• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 10:06
CEST 16:06
KST 23:06
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20257Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202577RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced24BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time I offer completely free coaching services What tournaments are world championships?
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign Dewalt's Show Matches in China BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread UK Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 717 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6252

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 6250 6251 6252 6253 6254 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
November 16 2016 23:39 GMT
#125021
This entire line of discussion is basically saying, why can't we focus more on the micro-issues of how she lost than on the macro-issues? Why can't we look for how we can allocate a portion of the responsibility for the loss to Comey, Sanders, Assange, and Henry Kissinger?

Most of us correctly perceive that as a deflection away from the biggest issue of all. Yes, there are a thousand minor factors and events that could have not happened and salvaged her run. At the end of the day, though, the people who most make that argument are just those most interested in downplaying the severe weaknesses of the candidate and her team. And for good reason, because the rest of us realize that that is the bigger, more important issue here.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
biology]major
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2253 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-16 23:44:04
November 16 2016 23:42 GMT
#125022
On November 17 2016 08:28 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On November 17 2016 08:09 zlefin wrote:
On November 17 2016 07:42 GreenHorizons wrote:
gh -> the reason the current inthread debate here over blame came up was because some people were using wording which tended to disregard the other reasons or consider them to in some sense "not count." most people indeed will, if pressed, properly acknowledge them; but sometimes the more partisan people won't, or they'll talk inaccurately, and only be accurate when pressed. which can lead to spreading false narratives; but this is getting too meta I think.
basically, it came up cuz it kinda was an issue.


It reminds me of someone blaming their passenger for ordering a coffee that took too long to make after they hit a car because they ran a red light. We could do the forensics and find out that had she ordered a plain coffee that they would have made it to the light before it turned red and not crashed, but you know, the passenger isn't the one who ran the red light.

So if someone says: "The passenger had nothing to do with the wreck", technically they may be wrong, but most reasonable people can see that had the driver just not ran the red light, the passenger doesn't matter.

Hillary supporters (who's livelihood is still connected to them) are basically at the point of calculating the weight of the passenger and it's impact on acceleration, saying "we can't ignore these other factors!". Sure, from a technical perspective they did, but that's missing the forest for the sake of seeing the tree.


the thing is, your analogy isn't entirely apt; and there are some entirely and some partially legitimate complaints against others.
Which is why there's things like contributory negligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence
some of the other people in this case aren't like that passenger, they contributed far more directly to the issue.
and people who treat the actual case as if it was like that analogy, and asserting that the others did nothing relevant or worthy of consideration in assessing the incident are also missing a vital part of the overall matter.

and again there's the key difference between blameworthy causation and non-blameworthy causation.

we all know that some of her supporters aren't doing enough focusing on the issues with hillary, but likewise some of her opponents are doing too much focusing on that, without giving enough credence to other factors.
I'm against all the inaccuracies, and in the cases here, was focused on the latter.


What influence are you suggesting couldn't have been overcome by her just being a better candidate? I'm not talking ridiculous standards, I'm talking about things like actually going to states she wrongly assumed were sure things (Wisconsin) or not wasting time and money on states she had no chance at, or here's one, not set up a private server in some random place.

You fix those three mistakes, and Hillary wins, all the other stuff counts, but doesn't change the outcome. All three of those were totally under her control. She is the reason she lost, sure others helped, but she is the reason she lost.

This is the correct analysis. Hillary's own misconduct, errors, and poor planning probably created at least a 5 point headwind for her. Eliminate those, and she wins comfortably. That's why all of this deflecting of blame away from her is so silly. Her own fuckups indisputably put her election at risk, and she paid for it.


Disagree with this. The reason Trump campaigned non stop was because his campaigning was actually working and generating enthusiasm, which created a positive feedback loop that ultimately lead to him doing up to 6 stops in a single day. Clinton on the other hand is so unlikable outside of her platform that I don't think campaigning would have even done anything. Who cares if she went to Wisconsin a few times, her message and her personality would never resonate and drive down the enthusiasm gap. Ultimately, there is nothing she could have done to win IMO vs Trump. If Trump tapes and 12 women coming out saying he groped them did'nt do it, then her flaws are too fundamental to even contemplate as fixable. The dems needed another candidate entirely to have a chance, and obviously a month ago no one would have been able to say that confidently but it's the truth looking back at it.
Question.?
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
November 16 2016 23:53 GMT
#125023
Speaking of which, are there still any open allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of our president-elect? Or did they basically drop off after they stopped being politically relevant?
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
tofucake
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
Hyrule19053 Posts
November 16 2016 23:56 GMT
#125024
Okay everybody, by now pretty much all of you have been warned about this: Discuss the topic, don't argue with each others' posting quality/habits.

If you are having personal issues with each other, take it to PM, and then if you reach a resolution, post the outcome in the thread and move on.
Liquipediaasante sana squash banana
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21668 Posts
November 16 2016 23:57 GMT
#125025
On November 17 2016 08:53 LegalLord wrote:
Speaking of which, are there still any open allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of our president-elect? Or did they basically drop off after they stopped being politically relevant?

I don't think anyone of them actually filled charges, so they are not relevant.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
November 17 2016 00:15 GMT
#125026
On November 17 2016 08:53 LegalLord wrote:
Speaking of which, are there still any open allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of our president-elect? Or did they basically drop off after they stopped being politically relevant?

i'm pretty sure they're still open in the sense of being not-resolved definitively; most of them weren't withdrawn, but also none of them ever reached the stage of charges being filed. Some were past statutes of limitation so will probably be never adjudicated.
There may be some active investigations on some of them; if so they're keeping it quiet, which is not at all unusual for such things.


PS the question at the top line of your post at the top of this page is incorrect, that's not what it's about.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 00:19:47
November 17 2016 00:17 GMT
#125027
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
November 17 2016 00:27 GMT
#125028
I would actually like to see Trump pick a fight with this guy.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/11/16/trump-impeachment-prediction-allan-lichtman-intv-erin.cnn/video/playlists/erin-burnett-outfront/

User was warned for this post
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
November 17 2016 00:33 GMT
#125029
On November 17 2016 09:17 xDaunt wrote:
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.

Sounds like the ideas of a rambling conspiracy theorist with a tendency towards cultural objectivism.

I suppose that would appeal to some of the Bernie crowd, but I'm sure I speak for at least some others when I say that for many people, supporting Bernie was just supporting the only sane option out of the four feasible candidates (Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders) in this race. His Wall Street diatribes didn't do him many favors with some looking for more substantive policy talk.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
November 17 2016 00:38 GMT
#125030
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
November 17 2016 00:38 GMT
#125031
On November 17 2016 09:33 LegalLord wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 09:17 xDaunt wrote:
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.

Sounds like the ideas of a rambling conspiracy theorist with a tendency towards cultural objectivism.

I suppose that would appeal to some of the Bernie crowd, but I'm sure I speak for at least some others when I say that for many people, supporting Bernie was just supporting the only sane option out of the four feasible candidates (Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders) in this race. His Wall Street diatribes didn't do him many favors with some looking for more substantive policy talk.

Yeah, but that's the besides point. Now we know where the idea came from to put the reimplimentation of Glass Steagall into the GOP platform. Clearly it was Bannon. And if you look at his comments about the investment banks, Bannon makes no bones about the fact that he wants to hold them accountable for what happened in 2008. So back to my original point -- for all of you anti-Wall Street leftists who pined for Bernie or Warren to be president, you may have gotten something just as good or even better in Trump.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
November 17 2016 00:38 GMT
#125032
On November 17 2016 09:17 xDaunt wrote:
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.


Personally I could do without the Judaeo-Christian stuff, particularly anything beyond philosophy, but this part wasn't bad:

In fact, one of the committees in Congress said to the Justice Department 35 executives, I believe, that they should have criminal indictments against — not one of those has ever been followed up on. Because even with the Democrats, right, in power, there’s a sense between the law firms, and the accounting firms, and the investment banks, and their stooges on Capitol Hill, they looked the other way.

So you can understand why middle class people having a tough go of it making $50 or $60 thousand a year and see their taxes go up, and they see that their taxes are going to pay for government sponsored bailouts, what you’ve created is really a free option. You say to this investment banking, create a free option for bad behavior. In otherwise all the upside goes to the hedge funds and the investment bank, and to the crony capitalist with stock increases and bonus increases. And their downside is limited, because middle class people are going to come and bail them out with tax dollars.
And that’s what I think is fueling this populist revolt. Whether that revolt is in the midlands of England, or whether it’s in Middle America. And I think people are fed up with it.

And I think that’s why you’re seeing — when you read the media says, “tea party is losing, losing elections,” that is all BS. The elections we don’t win, we’re forcing those crony capitalists to come and admit that they’re not going to do this again. The whole narrative in Washington has been changed by this populist revolt that we call the grassroots of the tea party movement.

And it’s specifically because those bailouts were completely and totally unfair. It didn’t make those financial institutions any stronger, and it bailed out a bunch of people — by the way, and these are people that have all gone to Yale, and Harvard, they went to the finest institutions in the West. They should have known better.

And by the way: It’s all the institutions of the accounting firms, the law firms, the investment banks, the consulting firms, the elite of the elite, the educated elite, they understood what they were getting into, forcibly took all the benefits from it and then look to the government, went hat in hand to the government to be bailed out. And they’ve never been held accountable today. Trust me — they are going to be held accountable. You’re seeing this populist movement called the tea party in the United States.


He didn't know at the time Bernie would lead the left's version, rather than the Tea-party capture all of that, but there's some good stuff in there. My general problem with stuff like this is that it usually ends up being a trojan horse, but that's better than what I heard from most of the right (especially on capital hill) regarding the bailout in general.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
a_flayer
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Netherlands2826 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 00:59:22
November 17 2016 00:53 GMT
#125033
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedBen/status/799014832402038784


That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?
When you came along so righteous with a new national hate, so convincing is the ardor of war and of men, it's harder to breathe than to believe you're a friend. The wars at home, the wars abroad, all soaked in blood and lies and fraud.
Nevuk
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States16280 Posts
November 17 2016 01:05 GMT
#125034
On November 17 2016 09:38 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 09:33 LegalLord wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:17 xDaunt wrote:
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.

Sounds like the ideas of a rambling conspiracy theorist with a tendency towards cultural objectivism.

I suppose that would appeal to some of the Bernie crowd, but I'm sure I speak for at least some others when I say that for many people, supporting Bernie was just supporting the only sane option out of the four feasible candidates (Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders) in this race. His Wall Street diatribes didn't do him many favors with some looking for more substantive policy talk.

Yeah, but that's the besides point. Now we know where the idea came from to put the reimplimentation of Glass Steagall into the GOP platform. Clearly it was Bannon. And if you look at his comments about the investment banks, Bannon makes no bones about the fact that he wants to hold them accountable for what happened in 2008. So back to my original point -- for all of you anti-Wall Street leftists who pined for Bernie or Warren to be president, you may have gotten something just as good or even better in Trump.

I've always preferred Trump to normal republicans. I mainly have concerns about his character and some of the implications of his statements. Policy wise I think most non-conservatives would gladly take him over Mike Pence or Ted Cruz.

I can't remember which surrogate of Trump's it was, but before the roles of Bannon + Priebus were announced they basically said that choosing Priebus over Bannon would result in a revolt from his base. I think that Trump is trying to have it both ways with his current choices, both pandering to his base with the role of Bannon and to the mainstream GOP with Priebus. I'm not sure if he will be able to pull it off, though. The pushback against Bannon has been pretty extreme from the establishment media, far more so than I would have thought warranted initially. It could very well be due to his anti-wall street stances. There's almost an incoherent panic from some media persons about him, leading to more and more extreme statements that are basically music to Trump supporter's ears. The finer line to dance will be later on, I think - the establishment GOP is nervous about Bannon's presence, wanting Priebus to be the one with the real power, and if they get a hint that Priebus will be marginalized they'll start speaking about the need for getting rid of Bannon themselves.
Nyxisto
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany6287 Posts
November 17 2016 01:22 GMT
#125035
On November 17 2016 09:53 a_flayer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedBen/status/799014832402038784


That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?


Trump didn't look like he was poised to win even by admission of his own team. A broken clock is still right twice a day. Being right occasionally doesn't validate a faulty method. The same thing is true for conspiracy theories. They're not redeemed by the fact that they contingently might be true.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
November 17 2016 01:50 GMT
#125036
On November 17 2016 10:05 Nevuk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 09:38 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:33 LegalLord wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:17 xDaunt wrote:
By the way, for all of you Bernie fans and other members of the anti-Wall Street crowd, have you seen Bannon's speech from a couple years ago that he gave at the Vatican? It should give you a raging boner at the possibilities of a Trump presidency.

Here's the transcript.

Sounds like the ideas of a rambling conspiracy theorist with a tendency towards cultural objectivism.

I suppose that would appeal to some of the Bernie crowd, but I'm sure I speak for at least some others when I say that for many people, supporting Bernie was just supporting the only sane option out of the four feasible candidates (Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders) in this race. His Wall Street diatribes didn't do him many favors with some looking for more substantive policy talk.

Yeah, but that's the besides point. Now we know where the idea came from to put the reimplimentation of Glass Steagall into the GOP platform. Clearly it was Bannon. And if you look at his comments about the investment banks, Bannon makes no bones about the fact that he wants to hold them accountable for what happened in 2008. So back to my original point -- for all of you anti-Wall Street leftists who pined for Bernie or Warren to be president, you may have gotten something just as good or even better in Trump.

I've always preferred Trump to normal republicans. I mainly have concerns about his character and some of the implications of his statements. Policy wise I think most non-conservatives would gladly take him over Mike Pence or Ted Cruz.

I can't remember which surrogate of Trump's it was, but before the roles of Bannon + Priebus were announced they basically said that choosing Priebus over Bannon would result in a revolt from his base. I think that Trump is trying to have it both ways with his current choices, both pandering to his base with the role of Bannon and to the mainstream GOP with Priebus. I'm not sure if he will be able to pull it off, though. The pushback against Bannon has been pretty extreme from the establishment media, far more so than I would have thought warranted initially. It could very well be due to his anti-wall street stances. There's almost an incoherent panic from some media persons about him, leading to more and more extreme statements that are basically music to Trump supporter's ears. The finer line to dance will be later on, I think - the establishment GOP is nervous about Bannon's presence, wanting Priebus to be the one with the real power, and if they get a hint that Priebus will be marginalized they'll start speaking about the need for getting rid of Bannon themselves.


Some members of the base have reacted badly to Priebus being chosen as Chief of Staff over Bannon, but most understand why Trump did it and that it was the better choice for Bannon.

And yeah, the constant attacks and smearing of Bannon have definitely stricken me as curious. Almost all are completely outlandish, particularly those alleging anti-semitism. I've lost count of the number of prominent Jews who have come out in Bannon's defense (even Alan Dershowitz). I'm generally not one for conspiracy theories, but I can't help but think that there are a number of establishment figures (such as the investment banking crowd) who are scared to death of what Trump may do with Bannon at his side, so they are doing everything that they can to force Bannon out. Too bad Trump doesn't give two shits about what they have to think.
a_flayer
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Netherlands2826 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 02:42:27
November 17 2016 02:01 GMT
#125037
On November 17 2016 10:22 Nyxisto wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 09:53 a_flayer wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedBen/status/799014832402038784


That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?


Trump didn't look like he was poised to win even by admission of his own team. A broken clock is still right twice a day. Being right occasionally doesn't validate a faulty method. The same thing is true for conspiracy theories. They're not redeemed by the fact that they contingently might be true.


I wish I could argue without bringing in specific examples that are easily debunked with pointless sayings such as "a broken clock..." The "Trump poised to win" thing is just one example where I can imagine that'd be the sort of "alternative news headline" that wouldn't make the cut in mainstream media headlines, despite the fact there might be accurate reporting within such an article (maybe they're basing it on their observations of enthusiasm at rallies instead of broken polls?). Please don't bother coming up with specific mainstream media examples where they happen to have used that headline, that is really besides the point.

I simply don't think it is fair nor accurate to put something as oblique as "mainstream news" against something equally oblique in what essentially boils down to "alternative news" and then label the latter as "fake" because it is not mainstream. I'm assuming here that "mainstream news" in that graphic is filtered almost directly from headlines matching with those on a limited number of (mainstream approved) websites, and then the rest is classified as "fake". I just have so many questions regarding where those numbers are coming from, and what is considered as real or fake.

Would a headline from breitbart or infowars always be classified as non-mainstream (and thus fake?) in this listing regardless of the accuracy of the report within? Maybe the people who came up with that graph do have some advanced algorithm for determining the fakeness or reality of an individual report, but if I believed in conspiracies it could just as easily be some mainstream organization simply trying to debunk others for their own profit.

I do not believe that last claim, by the way, and I absolutely do think there is a serious problem with the spreading of bullshit news in social media, but also in other media such as the billboards and TV ads I've seen in the United States that suggest global warming is a hoax or that there's a god and Jesus was his son. I feel I should also point out that I don't read either infowars or breitbrat beyond the occasional scanning of headlines in general disbelief.
When you came along so righteous with a new national hate, so convincing is the ardor of war and of men, it's harder to breathe than to believe you're a friend. The wars at home, the wars abroad, all soaked in blood and lies and fraud.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
November 17 2016 02:12 GMT
#125038
Hundreds of American companies, including Mars, Nike, Levi Strauss and Starbucks, have urged President-elect Donald J. Trump not to abandon the Paris climate deal, saying a failure by the United States to build a clean economy endangers American prosperity.

In a plea addressed to Mr. Trump — as well as President Obama and members of Congress — 365 companies and major investors emphasized their “deep commitment to addressing climate change,” and demanded that he leave in place low-emissions policies in the United States.

“Failure to build a low-carbon economy puts American prosperity at risk,” the companies said in a joint letter announced on Wednesday in Marrakesh, Morocco, where global leaders are determining the next steps for the Paris deal. “But the right action now will create jobs and boost U.S. competitiveness.”

The companies also said that they would push ahead with their own targets to reduce their carbon footprints regardless of steps taken by Mr. Trump once he is in office. During his campaign, Mr. Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, pledged to leave the Paris accord, dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency and undo Mr. Obama’s climate change policies.

“This doesn’t change our commitments,” said Kevin Rabinovitch, global sustainability director at Mars, which has pledged to eliminate 100 percent of its greenhouse gas emissions from its factories and offices by 2040. “We’re doing this because we see a real business risk. We see a real business problem.”

Businesses large and small have scrambled in the days since Mr. Trump’s victory to chart their next moves in an uncertain regulatory situation. Mr. Trump’s campaign pledges and musings have been driven by the belief that the economy will grow faster if businesses are freed from cumbersome federal regulations, especially those that limit carbon emissions.

The president-elect has heightened environmentalists’ fears that his administration will take on an anti-climate, anti-environment bent by appointing the climate contrarian Myron Ebell to lead the E.P.A. transition. Climate change activists have denounced Mr. Ebell, whose Competitive Enterprise Institute has received funding from oil and gas interest groups.

Some corporations, like the country’s largest automakers, have already seized on a potential upside to the president-elect’s leanings, urging a rethinking of stringent federal auto emissions standards. An easing of federal standards for passenger cars, which together with the rest of the transportation sector emit more carbon dioxide than any other part of the American economy, could have immense implications for overall emissions.

Others, like solar and wind power companies, have raced to find common ground with Mr. Trump, pressing for reassurances that his administration will not slash investment in renewable energy or alter federal tax credits on renewable energy projects.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
a_flayer
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Netherlands2826 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 02:37:19
November 17 2016 02:31 GMT
#125039
This seems like it could be some good news regarding "drain the swamp":

Posted by Foxnews on 16 november, 2016
Pence removing lobbyists from Trump transition team

Is Pence fulfilling Trump's promise to 'drain the swamp'?

Lobbyists are being purged from official roles in President-elect Donald Trump's transition team, sources told Fox News late Tuesday.

The move to get rid of lobbyists in key roles was one of the first decisions made by Vice President-elect Mike Pence in his role overseeing the construction of a Trump administration.

One source said the decision to remove the lobbyists "makes good on [Trump's] vision of how he wants his government constructed."

Source
When you came along so righteous with a new national hate, so convincing is the ardor of war and of men, it's harder to breathe than to believe you're a friend. The wars at home, the wars abroad, all soaked in blood and lies and fraud.
Sent.
Profile Joined June 2012
Poland9193 Posts
November 17 2016 02:42 GMT
#125040
On November 17 2016 08:57 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 08:53 LegalLord wrote:
Speaking of which, are there still any open allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of our president-elect? Or did they basically drop off after they stopped being politically relevant?

I don't think anyone of them actually filled charges, so they are not relevant.


I'm more interested in Trump's promise to sue them "after the election".
You're now breathing manually
Prev 1 6250 6251 6252 6253 6254 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14:00
Bracket Day 2 - Final
LiquipediaDiscussion
FEL
09:00
Cracow 2025
Clem vs Krystianer
uThermal vs SKillousLIVE!
Reynor vs MaNa
Lambo vs Gerald
RotterdaM1818
ComeBackTV 1724
IndyStarCraft 592
WardiTV337
CranKy Ducklings181
Rex143
3DClanTV 68
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 1818
IndyStarCraft 592
Rex 143
BRAT_OK 65
MindelVK 24
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 50677
Horang2 6382
EffOrt 1523
Barracks 1318
Larva 982
Stork 675
BeSt 627
firebathero 528
Soulkey 267
Hyun 232
[ Show more ]
Last 223
Rush 108
Dewaltoss 92
Sharp 66
Shinee 63
Movie 55
sSak 55
Free 55
Shine 35
sorry 33
sas.Sziky 31
zelot 20
yabsab 18
ajuk12(nOOB) 13
Terrorterran 10
Dota 2
Gorgc4444
qojqva3471
XcaliburYe459
420jenkins212
LuMiX1
Counter-Strike
sgares335
fl0m310
oskar172
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor483
Other Games
B2W.Neo2185
Beastyqt1257
Hui .338
DeMusliM246
Fuzer 173
QueenE61
KnowMe4
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV29
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 14
• poizon28 5
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• Migwel
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 4278
• WagamamaTV782
League of Legends
• Nemesis2495
• Jankos1301
Upcoming Events
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3h 55m
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Wardi Open
20h 55m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 19h
WardiTV European League
2 days
Online Event
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
FEL Cracov 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.