Facebook to share 3,000 Russian ads with Congress
Hmmm.. so now it is Facebooks fault that Hillary lost, and soon it will be the Russians spent 3 years GDP just to get Trump elected. The only reason I can see for all this BS, is "We want a do over".......
Sorry, I don't have the link to a study performed on student testing...studying before or after the test...seems that the students that studied after the test did better...so long as the test results were initially unknown.
Hiltery could only have changed the results of the vote if 1 the results were unknown and 2 she did some soul searching afterward but unfortunately for her...she has no soul.
Hillary lost because she is Hillary, period. People saw through the thin veneer of civility she has. Inside, she is a vicious bit$% who would cut your heart out to get her way (like so many other liberals)
People are looking for any rumor that they can use and trying to turn it into a "fact" since if you repeat a rumor often enough it becomes considered a fact.
I frankly think what is happening is that the U.S. intelligence agencies which have long interfered with and, in some cases, overturned foreign elections have turned their tools on their own country.
I think most people want fair elections. The recounts showed the last election was fair. That's important to know since there were allegations of fraud. They turned out to be unfounded.
"weekly calls for impeachment "
I know. Politicians lately seem to be more interested in locking up the other side on a technicality rather than arguing about policies.
"turned their tools on their own country."
All the evidence showed the elections were fair, with no significant interference. President Trump won. When he took office he proposed nothing radical that would motivate a conspiracy. Even if he did, he can't seem to execute because he's too busy seeking attention by saying things that are offensive but inconsequential. I believe only his die-hard supporters imagine he's taking significant actions that would cause people to conspire against him more than against any other president.
His changes to the regulatory structure and pushing back against the environmental zealots is probably the most significant thing he is doing and it seems to be progressing.
If you read "The Art of the Deal", you see that Trump has always heavily multi-tasked. When people ask, why is he focusing on "x", they don't understand how he works. He doesn't "focus" on anything, like a juggler, he keeps a lot of balls in the air, only touching them for a moment as they pass.
I think that's his main skill, and he naturally uses it. The media have gotten better at monitoring eyeballs and seeing what gets attention. Train wrecks get eyeballs, and the media feedback loop gives us more of them. President Trump acts like a living train wreck, so he is a natural at getting attention in the modern age.
I do see your point. The way I describe it makes Trump the master. The eyeballs looking at the train wreck and the architects of that media feedback loop are equally responsible.
Regarding the environment, I think many people, companies, and organizations are working to contain the damage. I think an ordinary politician, not focused on getting attention, could do much more damage to the environment than Trump.
Regarding changes to regulatory structure, I don't really understand that. I have a vague understanding that the regulatory system was supposed to prevent lawsuits, but it became a monster of hoops for people to jump through. The policy changes have not affected my industry yet, and if they have affected other industries the story is buried deep under stories about athletes protesting.
The clearest example that I have to deal with is HIPAA. On the face of it, it is a simple idea: keep personal health care records private. Good, that was the industry standard before HIPAA and remains so.
Just one of the many regulatory requirements that HIPAA mandates is that a healthcare organization must have a Business Associates Agreement (BAA) with any business partner that has access to patient data. This is a contract that you work out that asserts that the partner will protect the data. Sounds good.
We sell a software product to medical laboratories. Our technical support department has to be able to access customer systems to resolve problems. This means that they can encounter personal healthcare information on patients in those systems. So we are required to have BAA contracts in place with our customers. All 1000 of them! As you can imagine this is a major undertaking. Since there is no standard BAA agreement every one can be unique. We have one on our web site that we encourage people to download and we can both sign it -- which helps. But every week or so, we get a multi page document that the lawyers for some healthcare institution have drawn up with ruinous requirements such as we will pay for an audit any time they request one. (never give someone the legal right to spend your money). So we negotiate. This takes a lot of time.
And a few years back they changed the law and we had to get new ones for everyone once more.
The industry spends billions on HIPAA compliance which doesn't buy so much as one aspirin. How many HIPAA documents have YOU had to sign?
Are you saying all that has changed for the better recently?
Why are they battling? Is it that the president wants to change regulations in a way that most people agree with, but the country's institutions are stopping him because the changes would eliminate gov't jobs?
The whole thing seems like a just-so story where you start with President Trump being something radically different from what he is. In the just-so story, the president is pushing for radical reforms. How do you square this with the fact that his background is in reality TV and he acts like an expert in getting unsophisticated viewers fired up? The answer is the clownish persona is just an Art-of-War style act to throw off the vast conspiracy secretly opposing his radical reforms.
This narrative is so far from the more parsimonious explanation that the Electoral College elected a reality TV person, and that's what we got.
Our Civil service laws are designed to protect the work force from politicization. What really happens is that the "administration" is a thin veneer of management over a bureaucracy that is pretty much accountable to no one. These people have high paying jobs with good benefits and they are there to protect them.
They are also people who have, for the most part, built their careers on writing and enforcing regulations on the American public. They believe they are doing the right thing. It's a self selecting group, not a lot of objectivists strive to become government regulators, lots of liberals do.
So you have the bulk of the government, somewhat immune to control from the high ranking administration officials nominally over them with an general liberal philosophy and an conviction that government is good.
That's the deep state you have to battle.
In spite of all the tweets and the gasping horror of the media, Trump is actually doing a pretty good job.
Also there is more than just what the government does. Generally the gov't doesn't do a good job of anything. There are people on their own working on technologies that will have more impact on global warming than anything the government does. When it comes to celebrating diversity, the gov't is really powerless to make people more bigoted. People who get stuff done show up and solve these problems. The rednecks of the world tune into the antics and mistake it for something real.
1. There's money to be made in gov't in DC.
2. Govt bureaucracy is bureaucratic.
3. People who work the the bureaucracy often have rightwing, leftwing, or others ideas to explain how gov't is good.
4. Compared to his clownish public persona, President Trump is a normal person.
Somewhere in that, I think you mean to imagine that President Trump is in a battle to reduce gov't, even as he proposes increasing spending, doubling borrowing, supports asset forfeiture, appoints people in favor of gov't intrusiveness, and makes off-hand comments in favor of gov't authoritarianism. But because Trump acts like a buffoon we can imagine it's all part of a long-term plan to do the opposite of what he says.
Trump's a natural mass-marketer in a job unrelated to mass-marketing. So he'll keep getting attention, fired-up rednecks, "respectable" people gasping in horror, all of that. That doesn't have much to do with gov't, though, so gov't will keep slowly growing more costly and intrusive as it has for the past 100 years.
I agree completely. I think there's a structural problem with gov't. I think institutions should be configured by the Constitution to be hard to vote for expansion of gov't and default limitations on gov't. The idea is something happens, and people think "if guns were illegal and police did random searches of all homes, maybe this crime wouldn't have happened," and institutions defined by the Constitution are supposed to put the brakes on. That's not happening. I say the Constitution is broken.
Any institution will naturally grow without bounds unless kept in check. We have specifically blocked the elected leadership from most of the tools of checking that growth.
I have long said that if you assigned someone to sit at a desk and look out the window and came back in 5 years you would find the "looking out the window department" with a manager, an administrative assistant and 3 window watchers.
Maybe in your book but they were never proven, and certified and accepted by the Left, they continue to try any trick they can to get Trump out. The next trick is to impeach him for his tweet on the sports thing, as there is apparently an obscure law saying that govt officials cannot force labor actions on private industry. That will be interesting, but may well bull it's way through. Thes idiots will not allow the peoples will go unchallenged, as THEY ARE THE PEOPLE", that is the whole logic behind them, and they completely ignore and disreagrd anyone else, and their rights. Why, if it is offensive to a large group of Americans, is this BS by the sports nimrods allowed to go on, but inanimate statues are so offensive they must be removed? That is pure arrogant insanity, and goes to elections as well.