I think POTUS gets too much credit for the state of the economy. The Federal Reserve is beyond executive control, for example.
On the other hand it might simply be advantageous for the sake of public perception for one person to take all the credit, or all the blame, as the case may be.
Good job we have are not like China and corruption IS investigated and occasionally punished. The man or woman on top IS accountable here.
When big players face trial and actual punishment for corruption, it's only an indication of political weakness.
But sure, it's good for society to believe that we have institutions of justice to be revered, and not just a legal system. Just make sure that noone sees the back side of the Potemkin village gaming hall where the winners and losers come out.
It's perfectly reasonable to ascribe ulterior motives to dogged legal persecutions of which was initiated under false pretenses to begin with. Cohen is a pawn and you know it. To pretend otherwise is some seriously sanctimonious bullshit.
Just before died, Seth Rich may have revealed to the police why he didn't also leak the RNC's emails. Unfortunately the DC police still won't turn over the bodycam video, so we'll probably never know.
Interesting that so far the evidence for election interference has amounted to nothing more than appeal to authority, by those who have already proved that they shouldn't be trusted.
Facebook actually does seem more credible by comparison.
Here's a good example of someone being 'held accountable' for daring to display a symbol of the fascist alt-right neo nazis, and being 'censored' as your ilk would have it.
No thanks. Religious fanatics have no business deciding what is or isn't 'harmful' or 'hateful' for the rest of us. Only a fool would submit to this kind of tyranny.
I can't wait for this wave of censorship intended to prevent violence to be applied fairly and consistently, with clear unwavering standards as to hold people accountable.
Oh wait, ha ha, we'll just walk past a mountain to point at a mole hill, and use any excuse we can think of to ban or hit someone we don't like.
Personally, free speech advocates should make their own platforms, and conservatives should actually move to them and abandon the platforms that hate them. Gab.ai and minds.com seem worthwhile. Seems like whining to complain Twitter is evil but keep using it.
Last time I checked gab was still blocked from both the Apple and Google app stores for failing to adhere to the SJW censorship standard. Or pretty much any other excuse they can scramble to come up with.
I know it's popular to say 'if you don't like it start your own', but the goal post is constantly being moved. Seems as if some anti-trust litigation is long overdue.
Did you notice how Rosanne's tweets made wall-to-wall national coverage for over a week?
Did you notice the mental gymnastics used to defend the NY times editorial hire that wanted to 'cancel white people'?
If not for hypocrisy, we'd have nothing at all. Selective outrage is necessary because it looses its effectiveness as a tool without it.
Facebook doesn't get a pass because millions of people use it to express political opinions, of which are increasingly of the older demographic and who happen to vote more often. Proper supervision is required. More pro-censorship FUD from the usual suspects will be incoming.
This is the only way we can be safe. This is the only way we can be free to express ourselves without fear of the corrupting, divisive, and harmful influences of speech that could mislead us. If we do nothing, people could start getting the wrong ideas, and world war or genocide could happen practically overnight. We won't call it political censorship, when it really it is just genocide prevention.
We are fundamentally altering a cycle that has been stable for millions of years, by injecting trillions of tons of carbon into it that was previously excluded from the system. There can be only one result to this action- warming.
This basic point seems to get lost in the fray, where balancing an equation is something basic taught even to grade schoolers. Except in this experiment, we're changing the variables to an equation that noone can fully yet understand or model completely.
I'm reminded of why users should not be able to access service menus. Yet here we are, dealing with button pushers who seem to think the system is designed to be idiot proof.
Observers, both from the public and party representatives, are there to monitor processing of the ballots.
I know there is an issue with the number of ballots that are not in acceptable condition to be read by the machine, and a worker must 'enhance' the ballot or transfer the marked choices to a new one. Observers seem very keen on keeping a close eye on this process as well.
Your guns aren't going to do much good when climate change has created food and water scarcity affecting billions of people.
Nothing inspires confidence more than an agenda to disarm and criminalize lawful citizens, while the world continuously serves up examples of what happens within failed states.
“It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, “Well, they’re bussing people in.” Well, you know what? We’ve been bussing people in to deal with you fucking assholes for fifty years and we’re not going to stop now, we’re just going to find a different way to do it."
So it's no wonder that those with potential to lose influence would have difficulty understanding the need to secure a process that desperately needs it.
But Diebold can be the butt of FUD-spreading without any sort of proof it ever contributed to actual vote-corruption — and without challenges from the same sticklers to the "unproven therefore false" approach...
I don't understand your point. Are these the same Diebold machines you're talking about?
When a process is demonstrated to be so flawed that compromise should be assumed, why is irrefutable proof even necessary?
From Vendor: All of your organizations logged and network security alert data is compressed, encrypted and sent to the CIS SOC. This allows analysts to review previous network activity and search for specific threats or activity related to newly-released signatures, providing a distinct advantage over traditional security network monitoring services.
More importantly, the TLA foxes will be very concerned and interested about guarding this particular henhouse. To preserve the integrity of our elections, of course.
If only the msm didn't lie in such obvious ways that even a simple youtube video of the event can discredit them, then Trump wouldn't be able to throw it up as a defense.
You also get plenty of popular independent journalists who are self supporting, whose jobs don't depend on their willingness to do as they're told. It's problematic.
I hope they are not a lost cause, otherwise we are going to end up with another pizzagate.
Yes, how absurd that leaked emails that contain coded references that are pedo related could have resulted in people questioning the activities of influential political insiders. Because child abuse by those in a position of power and authority that results in a coverup is practically unheard of.
Meanwhile in the UK, those that were child abuse conspiracy theorists are now whistleblowers. Isn't it amazing what happens when evidence becomes undeniable?
I guess that's why we really need to ban 'fake news'.
In sum, a lot of folks on here are opposed to this. So what, we just stay male-dominated forever and are totally cool with that?
No. Understand the pitfall of "good intentioned" tyranny that is gender quotas enforced by law, as compared to equal opportunity and a culture opposed to sexual discrimination.
So-called progressives believe the beatings should continue until moral improves. Others recognize the rule of unintended consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
If it was money that won elections, Hillary would be president.
Those who pull the strings understand this needs to be fixed immediately. Spending all that money without a guaranteed outcome is simply wasteful.
It's spring time for "internet reputation management" firms and "trusted flagger" NGOs alike.
I think POTUS gets too much credit for the state of the economy. The Federal Reserve is beyond executive control, for example.
On the other hand it might simply be advantageous for the sake of public perception for one person to take all the credit, or all the blame, as the case may be.
Good job we have are not like China and corruption IS investigated and occasionally punished. The man or woman on top IS accountable here.
When big players face trial and actual punishment for corruption, it's only an indication of political weakness.
But sure, it's good for society to believe that we have institutions of justice to be revered, and not just a legal system. Just make sure that noone sees the back side of the Potemkin village gaming hall where the winners and losers come out.
No the person using ad hom here is you.
There is no equal protection under the law and its enforcement is arbitrary. Here is an example, and here is another one.
It's perfectly reasonable to ascribe ulterior motives to dogged legal persecutions of which was initiated under false pretenses to begin with. Cohen is a pawn and you know it. To pretend otherwise is some seriously sanctimonious bullshit.
Handing your karma bonus over to what is most likely a paid troll also won't help the situation. Please be considerate.
Just before died, Seth Rich may have revealed to the police why he didn't also leak the RNC's emails. Unfortunately the DC police still won't turn over the bodycam video, so we'll probably never know.
This seems like another version of the 'gun' debate where Facebook is the gun.
Or perhaps how the cooking pot the frogs are in needs a lid.
Interesting that you trust Facebook now.
Interesting that so far the evidence for election interference has amounted to nothing more than appeal to authority, by those who have already proved that they shouldn't be trusted.
Facebook actually does seem more credible by comparison.
Here's a good example of someone being 'held accountable' for daring to display a symbol of the fascist alt-right neo nazis, and being 'censored' as your ilk would have it.
No thanks. Religious fanatics have no business deciding what is or isn't 'harmful' or 'hateful' for the rest of us. Only a fool would submit to this kind of tyranny.
I can't wait for this wave of censorship intended to prevent violence to be applied fairly and consistently, with clear unwavering standards as to hold people accountable.
Oh wait, ha ha, we'll just walk past a mountain to point at a mole hill, and use any excuse we can think of to ban or hit someone we don't like.
Personally, free speech advocates should make their own platforms, and conservatives should actually move to them and abandon the platforms that hate them. Gab.ai and minds.com seem worthwhile. Seems like whining to complain Twitter is evil but keep using it.
Last time I checked gab was still blocked from both the Apple and Google app stores for failing to adhere to the SJW censorship standard. Or pretty much any other excuse they can scramble to come up with.
I know it's popular to say 'if you don't like it start your own', but the goal post is constantly being moved. Seems as if some anti-trust litigation is long overdue.
Did you notice how Rosanne's tweets made wall-to-wall national coverage for over a week?
Did you notice the mental gymnastics used to defend the NY times editorial hire that wanted to 'cancel white people'?
If not for hypocrisy, we'd have nothing at all. Selective outrage is necessary because it looses its effectiveness as a tool without it.
Facebook doesn't get a pass because millions of people use it to express political opinions, of which are increasingly of the older demographic and who happen to vote more often. Proper supervision is required. More pro-censorship FUD from the usual suspects will be incoming.
Yes social media like FB is too dangerous to leave alone. Something must be done about it.
We need protection, and we need to empower trustworthy NGOs to do the policing across the entire social media landscape to prevent hate speech from happening.
This is the only way we can be safe. This is the only way we can be free to express ourselves without fear of the corrupting, divisive, and harmful influences of speech that could mislead us. If we do nothing, people could start getting the wrong ideas, and world war or genocide could happen practically overnight. We won't call it political censorship, when it really it is just genocide prevention.
We are fundamentally altering a cycle that has been stable for millions of years, by injecting trillions of tons of carbon into it that was previously excluded from the system. There can be only one result to this action- warming.
This basic point seems to get lost in the fray, where balancing an equation is something basic taught even to grade schoolers. Except in this experiment, we're changing the variables to an equation that noone can fully yet understand or model completely.
I'm reminded of why users should not be able to access service menus. Yet here we are, dealing with button pushers who seem to think the system is designed to be idiot proof.
Observers, both from the public and party representatives, are there to monitor processing of the ballots.
I know there is an issue with the number of ballots that are not in acceptable condition to be read by the machine, and a worker must 'enhance' the ballot or transfer the marked choices to a new one. Observers seem very keen on keeping a close eye on this process as well.
Your guns aren't going to do much good when climate change has created food and water scarcity affecting billions of people.
Nothing inspires confidence more than an agenda to disarm and criminalize lawful citizens, while the world continuously serves up examples of what happens within failed states.
Ah, well, in the timeless words of Scott Foval:
“It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, “Well, they’re bussing people in.” Well, you know what? We’ve been bussing people in to deal with you fucking assholes for fifty years and we’re not going to stop now, we’re just going to find a different way to do it."
So it's no wonder that those with potential to lose influence would have difficulty understanding the need to secure a process that desperately needs it.
But Diebold can be the butt of FUD-spreading without any sort of proof it ever contributed to actual vote-corruption — and without challenges from the same sticklers to the "unproven therefore false" approach...
I don't understand your point. Are these the same Diebold machines you're talking about?
When a process is demonstrated to be so flawed that compromise should be assumed, why is irrefutable proof even necessary?
From Vendor: All of your organizations logged and network security alert data is compressed, encrypted and sent to the CIS SOC. This allows analysts to review previous network activity and search for specific threats or activity related to newly-released signatures, providing a distinct advantage over traditional security network monitoring services.
More importantly, the TLA foxes will be very concerned and interested about guarding this particular henhouse. To preserve the integrity of our elections, of course.
Also the ballot must be in a sealed envelope that is signed with a signature that matches what is on the voter registration, in order to be accepted.
It's amazing to me that people would stand in long lines on a work day just to get to the polls, and that this somehow isn't disenfranchising.
If only the msm didn't lie in such obvious ways that even a simple youtube video of the event can discredit them, then Trump wouldn't be able to throw it up as a defense.
Leaving ourselves at the tender mercies of corporations to pick the winners and losers in the online marketplace of ideas. What could go wrong.
It's ok, the taste of boot leather isn't so bad once you get used to it.
You also get plenty of popular independent journalists who are self supporting, whose jobs don't depend on their willingness to do as they're told. It's problematic.
I hope they are not a lost cause, otherwise we are going to end up with another pizzagate.
Yes, how absurd that leaked emails that contain coded references that are pedo related could have resulted in people questioning the activities of influential political insiders. Because child abuse by those in a position of power and authority that results in a coverup is practically unheard of.
Meanwhile in the UK, those that were child abuse conspiracy theorists are now whistleblowers. Isn't it amazing what happens when evidence becomes undeniable?
I guess that's why we really need to ban 'fake news'.
In sum, a lot of folks on here are opposed to this. So what, we just stay male-dominated forever and are totally cool with that?
No. Understand the pitfall of "good intentioned" tyranny that is gender quotas enforced by law, as compared to equal opportunity and a culture opposed to sexual discrimination.
So-called progressives believe the beatings should continue until moral improves. Others recognize the rule of unintended consequences.