Printable View
Elizabeth Warren is god... Liberals love her. She can play dirty and she is much more intelligent than Trump. It would not go well for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
not so sure about this one..... the only person bernie sanders' supporters like more than sanders is elizabeth warren. picking her might help solidify the democratic base. warren saying last night that she is ready to serve as commander in chief was tellingQuote:
Originally Posted by Daly
honestly, every single bernie sanders supporter absolutely loves warren. any hope that trump had of taking bernie voters would probably end if she was the VP pick, although i imagine picking someone from ohio or florida would make sense too
The precedent - not president, case for this was when Al Gore supporters manipulated the SEO algorithm on Google so that if you typed in 'Geroge Bush', you would get all kinds of negative shit for the entire first page. The name for this is a Google Bomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
The way I see it, Google is sometimes taking steps to modify, if not mollify results that may or may not have been artificially manipulated.. or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bomb
http://www.searchenginepeople.com/bl...gle-bombs.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by El GalloElizabeth Warren is god... Liberals love her. She can play dirty and she is much more intelligent than Trump. It would not go well for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
Betting you $5 that if Warren somehow gets involved, Trump verbally wipes his ass with her, and leaves her in a ditch.
4Dragons: shows true colors of supporting a woman who faked being native american to get into a better school
if this is all you have on her id say she is doing pretty well.
Unless you have more of course?
It doesn't matter because no matter what you will think Trump is winning. He could call her a "poop face" and you would get an erection.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK StarQuote:
Originally Posted by El Gallo
Betting you $5 that if Warren somehow gets involved, Trump verbally wipes his ass with her, and leaves her in a ditch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El GalloIt doesn't matter because no matter what you will think Trump is winning. He could call her a "poop face" and you would get an erection.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
That looks like another OPINION you just typed. "NO MATTER WHAT I THINK TRUMP IS WINNING"
Did I say that? Or are you GUESSING and pulling shit out of your ass again? :)
plz explain to us all how you would determine if trump "verbally wipes his ass with her, and leaves her in a ditch."Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK StarQuote:
Originally Posted by El Gallo
That looks like another OPINION you just typed. "NO MATTER WHAT I THINK TRUMP IS WINNING"
Did I say that? Or are you GUESSING and pulling shit out of your ass again? :)
what facts would you use to determine a winner for this wager? oh your personal opinion? you dont say.
jesus you are a fucking mong
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
Some more on this from Julian Assange
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-34780998.html
Google works closely with Hillary Clinton to promote presidential campaign
Newsflash, Hillary is a snakeinthegrass.Quote:
Assange appeared via video link from the Ecuadorian embassy in London as part of the 'New Era of Journalism: Farewell to Mainstream international media' forum in Moscow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSqR375pip0
He said: "Google is directly engaged with Hillary Clinton’s campaign" and claimed the technology giant used the US State Department on a "a quid pro quo" basis.
"Of course when she is in power… she is a problem for freedom of speech. We know what she is going to do. And she made the chart for the destruction of Libya, she was involved in the process of taking the Libyan armoury and sending it to Syria."
Assange reiterated his claims that Clinton is a "war hawk" that "seemingly" wants to start wars.
"What we have with Clinton is someone who is a hawk but who has the tools of legal interventionism, a rhetorical cover to start wars, and someone who seemingly wants to start them… From WikiLeaks’ perspective Hillary Clinton is a problem in terms of war and peace."
He also pointed out that former Google CEO Eric Schmidt is now heading the Pentagon innovation board.
"Google is heavily integrated with Washington power, at personal level and at business level. Google, which has increasing control over the distribution channels,… is intensely allying itself with the US exceptionalism.
"It [Google] shows the will to use that at different levels. It will inevitably influence its audience."
The founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks added: "Google is an intensely Washington, DC-aligned company. I see a Google exit from China… It seems much more to do with Google's feeling that it is part of ‘family America’ and that it is opposed to the Chinese."
Fortune reported last year that researchers had found that "Google search rankings could potentially decide the outcome of an election".
"Through five experiments in two countries... biased rankings in search results can shift the opinions of undecided voters by 20% or more, sometimes even reaching as high as 80% in some demographic groups.
"If Google tweaks its algorithm to show more positive search results for a candidate, the researchers say, the searcher may form a more positive opinion of him or her."
Assange also claimed that the US government can put pressure on social media site Facebook.
"The US apparatus can squeeze Facebook, Facebook squeezes your capital, you don't want to risk losing your capital so you start to adjust reportage as an individual, you start to adjust the things you say."
During the video conference Assange said that the US National Security Agency is now '80 percent privatised'.
"There is a merger between the corporate organisations and state… 80 percent of the National Security Agency budget is privatised. The NSA is the core of the US deep state… There has been a smoothing out between the government and the corporations."
Assange has been staying at London's Ecuadorian embassy since August 2012.
He is wanted for questioning in Sweden over a sex allegation, which he denies, but believes he will be extradited to the United States to be quizzed about the activities of WikiLeaks if he travels there.
In February a United Nations working group decided that he is being unlawfully detained. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said the Swedish and British authorities should end Assange's "deprivation of liberty" and respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement.
Melinda Taylor, part of Assange's legal team, said the UN report made clear that the WikiLeaks founder was neither a fugitive from justice, nor could he just walk out of the embassy.
She called it a "damning indictment" of the way Mr Assange has been treated.
How might Google influence opinion?
Based on research by Dr. Robert Epstein & Ronald E. Robertson webpagefx.com examined how the tech giant might influence opinion through its search results. The findings are summarised in a series of graphics below.
Apparently, this is just getting started..
'If this is true, it is a disgrace': Donald Trump responds to viral video claiming Google's search is biased
http://www.businessinsider.com/donal...h-viceo-2016-6
Big article with pics and shit with an explanation by Matt Cutts, a guy I love and despise. So go read the rest here:Quote:
Donald Trump took aim at Google on Friday afternoon after a viral video claimed to show the web giant's autocomplete search function manipulated results to favor Hillary Clinton.
"If this is true, it is a disgrace that Google would do that," Trump wrote in a statement sent to Business Insider by his campaign. "Very, very dishonest."
"They should let it float and allow people [to] see how crooked she really is," he continued.
The video, created by SourceFed, showed multiple autocomplete search results for "Hillary Clinton" that it claimed proved that Google "has been actively altering search recommendations in favor of Hillary Clinton's campaign."
The video had been viewed more than 14 million times on Facebook since Thursday.
In a statement on Friday, Google emphatically rejected that its autocomplete function was biased toward any candidate. Rather, each site simply uses a different algorithm from the others.
A Google representative wrote in a statement:
Google Autocomplete does not favor any candidate or cause. Claims to the contrary simply misunderstand how Autocomplete works. Our Autocomplete algorithm will not show a predicted query that is offensive or disparaging when displayed in conjunction with a person's name. More generally, our autocomplete predictions are produced based on a number of factors including the popularity of search terms.
In one example from the video, SourceFed showed the autocomplete results for "Hillary Clinton cri" that included "Hillary Clinton crime reform," "Hillary Clinton crisis," and "Hillary Clinton crime bill 1994."
The results did not include anything about "crimes," "criminal," or "criminal investigation," which SourceFed showed were, by comparison, among the first results to appear on Yahoo's and Bing's autocomplete search functions.
A similar result happened when "Hillary Clinton ind" was typed into the Google search bar. Results including "Indiana," "India," "independent voters," and "Indiana campaign" all appeared. But "indictment" did not. On Yahoo and Bing, on the other hand, "indictment" was included on all of the top results for "Hillary Clinton ind."
SourceFed also found, however, that results for "Donald Trump rac" and "Bernie Sanders soc" revealed autocomplete results that contained "racist" - with additional wording or context - and "socialist," matching the results on Yahoo and Bing.
Google's autocomplete function automatically filters a small set of terms the company deems offensive or inappropriate. One of those words is "crime," which is filtered when associated with anybody's name. Vox conducted an experiment on that involving Bernie Madoff, the infamous financier who defrauded many of his clients. For the search "Bernie Madoff cri," the first response is "cricket."
Business Insider attempted SourceFed's experiment and found very similar results. But Business Insider also found similar results for other politicians, such as President George W. Bush. Searching "George w bush co" on Google, Yahoo, and Bing, respectively, revealed the following:
http://www.businessinsider.com/donal...h-viceo-2016-6
A few days ago I was looking for the Hillary/Ghadaffi vid and some other Hillary stuff and something seemed off. For a brief millisecond the thought of Google skewing the results crossed my mind. Google would never do that and there really are people who like Hillary is what i thought about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
First I had my vote suppressed and now this, what the fuck is going on.
Is this video debunked or did Google really skew for Hillary?
Like Brownie with FEMA under W. Money has completely corrupted American politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Starhttp://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clint...ry?id=39710624
How Clinton Donor Got on Sensitive Intelligence Board
Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.
Uploaded Oct. 2013 Wow
Despite questionable credibility this is interesting to say the least. Pretty sure this guy was indeed a political operative for Bill Clinton in the 80's n 90's..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akb8XXM8T08
haha oh I remember brownie... he did a great job!Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerLike Brownie with FEMA under W. Money has completely corrupted American politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Starhttp://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clint...ry?id=39710624
How Clinton Donor Got on Sensitive Intelligence Board
Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.
No... he did a heckuva job.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dickhaha oh I remember brownie... he did a great job!Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Dragons
Annnnd instantly debunked as desperate spinsmoke from a campaign that can barely find rails to jump off.
in other news..
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ad5bb...2e872dfbc60c3c
" A jury on Friday found Alabama House Speaker Mike Hubbard guilty on 12 counts of public corruption — agreeing with prosecutors' assertions that the powerful Republican used the influence and prestige of his political office to benefit his companies and clients."
That's illegal? Using the influence and prestige of his political office to benefit his companies and clients sounds like an accurate job description of damn near every politician ever.
Not debunked imo 10 more examples w pictures. Google 'Hillary Clinton croo' right now for yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by 4Dragons
Annnnd instantly debunked as desperate spinsmoke from a campaign that can barely find rails to jump off.
http://freebeacon.com/politics/here-...le-to-hillary/
Hillary Clinton cross stitch
Not quite, I think she's too passive, a pushover and will never be presidential. So stop it with all this Warren BS. The financial crooks and their shills probably got emails to each other to "act scared of Elizabeth Warren, maybe we can trick em into picking her" insert evil laugh.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
Russ Feingold's the man for the job. He's polling 5% or so ahead of some dipshit Republican in the Wisconsin Senate race. After he wins there I expect him to pick up all the Bernie voters and take the White House in 2020.
Like Bernie he's the real deal so the establishment in both parties prefer to ignore him. Russ needs your support.
If there wasn't voter fraud and an incredibly rigged system in place for Hillary. Bernie would of kicked her and her ringer Trump's ass with moderate ease. Who invites total strangers to their wedding? Chelsea and Ivanka were BFF. Both big players in NY. That Rense vid has me thinking Trump may be a Clinton ringer just like Perot and Dole. Be looking for trump to intentionally blow it in the general. Clinton Modus Operandi.
EVERYONE knows the FBI has enough to indict Hillary for mishandling classified info. They need to quit stalling and let us sort out this Biden or Bernie mess, however unlikely.
Feingold 2020
FPS, let me preface what I'm about to say by this: I badly wanted Bernie to trounce Clinton in the Cali primary, and following that blowout, win Clinton's superdelegates over to backing him based on his superior electability. But it didn't happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_RussiaNot quite, I think she's a too passive, a pushover and will never be presidential. So stop it with all this Warren BS. The financial crooks and their shills probably got emails to each other to "act scared of Elizabeth Warren, maybe we can trick em into picking her" insert evil laugh.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
Russ Feingold's the man for the job. He's polling 5% or so ahead of some dipshit Republican in the Wisconsin Senate race. After he wins there I expect him to pick up all the Bernie voters and take the White House in 2020.
Like Bernie he's the real deal so the establishment in both parties prefer to ignore him. Russ needs your support.
If there wasn't voter fraud and an incredibly rigged system in place for Hillary. Bernie would of kicked her and her ringer Trump's ass with moderate ease. Who invites total strangers to their wedding? Chelsea and Ivanka were BFF. Both big players in NY. That Rense vid has me thinking Trump may be a Clinton ringer just like Perot and Dole. Clinton Modus Operandi.
EVERYONE knows the FBI has enough to indict Hillary for mishandling classified info. They need to quit stalling and let us sort out this Biden or Bernie mess, however unlikely.
Feingold 2020
Now, in response to what you say here:
(1) Warren has been roundly attack-dogging Trump for about a month now. She has demonstrated her chops to take on the role, with vigor, for Team Hillary in the upcoming general election.
(2) Re Warren versus Feingold as progressive-wing leader: Feingold is, unfortunately for his fans, past his political prime. The press doesn't care about him, *and* he is waaaaaay too verbally meek in the heat of media-dominated political promotion. So, he really isn't even close at this juncture to being as useful for the Dem ticket this election cycle.
Perhaps Feingold will resurrect his national political relevance sometime in the future, but this time around, he would at best draw a few hardcore progressives out to the polls who would otherwise idealistically rail (at home) against Clinton's cynical recruitment of Warren to provide some cover for her otherwise wholesale embrace of unlimited campaign contributions.
I'm not surprised you're a Pocahontas supporter. I think for myself and you think what the media tells you to think.
If you can't see from her body language and smile that she's just happy to be one of the important cool kids and will do whatever to stay then you can't make solid reads on people
Warren's a laughable joke. So obv. she's corruptible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVxQ9B4pVWk
Here's Russ standing all by his lonesome on principle. No fanfare no favorable endorsements or media coverage, no bricks of cash or political favors for Russ. A Koch funded super pac took out Russ with lies but Bernie laid the groundwork for just a candidate and the people to crush. Paybacks a motherfucker, I can think of no one else who's totally legit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-gS3jKshgE
GTFO with this Liz Warren bs. We can't afford to keep getting hustled.
Mark my words Feingold 2020
Marion Berry 2020
"Another neocon endorses Clinton, calling her “2016’s real conservative” and “the candidate of the status quo”
https://www.salon.com/2016/06/10/ano...he_status_quo/
"Wall Street has thrown its weight behind Hillary Clinton. Some of the biggest names in the U.S. right-wing establishment have also expressed support for her.
Another neocon added his name to the pro-Clinton list on Thursday. James Kirchick penned an op-ed in The Daily Beast titled “Hillary Clinton Is 2016’s Real Conservative — Not Donald Trump.”
They're being forced to state the obv. Hillary's a hardcore Republican. Don't kid yourself guys, Druff loves him some pantsuit .
Totally agree with you on this point re Hillary's neocon tendencies. She isn't as bad as Dubya regarding militarism. In 2009, she vigorously sided with the military brass to send many more troops to Afghanistan, against the advise of the two most knowledgable-about-the-region members of Obama's admin at the time (Joe Biden and Richard Holbrooke). What a clusterfuck of many more dead US service members that decision cost!Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
Im hoping Gallo sees this and watches it through its entirety. It has some very good information.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuiW_Jagl4U
Yet another Hillary scandal has been unearthed.
This one is being reported by ABC News, so don't blame it on a right wing hatchet job at Fox News or Breitbart.
Rajiv K. Fernando was a prolific Democratic candidate donor, who gave a shitload of money to the the Clintons over the years.
Quote:
He was an early supporter of Hillary Clinton's 2008 bid for president, giving maximum contributions to her campaign, and to HillPAC, in 2007 and 2008. He also served as a fundraising bundler for Clinton, gathering more than $100,000 from others for her White House bid.
Prior to his State Department appointment, Fernando had given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the William J. Clinton Foundation, and another $30,000 to a political advocacy group, WomenCount, that indirectly helped Hillary Clinton retire her lingering 2008 campaign debts by renting her campaign email list.
In 2011, Rajiv Fernando suddenly appeared on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board. He had no qualifications to be there. Rajiv was an expert in computer-generated stock trading, but this security board had nothing to do with that. This security board's focus was nuclear weapons and risk of their use by Russia and Pakistan.
Everyone was perplexed how Rajiv got there. This was a sensitive board with access to some of the most secret information, and an outsider with zero expertise on the matter was plopped in there.
The answer as to how Rajiv got there was revealed in recently obtained State Department e-mails:
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politic..._lf_160608.jpgQuote:
The newly released emails reveal that after ABC News started asking questions in August 2011, a State Department official who worked with the advisory board couldn’t immediately come up with a justification for Fernando serving on the panel. His and other emails make repeated references to “S”; ABC News has been told this is a common way to refer to the Secretary of State.
“The true answer is simply that S staff (Cheryl Mills) added him,” wrote Wade Boese, who was Chief of Staff for the Office of the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, in an email to Mannina, the press aide. “Raj was not on the list sent to S; he was added at their insistence.”
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politic..._lf_160608.jpg
The e-mails also reveal how they attempted to "protect the name" of Hillary and to "stall" the ABC News reporter.
Rajiv resigned for a bullshit reason ("he needs to devote more time to his business" LOL) when ABC News would not quit digging.
Here are all the e-mails, in case you want to read them: http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politic...ils_160810.pdf
The story is 5 years old, but it's coming up now because the internal e-mails about the matter were just obtained, and they give an interesting look into what was really going on.
Don't think that Rajiv isn't grateful:
Quote:
And he continued to donate to Democrats, and to Clinton. He emerged as one of the first “bundlers” to raise money for Clinton’s 2016 bid. And in July 2015, he hosted a fundraiser for Clinton at his Chicago home. Fernando has also continued to donate to the Clinton Foundation. He now is listed on the charity’s website as having given between $1 million and $5 million.
About six months after Fernando resigned from the State Department advisory board, he was invited to attend a White House State Dinner, honoring the British Prime Minister. And this summer Fernando will serve as a super delegate at the Democratic National Convention. According to Chicago media reports, he has committed to supporting Clinton.
Cliffs: Some foreign-policy-loving computer stock trading geek bought his way onto a secret government security board via "donations" to Hillary. ABC News found out and started trying to investigate. Cinton's people threw up roadblocks, and finally had the dude resign when this didn't work.
This isn't right-wing conspiracy garbage.
This really happened, and this type of thing will become the norm once the Clintons are back in the White House.
I imagine they owe a lot of favors to a lot of people by now.
Yeahhhh but lets be real; thats basically a dewdrop in the ocean compared to what Cheney pulled tho.
The truth is, quid pro quo shit like that is just how the machine works.
Would suck if someone donated a ton of money to the Clinton's so they could get an Ambassadorship to Libya.
Like honestly if you told me tomorrow they busted the guy for espionage and the Clinton's fled to Beijing, I wouldnt really be shocked. I just dont give a fuck about their criminality and corruption if they maintain basic human rights, dont tank the dollar, and make a real solid effort and keeping us from growing extinct.
She's just way too much Mary Tudor for me. All these assholes have historical archetypes and Bloody Mary is about the gist of HRC. Pretty cool if you're on her payroll, but even 1 or 2 steps from the castle and you're most likely marked for elimination sometime before you were due to go.
Honestly I feel the same way but Im just like thats showbiz folks.
And keep the GOPers from completely taking away a woman's control over her uterus.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
A littled dated, but worth it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
I watched it, and now I'm done watching videos you post. I can't understand how fucking gullible you are when it comes to Trump. That was terrible. You are on a direct path to believing in lizard people and the illuminati. You are honestly using their type of "logic." They also think they are being reasonable and following facts. Videos like that make you dumber. Be honest with me, you've come across some lizard people videos and you're starting to slowly agree with just "some" theories.
Im trying to understand your logic, G.
He has shown maybe 25 years of consistency. He has also changed his mind on a few viewpoints, Im sure. This is always funny to me. People will bitch at someone for "Flip Flopping", but then spend hours and hours trying to convince someone to change their mind. If, for any reason, you change your mind because you are open minded, and willing to see other viewpoints, and now make more of an educated decision based on further info, you are somehow called a Flip Flopper. Its hilarious. If you are going to take the time to bitch at someone and try to "educate them", why do you get upset with them if they change their mind?.....otherwise, what was the fucking point of you lecturing to them?
Is he doing a Hillary, where she doesnt discuss facts, but rather give you the old IMAGINE routine? "Imagine what a world with Trump would be....<insert hypothetical scenarious, based on fear and little proof>
so, Trump made tons of excellent points in that video. He made comments that he can actually prove with stats and evidence, yet, in YOUR opinion, (which is obviously NOT his), anyone who believes in what Trump is saying is either nuts or believes in the illuminatti.
....but WE are the crazy ones....
"I am right!....you are all wrong if you disagree!"
~ Half the liberals I actually know
Keep convincing yourself that liberals are the problem and not that this man is terrible. There is no point to discuss this with you. I could dissect everything he said and then show you how in his personal business dealings he does the exact opposite of what he says is best. Obviously, he has some good points about the economy and a few things, the man is not a complete moron, but he is still an awful human being. I'm the one that told you that many times people change their minds on stuff and that we call that learning. Kindly, don't make it seem like I would be against him changing his mind on stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRK Star
I've shown you time and time again people much smarter than you and I who completely disagree with you. You are impregnable to logic on this topic. You continuously make yourself look foolish and are so deep down the rabbit hole that you don't realize it. You are showing videos from youtube where they are trying to take the best things he has ever said and cutting out all the moronic, bigoted, racist, sexist shit he's said just over the last 8 months.
That is what you are using for arguments now, youtube videos with cherry picked statements... Everyday I think you can't possibly get any worse... then you do
I have an idea for you, G.
Rather than you tell us how stupid we and our candidates are, why don't you show us why you are choosing your candidate? Discuss the reasons why you feel they will make a good leader. I don't recall seeing anything like that from you....only you and others bashing Trump.
I'm looking forward to seeing this.
Thanks