reason why the left is losing their foothold in nearly every western country. You're living in a political bubble, go read a years back opinions on a site like samizdat and get back to everyone.
No, I mean the left wing bias that infuriates people and causes them to say things like "I'm not racist, but..." or scream "stop calling me a Nazi all the time just because I like Hitler and ethnic cleansing".
You know the whole "I'm not racist, but..." bit is mainly prevalent in left-wing politics don't you? Most people on the right rejected identity politics for a reason, and the left decided to eat, breath, and shit it out for breakfast. That is if they're not engaging in overt racism in and of itself, or trying to claim that "diversity quotas" and "preferential hiring" instead of hiring based on race instead of merit isn't actually racism or sexism.
Yeah, I can't find anything that Bannon says outside of far-leftist or social justice circles that is considered "white supremacy."
Not to back-up whomever you're responding to, but Germaine Greer has proposed mandatory sterilization for all men. Of course, that's not quite the same thing as castration. And, well, it's Germaine Greer, knowwhatimean? But I wonder if the GP heard that Greer proposed that filtered through a game of telephone.
There's quite a few feminists hold extremist view points. It's actually become bad enough that the less radical feminists call them out for it, and are attacked for their trouble. Whether said attack is via social media, peer pressure, doxing or threats. It much like the broader scope of social justice is so far down the marxist rabbit hole, that anything right of Lenin is considered extremism in their eyes.
Better realize that the only thing that modern feminism supports is their own supremacist ideology. Because feminists supporting castration? Yeah that exists. Then there's the ones that support killing large segments of the male population because "reasons." And then there's the ones that support infanticide of male babies, and the other ones that are in support of using abortion directly against male babies. Then there's the feminists who are openly in support of FGM because you can't speak out against that backwards culture that believes in it. All the while supporting the same people who beat their wives is fine, as long as they aren't western.
Not fishy at all. The Toyota plants in Woodstock, Ontario and Cambridge, Ontario have had multiple cases of this. People would get hired on usually by having a sterling resume, or qualifications that put them above the average worker to get hired on. Then after several years start agitating for unionization and so on. It's why the unionization vote at the Woodstock plant has failed at least 4 times that I know of.
The press tone hasn't changed, it's just that the republicans have moved from conservative to fascist.
Uh-huh. Republicans are fascist. Oh boy! Look at all those progressives and so on openly supporting actual fascism. What shall the world ever do in the face of such hypocrisy and failing self-realization that they're everything that they claim the opposition is.
This is what he means by a few alt-right spewing lies.
Don't let reality hurt you.It's a very harsh mistress. When you decide to look, you can also note how the tone of media has changed as it's been consolidated into particular hands. I recommend the washington post as a starting point, then move onto NBC.
Yeah, we're trying to prevent that BEFORE it happens, not after.
Too bad it's already happening isn't it? That it's been going on for years. That you can look at Germany and see the government leaning on media and police not to report statistics. That one can look at Sweden where police officers are threatened with "racism" charges for reporting facts. Where the governments make demands of social media to censor things which are contrary to the presented viewpoint. Or police threaten and dox people for not wanting refugees in their backyard, or having particular points of view on sexuality. Or universities and student unions engaging in no-platforming, or threatening speakers because their view points no longer fit the radical agendas that are being pushed. Yes, very much trying to prevent what's already happening and encouraging a "further" counter-pendulum swing with your actions.
You mean that "left-wing bias" which gives rise to things like 20 years of screaming "the nazis/white supremacists are coming." Or "it's okay to punch nazis/etc" or "everyone is a racist/sexist/homophobes if you don't agree with us" type of bias? Or "pepe is a racist hate symbol" type of left-wing bias. We can keep going down this form of reality you're pushing, but that doesn't make it true. And if anything, it simply paints the left very unhinged. How about the "kkk are on the rise again" type of bias? You know when their actual membership is so tiny, that they're smaller in organizational size then that group of leftists at UC Berkeley stood along side.
Yep, I know, it's very comforting for you to think that there's this mythical "alt-right" that's lurking behind everything on the right side of politics these days. But then again, considering that Trump's message resonated with every sector of the electorate and he did better then the last candidates. Seems like it's not a "1950's idea. It's a 1980's idea, where people weren't having their jobs outsourced to 3rd world labor.
Fortunately the alt-right has shown up the solution. A relatively small number of people working to spread disinformation worked very effectively. To counter that, we need a similar number of people willing to use subversion tactics to promote the truth.
30 years of the media in the US alone being partisan towards democrats, but it's suddenly a small number of "alt-right" spreading disinformation. Okie there. I'm sure that the mainstream media pumping out a bunch of articles in the last few months that were fake wasn't anything. Or how many times has it been now that sites like WAPO have had to publicly retract stories because of that fake news? Hate to tell you this, but the media tried to pull the fake news crap, and got their face rolled into it. It's the same reason why for over a decade that the trust in the media in the US is under 20% and even here in Canada it's under 25%
But let's look at some disinformation. Would that be like the migrant that was arrested in Edmonton, Alberta the other day. And the CBC uses the word "touched" when the person in question aggressively committed sexual assaulted a 14 year old? Under the definition of the law as sexual assault level 3, because they threatened and caused physical injury. Or is that simply massaging the truth because it paints them in a bad light. Or would that be like the underage refugees in NFLD, who physically assaulted a 15 year old girl, and the response from the media was bending over backwards to claim "cultural issues" and the two people "not knowing that assault was wrong." We don't even have to start from there, we can just look over the media like the letter networks and see how much garbage they've been pumping out over the last 15 years.
I know that the "alt-right" is some great invisible bogeyman for you. But you guys over in Europe have far more to worry about with the government engaging in active censorship, and trying to hide information from the public in order to ensure their political power remains intact.
"Policy" doesn't matter when it comes down to reality. Policy can say "It's not okay to drone Americans" when the president turns around and drones Americans right? And while that's a far-off example, when someone decides that they can step over the line and present an issue with their own ideological bent, and administrators back it up? The entire base trustworthiness goes right out the window. Take any issue on wikipedia that has even a single touch on a contemporary issue, and all those policies and rules go right out the window. There's a reason why the term citeogensis exists, and you can create an entirely false premise based on wikipedia itself.
If you need an example of how bad this can get, go read the gamergate article. The entire premise of it is based off opinion and he-said-she-said view points, the talk page itself is full of people pointing it out. And actual NPOV's have been repeatedly deleted, and factually inaccurate or direct falsehoods have been presented as fact inside wikipedias articles itself. And with that I'm not sure what's worse, that people try to paint it as "well it's okay as long as x is okay." Or that people actively try to make the argument that even if it's factually incorrect or present falsehoods it's okay because people were "making opinion articles" about it.
hroughout each Wikipedia article, you'll see references to sources, with the full information about each source listed at the bottom of the article
The problem is their definition of a source. Blog posts are fine. Articles which are opinion, which reference blog posts are fine. Even opinion and news articles which reference blog posts which are slanderous are fine. It's not the "Wikipedia to be a source for information" it's that wikipedia uses sources to paint narratives, based on what an editor feels is true. And if you happen to disprove what the editor wrote? Well you're likely to be banned for your trouble.
As it stands now? Wikipedia is a good place to find bad sources, or sources which don't actually reflect reality. It's only gotten worse with their "edithons" which push particular ideological view points.
Funny that twitters decline started around the time they decided to start censoring users, and deciding who gets to see what. And since facebook is doing the same thing, as well as being complicit in open censorship in western democracies(France, Germany, etc). This is likely going to be the least of their problems. It looks like politicians(and gov bodies) will be behind the technical and social curve as usual.
They don't like my add blocker and I am not turning it off for them.
This is pretty common these days especially sites which have basically turned into a blog farm. Business Insider, Forbes, Telegraph, Vice, Vox, etc. The Guardian is getting there, won't surprise me in the next couple of years if they start pushing the same garbage. They can crash and burn for all it worth though. Some sites are suffering worse for it then others, and there's new media rising to replace it all anyway.
So when it was done repeatedly over the last 30 years with various countries, you were right there protesting. No? Guess what? These companies aren't trying to sell there, they're trying to stop Trump from cutting off their low-cost labor alternatives.
If you think that Syria or Yemen is in any financial situation to afford the software or hardware that these companies are peddling, you have no idea of exactly the state of their economy. If everything that's going on there stopped right now, at this exact moment. It would still be the better part of half a decade before there would be stable enough market that it wouldn't be a massive loss.
There's an actual reason why Iran is on such a highly restricted country list that even other muslim countries in the region refuse to allow any entry at all. If you need help figuring out why, I'd suggest checking out a newspaper or political journal. The fact that you're so happily pro-H1B, instead of having people who are already *in* the country retrained to do the job says a lot more.
The one in Quebec? You mean the white, hyper leftwing supporting person, who supported the Parti Quebecois, NDP, and other various separatist leaders in Quebec? Yeah, you read that right. He was a left-wing nationalist. Not the first one we've dealt with here in Canada. The PQ are leftwing nationalists, the FLQ was a leftwing nationalist terrorist group. But those facts aren't convenient for the story of the day.
I can find ads here in Canada which contravene the equal hiring laws, where companies and government agencies have openly stated that they "are not hiring white people." Hell buzzfeed got caught doing it a year or two ago, in both Canada and the US.
Intel threw $300,000,000 at increasing diversity and equality. Either there is a genuine shortage of skill, or they genuinely care about that stuff*, or... Or what?
Pandering. Nothing more. They also laid off 11% of their workforce at roughly the same time.
If you don't think there aren't shakedowns going on by sexist baiters and race baiters you're extremely naive. Al Shaprton has done it to numerous companies, Sarkeesian has done it to several companies as well. The only upside is, the numbers of companies actually pandering and simply not giving a shit is increasing.
He's a RINO. Which makes him basically a democrat. But hey, he's not the only one. You notice all those other people on there? You noticed how they shook their head so hard, and believed that they were *still the right ones" and all that? No? You should watch that again then. Then while you're at it, you can watch this little bit by Dave Rubin.
People can whine, complain, stomp their feet or whatever else. But as someone who's "right of center" the left needs to get it's act together because a functinoing democracy doesn't work when one half it is overrun by extremists. And it's not the right however much you want to think it is.
My dice has a 16% chance of generating a six. It still happens from time to time. Your N=1 dataset is irrelevant.
You're basically saying that trump threw a 100 on a 10,000,000 sided dice. You realize the exact statistical impossibility of that right? Not once, but in multiple throws he got a 100 every time. That means ones of two things, either the initial estimates were so wildly off in terms of the polls, or the dice was fixed. Now the first is far more likely true, that the polls were wildly off. The second? Well, if the second was true. Why are democrats stomping their feet from wanting to investigate it now? You'd think they'd want to show beyond a reasonable doubt that either they were correct, he was incorrect, or that there was something funky going on right.
Again, if you disagree you'll need to explain why it's made a big comeback since our dollar tanked after reaching parity a few years ago.
Two reasons: Excessively high energy costs at roughly 20x the rate in Michigan or Buffalo, this is directly contributed to "green energy." And carbon taxes, or the threat of carbon taxes which businesses have said NOPE. Picked up and moved out. The answers are right in front of you.
Slashdot Mirror
From personal experience and what friends in the industry tell me, the biggest areas that need help are LOD artists and texture artists. There's plenty of mesh(static and moving object) makers even animators, if anything there's an over abundance of both. And that's because schools(inc. fly-by-night, and low-end schools) pushed the big "animation is where it's at!" stuff for years. But 2D artists and things like that? If you can colour, draw in a texture, and so on? You can basically take your pick of jobs from low to high end. Even the h-games I've worked on, the biggest problems we've always had were finding actual artists who could draw assets. It's why on sites like(FYI all NSFW -- basically digital storefronts like Steam/Origin/etc) DMM.co.jp, getchu.com or DLSite.com you'll see such similarities in drawings, it's not that people are copying(though there is some of that). It's there's a lack of actual artists, and they're in such demand that their services go to the highest bidder. You can also look at big projects like Skywind and other total conversion projects. It's always the same thing 2D texture makers and LOD/static mesh artists.
It's easy to "upsample" a texture and make it prettier which is what a lot of those texture packs that gamers like to use. But finding someone who does it by hand? Rare. And they usually already work in the industry.
D'ya suppose the current FCC will even care?
The FCC isn't the only organization that this falls under. ISP's in Canada use cogent as well, and oversight falls into the domain of the CRTC. We also have net neutrality rules, cogent operates offices here and in turn is subject to Canadian laws.
Having looked a bit at history and other cultures, I'd say: no.
1950s America is not the definition of Humanity. Deal with it.
Haven't looked very hard then. I suggest looking at the existing matriarchies in the world. When you do, you'll figure out that western society did in deed grow out of the norms. Most other societies have not, which is why women aren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia. And in islamic countries, they're considered not only inferior, but worth less then children in the eyes of the law.
Their ideas aren't "strange" about the political left. Those are the ideas that the left espouse on a regular basis. Pick your favorite search engine, and you'll find that those aren't minority opinions among the left. They're majority opinions, and it's also the reason why the left is losing their foothold in nearly every western country. You're living in a political bubble, go read a years back opinions on a site like samizdat and get back to everyone.
No, I mean the left wing bias that infuriates people and causes them to say things like "I'm not racist, but..." or scream "stop calling me a Nazi all the time just because I like Hitler and ethnic cleansing".
You know the whole "I'm not racist, but..." bit is mainly prevalent in left-wing politics don't you? Most people on the right rejected identity politics for a reason, and the left decided to eat, breath, and shit it out for breakfast. That is if they're not engaging in overt racism in and of itself, or trying to claim that "diversity quotas" and "preferential hiring" instead of hiring based on race instead of merit isn't actually racism or sexism.
Yeah, I can't find anything that Bannon says outside of far-leftist or social justice circles that is considered "white supremacy."
Not to back-up whomever you're responding to, but Germaine Greer has proposed mandatory sterilization for all men. Of course, that's not quite the same thing as castration. And, well, it's Germaine Greer, knowwhatimean? But I wonder if the GP heard that Greer proposed that filtered through a game of telephone.
There's quite a few feminists hold extremist view points. It's actually become bad enough that the less radical feminists call them out for it, and are attacked for their trouble. Whether said attack is via social media, peer pressure, doxing or threats. It much like the broader scope of social justice is so far down the marxist rabbit hole, that anything right of Lenin is considered extremism in their eyes.
Better realize that the only thing that modern feminism supports is their own supremacist ideology. Because feminists supporting castration? Yeah that exists. Then there's the ones that support killing large segments of the male population because "reasons." And then there's the ones that support infanticide of male babies, and the other ones that are in support of using abortion directly against male babies. Then there's the feminists who are openly in support of FGM because you can't speak out against that backwards culture that believes in it. All the while supporting the same people who beat their wives is fine, as long as they aren't western.
Perhaps it's time to get out of your bubble.
Not fishy at all. The Toyota plants in Woodstock, Ontario and Cambridge, Ontario have had multiple cases of this. People would get hired on usually by having a sterling resume, or qualifications that put them above the average worker to get hired on. Then after several years start agitating for unionization and so on. It's why the unionization vote at the Woodstock plant has failed at least 4 times that I know of.
Let's skip the crazy and go right to the insane.
The press tone hasn't changed, it's just that the republicans have moved from conservative to fascist.
Uh-huh. Republicans are fascist. Oh boy! Look at all those progressives and so on openly supporting actual fascism. What shall the world ever do in the face of such hypocrisy and failing self-realization that they're everything that they claim the opposition is.
This is what he means by a few alt-right spewing lies.
Don't let reality hurt you. It's a very harsh mistress. When you decide to look, you can also note how the tone of media has changed as it's been consolidated into particular hands. I recommend the washington post as a starting point, then move onto NBC.
Yeah, we're trying to prevent that BEFORE it happens, not after.
Too bad it's already happening isn't it? That it's been going on for years. That you can look at Germany and see the government leaning on media and police not to report statistics. That one can look at Sweden where police officers are threatened with "racism" charges for reporting facts. Where the governments make demands of social media to censor things which are contrary to the presented viewpoint. Or police threaten and dox people for not wanting refugees in their backyard, or having particular points of view on sexuality. Or universities and student unions engaging in no-platforming, or threatening speakers because their view points no longer fit the radical agendas that are being pushed. Yes, very much trying to prevent what's already happening and encouraging a "further" counter-pendulum swing with your actions.
You mean that "left-wing bias" which gives rise to things like 20 years of screaming "the nazis/white supremacists are coming." Or "it's okay to punch nazis/etc" or "everyone is a racist/sexist/homophobes if you don't agree with us" type of bias? Or "pepe is a racist hate symbol" type of left-wing bias. We can keep going down this form of reality you're pushing, but that doesn't make it true. And if anything, it simply paints the left very unhinged. How about the "kkk are on the rise again" type of bias? You know when their actual membership is so tiny, that they're smaller in organizational size then that group of leftists at UC Berkeley stood along side.
Yep, I know, it's very comforting for you to think that there's this mythical "alt-right" that's lurking behind everything on the right side of politics these days. But then again, considering that Trump's message resonated with every sector of the electorate and he did better then the last candidates. Seems like it's not a "1950's idea. It's a 1980's idea, where people weren't having their jobs outsourced to 3rd world labor.
Fortunately the alt-right has shown up the solution. A relatively small number of people working to spread disinformation worked very effectively. To counter that, we need a similar number of people willing to use subversion tactics to promote the truth.
30 years of the media in the US alone being partisan towards democrats, but it's suddenly a small number of "alt-right" spreading disinformation. Okie there. I'm sure that the mainstream media pumping out a bunch of articles in the last few months that were fake wasn't anything. Or how many times has it been now that sites like WAPO have had to publicly retract stories because of that fake news? Hate to tell you this, but the media tried to pull the fake news crap, and got their face rolled into it. It's the same reason why for over a decade that the trust in the media in the US is under 20% and even here in Canada it's under 25%
But let's look at some disinformation. Would that be like the migrant that was arrested in Edmonton, Alberta the other day. And the CBC uses the word "touched" when the person in question aggressively committed sexual assaulted a 14 year old? Under the definition of the law as sexual assault level 3, because they threatened and caused physical injury. Or is that simply massaging the truth because it paints them in a bad light. Or would that be like the underage refugees in NFLD, who physically assaulted a 15 year old girl, and the response from the media was bending over backwards to claim "cultural issues" and the two people "not knowing that assault was wrong." We don't even have to start from there, we can just look over the media like the letter networks and see how much garbage they've been pumping out over the last 15 years.
I know that the "alt-right" is some great invisible bogeyman for you. But you guys over in Europe have far more to worry about with the government engaging in active censorship, and trying to hide information from the public in order to ensure their political power remains intact.
"Policy" doesn't matter when it comes down to reality. Policy can say "It's not okay to drone Americans" when the president turns around and drones Americans right? And while that's a far-off example, when someone decides that they can step over the line and present an issue with their own ideological bent, and administrators back it up? The entire base trustworthiness goes right out the window. Take any issue on wikipedia that has even a single touch on a contemporary issue, and all those policies and rules go right out the window. There's a reason why the term citeogensis exists, and you can create an entirely false premise based on wikipedia itself.
If you need an example of how bad this can get, go read the gamergate article. The entire premise of it is based off opinion and he-said-she-said view points, the talk page itself is full of people pointing it out. And actual NPOV's have been repeatedly deleted, and factually inaccurate or direct falsehoods have been presented as fact inside wikipedias articles itself. And with that I'm not sure what's worse, that people try to paint it as "well it's okay as long as x is okay." Or that people actively try to make the argument that even if it's factually incorrect or present falsehoods it's okay because people were "making opinion articles" about it.
hroughout each Wikipedia article, you'll see references to sources, with the full information about each source listed at the bottom of the article
The problem is their definition of a source. Blog posts are fine. Articles which are opinion, which reference blog posts are fine. Even opinion and news articles which reference blog posts which are slanderous are fine. It's not the "Wikipedia to be a source for information" it's that wikipedia uses sources to paint narratives, based on what an editor feels is true. And if you happen to disprove what the editor wrote? Well you're likely to be banned for your trouble.
As it stands now? Wikipedia is a good place to find bad sources, or sources which don't actually reflect reality. It's only gotten worse with their "edithons" which push particular ideological view points.
Rational wiki as a source? You'd have been better off directly posting a link to media matters or democratic underground.
Twitter has much more serious problems then this right now. Like remaining profitable in the face of censoring users, and revenue, engagement and ad revenue following through the floor.
Funny that twitters decline started around the time they decided to start censoring users, and deciding who gets to see what. And since facebook is doing the same thing, as well as being complicit in open censorship in western democracies(France, Germany, etc). This is likely going to be the least of their problems. It looks like politicians(and gov bodies) will be behind the technical and social curve as usual.
They don't like my add blocker and I am not turning it off for them.
This is pretty common these days especially sites which have basically turned into a blog farm. Business Insider, Forbes, Telegraph, Vice, Vox, etc. The Guardian is getting there, won't surprise me in the next couple of years if they start pushing the same garbage. They can crash and burn for all it worth though. Some sites are suffering worse for it then others, and there's new media rising to replace it all anyway.
So when it was done repeatedly over the last 30 years with various countries, you were right there protesting. No? Guess what? These companies aren't trying to sell there, they're trying to stop Trump from cutting off their low-cost labor alternatives.
If you think that Syria or Yemen is in any financial situation to afford the software or hardware that these companies are peddling, you have no idea of exactly the state of their economy. If everything that's going on there stopped right now, at this exact moment. It would still be the better part of half a decade before there would be stable enough market that it wouldn't be a massive loss.
There's an actual reason why Iran is on such a highly restricted country list that even other muslim countries in the region refuse to allow any entry at all. If you need help figuring out why, I'd suggest checking out a newspaper or political journal. The fact that you're so happily pro-H1B, instead of having people who are already *in* the country retrained to do the job says a lot more.
The one in Quebec? You mean the white, hyper leftwing supporting person, who supported the Parti Quebecois, NDP, and other various separatist leaders in Quebec? Yeah, you read that right. He was a left-wing nationalist. Not the first one we've dealt with here in Canada. The PQ are leftwing nationalists, the FLQ was a leftwing nationalist terrorist group. But those facts aren't convenient for the story of the day.
I can find ads here in Canada which contravene the equal hiring laws, where companies and government agencies have openly stated that they "are not hiring white people." Hell buzzfeed got caught doing it a year or two ago, in both Canada and the US.
And you've managed to contradict yourself three times in the first sentence. Did you figure out where? Or do you need me to draw a diagram for you.
I'll give you a hint: (1)
Intel threw $300,000,000 at increasing diversity and equality. Either there is a genuine shortage of skill, or they genuinely care about that stuff*, or... Or what?
Pandering. Nothing more. They also laid off 11% of their workforce at roughly the same time.
If you don't think there aren't shakedowns going on by sexist baiters and race baiters you're extremely naive. Al Shaprton has done it to numerous companies, Sarkeesian has done it to several companies as well. The only upside is, the numbers of companies actually pandering and simply not giving a shit is increasing.
He's a RINO. Which makes him basically a democrat. But hey, he's not the only one. You notice all those other people on there? You noticed how they shook their head so hard, and believed that they were *still the right ones" and all that? No? You should watch that again then. Then while you're at it, you can watch this little bit by Dave Rubin.
People can whine, complain, stomp their feet or whatever else. But as someone who's "right of center" the left needs to get it's act together because a functinoing democracy doesn't work when one half it is overrun by extremists. And it's not the right however much you want to think it is.
My dice has a 16% chance of generating a six. It still happens from time to time. Your N=1 dataset is irrelevant.
You're basically saying that trump threw a 100 on a 10,000,000 sided dice. You realize the exact statistical impossibility of that right? Not once, but in multiple throws he got a 100 every time. That means ones of two things, either the initial estimates were so wildly off in terms of the polls, or the dice was fixed. Now the first is far more likely true, that the polls were wildly off. The second? Well, if the second was true. Why are democrats stomping their feet from wanting to investigate it now? You'd think they'd want to show beyond a reasonable doubt that either they were correct, he was incorrect, or that there was something funky going on right.
Again, if you disagree you'll need to explain why it's made a big comeback since our dollar tanked after reaching parity a few years ago.
Two reasons: Excessively high energy costs at roughly 20x the rate in Michigan or Buffalo, this is directly contributed to "green energy." And carbon taxes, or the threat of carbon taxes which businesses have said NOPE. Picked up and moved out. The answers are right in front of you.