What is Reddit's opinion of
The New York Times?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
➔ The New York Times website
By popularity on Reddit, this Service is:
100 reviews of this app found across Reddit:
Who you gonna believe, Trump or your own lying eyes?
Edit: For all the inauguration crowd "truthers" out there (apparently that is now a thing), both of the above photos were taken at 11:15. For those who want further evidence, here is a timelapse of Trump's pathetic inauguration crowd.
There's a story of a jeweler who accidentally doubled the price of her turquoise jewelry instead of halving it. Based on traditional economics, she should have sold less of the turquoise jewelry, but she actually sold out of it! It turned out that increasing the price of the jewelry increased its perceived value: https://blog.kissmetrics.com/5-psychological-studies/
I first heard about this study when I was a student at a US university whose increasing tuition rates seem to be capitalizing on a similar pricing pattern, as pioneered by George Washington University: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/how-to-raise-a-universitys-profile-pricing-and-packaging.html
2011 is also the year Trump paid buyers of Trump Soho $2.8 million to stop cooperating with a Manhattan DA investigation into criminal Russian funding sources for the project.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/politics/donald-trump-soho-settlement.html
You'd think his base would have cared.
- Pretty much the story of 2016.
Edit: If anyone is thinking about scrolling down, let me go ahead and tell you what's going on in the rest of this thread.
Trump Supporter: Ivanka has to manufacture abroad because bad trade deals have made US manufacturing uncompetitive. But Trump is going to fix that!
Everyone: The decline of low-skilled US manufacturing jobs has little to do with trade deals and is overwhelmingly due to the lower cost of living in developing countries and, even more so, due to the increasing role of automation.
The Trump supporter then says nothing, instead re-navigating to a fresher thread to reiterate the same talking point.
Get ready for multiple years of this. Trump, to his credit, is excellent at spectacle and PR, so you can be that he's going to have a series of high-profile events where he highlights jobs that he may-or-may-not have had a hand in cultivating. There will be pictures of him handing a shovel to someone breaking ground, there will be a crowd of teary-eyed middle-aged men overflowing with gratitude, there will be goofy pictures of Trump with a hard-hat. These events will make little to no meaningful difference in the overall jobs numbers, because these trends are irreversible, but his supporters won't care.
There, I just wanted to get that out somewhere so that I can say that I called it.
Get ready for Spectacle vs. Data.
Obama has been a major abuser of human rights. If I remember correctly, I think he was one of the only presidents to be in war for all 8 years of his presidency. He actively persecuted whistleblowers, kept Guantanamo open, and still kept the NSA going despite the massive leak. People are willing to overlook too much when it comes to Obama and the amount of freedom that was taken during this administration. I'm sorry, but gay marriage and marijuana isn't enough to forget the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Libyans and Syrians.
But it doesn't matter, the American people have basically spoken by voting for the complete decimation of the Democratic Party. Obama caused liberals to lose the House, the Senate, State legislature, Governor seats, and the Supreme court for the next decade at least. History has judged Obama, and the picture is not as rosy as the Nobel Peace Prize he received.
Edit: I forgot about TPP, Obamacare, racial tensions, Chinese aggression, Crimea .......... damn, but his speeches were slick so it's all okay right /s
> If the United States remains in combat in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria until the end of Mr. Obama’s term — a near-certainty given the president’s recent announcement that he will send 250 additional Special Operations forces to Syria — he will leave behind an improbable legacy as the only president in American history to serve two complete terms with the nation at war
Learn to google people
He's literally using his own Trump Hotel to host foreign diplomats and politicians. He doesn't seem to believe in conflicts of interest any more than climate change.
>“There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
I can't see him pardoing specially since how many people he prosecuted so many whistleblowers.
>Since Barack Obama entered the White House in 2009, his government has waged a war against whistleblowers and official leakers. On his watch, there have been eight prosecutions under the 1917 Espionage Act – more than double those under all previous presidents combined.
Under him NSA has only gotten bigger so I don't see why he would ever pardon Snowden. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more-latitude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html
TIL that he would cut his grapefruit with the dull side of the knife.
>Erdös found a grapefruit. He looked at it and looked at it and got a butter knife. "It can't be by chance," Graham explained, "that he so often used the dull side of the knife, trying to force his way through. It'll be squirting like mad, all over himself and the kitchen. I'd say, 'Paul, don't you think you should use a sharper knife?' He'd say, `It doesn't matter,' as the juice shoots across the room. At that point I give up and cut it for him."
TIL that he would call everything he didn't like "fascist."
>This brush with fascism had a lasting impact on Paul, both politically and linguistically. From this point on, anything was inconvenient or oppressive was "fascist". To illustrate: At one point, a colleague showed Erdős a new litter of kittens. Paul picked up a kitten, but the kitten would have none of it, and scratched him. Paul carefully put the kitten back down, clucked and proclaimed "fascist cat!". Paul's colleague, intrigued, asked Paul how the cat could possibly be fascist. Paul responded, "If you were a mouse, you would know!".
Fun facts: MLK's niece has said she voted for Trump, and MLK III (his son) just met with Trump today and praised their constructive talk, and said Trump is very interested in his plan to give free government identification to those who don't have drivers licences as to make it easier for disadvantaged black voters to get ID for voting.
>Mr. King said the session, which included a discussion about voting rights, had been “constructive,” and described Mr. Trump as eager to present himself as inclusive.
>“He said that he is going to represent Americans — he’s said that over and over again,” Mr. King, the president of the Drum Major Institute, a progressive New York-based public policy organization, told reporters. “We will continue to evaluate that.”
>On Monday, Mr. King sought to defuse the furor surrounding Mr. Trump’s remarks about Mr. Lewis, saying, “In the heat of emotion, a lot of things get said on both sides.”
>Mr. King has pressed for the creation of a free photographic government identification card to make it easier for Americans who do not have driver’s licenses, including many black voters, to cast ballots, and he indicated on Monday that Mr. Trump had taken an interest in the plan.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/16/us/politics/donald-trump-martin-luther-king-jr-son.html?_r=0
Please correct the record below. Something about Russia should do it.
He didn't let his children use much technology at all. He believed it was healthy to limit the amount of time they had with technology, especially at a young age.
Her name is Gjinovefa Merxira. She is getting this operation due to the fact that, amongst many incidents, she once saw "flowers instead of numbers" while doing math.
During the surgery in which this photo is taken, she was awake and responding to the surgeon as he cut into her.
Article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/03/magazine/karl-ove-knausgaard-on-the-terrible-beauty-of-brain-surgery.html?_r=0
Not if he wants to run in 2020 and New York passes the T.R.U.M.P. bill requiring presidential candidates who want to appear on NY's ballot to release the past 5 years worth of tax returns.
Edit: I swear some of you people are more concerned about a possible "violation of Trump's privacy" than you were over the NSA scandals. What was it you said then? Oh right, if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to be concerned about.
I wish more people would pay attention to this. And I wonder if we'll ever really comprehend the extent to which social media-driven micro-targeting influenced this election, not least by suppressing turnout among hardcore Berniecrats in certain key states.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/the-secret-agenda-of-a-facebook-quiz.html
At this point, there is so much smoke that it's in everyone's best interest to have a full-on bipartisan investigation into these allegations. Both Trump and the media are seemingly going all-in on this, and only one side is going to be able to walk away from the aftermath.
This NYT article sums it up pretty well:
> If true, the claims in the BuzzFeed dossier are sensational, including extensive contacts between Trump aides and Russian operatives and the Russian accumulation of dirt on Mr. Trump to be used for blackmail.
> But are they true? No one knows. This could either be a Watergate-style scandal that engulfs the Trump presidency or a “Hitler Diaries”-style hoax, or anything in between.
> There is only one way to get to the bottom of this tawdry affair: Appoint a bipartisan, 9/11-style commission to investigate all of the allegations and issue a public report. The former C.I.A. directors Leon E. Panetta and Michael V. Hayden, among other possible choices, would provide instant credibility if they were appointed to lead such a panel.
> If Mr. Trump is genuinely innocent of any untoward connections with the Kremlin, wouldn’t he want a full investigation to clear his name? That he so adamantly opposes any such inquiry speaks volumes.
Native American. Pretty much everything. But to name a few popular ones:
- War bonnets are not worn by women(or by every tribe). They are worn by male leaders and warriors of the tribe. It is earned and equivalent to the Military Purple Heart.
- Our songs are not just random "hey ya's". There are chorus' and verses. Along with our dances, they are choreographed movements.
- We do not all look like Pocahontas and Geronimo.
Edit: Native people have and continue to be misrepresented so bad that I didn't know I was considered Native until middle school. My teachers generalized the entire race that I thought it couldn't possibly be me or the other several Native students in class. We just identified ourselves as our tribe instead of the "Indians" they taught us in class because they did weird shit.
As Marlon Brando perfectly said, "...the motion picture community has been as responsible as any for degrading the Indian and making a mockery of his character, describing his as savage, hostile and evil. It's hard enough for children to grow up in this world. When Indian children watch television, and they watch films, and when they see their race depicted as they are in films, their minds become injured in ways we can never know."
Did you see this story?, the most under rated scary story of the election. They were involved with Brexit and who knows how many other elections.
Fun Fact: When they initially were filming this movie, lots of Indian people were in quite an uproar about an Englishmen playing Gandhi, for obvious reasons. It wasn't until they realized that he was not only in part ethnically Indian, but that his family actually came from the same village as Gandhi, that they gave it the ok.
I can't find a source for this story, as I remember Ben Kingsley talking about it in some interview. But here is the source for the part about his family heritage.
Who you gonna believe, Trump or your own lying eyes?
Edit: For all the inauguration crowd "truthers" out there (apparently that is now a thing), both of the above photos were taken at 11:15. For those who want further evidence, here is a timelapse of Trump's pathetic inauguration crowd.
Stealing this from another user from another thread:
> Yes. But a huge number of bills in the Senate are to rename a postoffice in Tumbleweed, Wyoming or something like that. The bills that mattered they differed on. Here are a few examples:
> - The Iraq War (S: No, C: Yes)
- The Wall Street TARP bailout (S: No, C: Yes)
- Tax credits for renewable fuels (S: Yes, C: No)
- Estate tax breaks for millionaires (S: No, C: Yes)
>These 4 votes alone are worth well over $2 trillion dollars. $1.2+ for the Iraq War, $0.8 for the Wall Street bailout, etc.
>There's enough money there alone to pay for Bernie's college plan for nearly 50 years.
Hillary and Sanders also voted on different sides in 2007 on Guantanamo.
Here is a link to another reddit thread about the differences in voting
NYTimes article that discusses the differences in voting
Basically, they only served with each other for about 2 years and the bills they voted similarly on were non-impactful and mostly pork stuff that do not necessarily show any similarity in political ideology. Conversely, what they voted differently on were major impact bills where your vote(s) tell a great deal on where one stands politically and ideologically.
The "Hillary and Sanders voted 93% similarly while they were together so Hillary MUST be as liberal and left leaning as Sanders" is spin coming from the DNC camp to try and fool true democrats into coming into their fold.
EDIT: Holy carp. Gold! Thank you kind stranger, though you could have just given me reddit silver and I've have been just as happy!
This is Rep. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. He supported Trump. It's actually fairly strange to me that he's speaking out about Trump releasing his tax returns, but it's something he's been fairly vocal about since August.
Not really sure what he has to gain from this. Guess he's just taking a principled stand, or trying to boost his image. Either way it's somewhat encouraging to see Republicans standing up to Trump, even in such an extremely limited capacity.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html?_r=0
>When Kasich’s adviser asked how this would be the case, Donald Jr. explained that his father’s vice president would be in charge of domestic and foreign policy.
>Then what, the adviser asked, would Trump be in charge of?
>“Making America great again” was the casual reply.
>I expect Assange to "coincidentally" begin smear campaigns against Merkel within six months.
Russia has already identified her as their next target for smearing and election tampering.
>I would have wanted her to completely walk away from the Clinton Foundation, possibly even dissolving the organization or renaming it and handing it over to others.
Which was the plan they released in September that she got zero credit for.
edit: Originally said the plan was released during the primary but the more detailed plan I was thinking of wasn't released until last September. Still got no credit for it.
>“I'm a Leninist. Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that's my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”
-Steve Bannon https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/stephen-bannon-breitbart-words.html
Lots of folks have postulated MLK was killed when he tried to organize not just the black people, but the poor people at large. He wanted to turn it from civil rights into what "they" perceived as a brewing class war.
Info on his Poor People's Campaign, which was carried out despite his assassination the month prior.
And the FBI even urged him to kill himself through supposed "fan" letters, even going as far as blackmailing him to do so by threatening to release evidence of his marital affairs. Source on that.
Edit for sources.
>“I'm a Leninist. Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that's my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”
-Steve Bannon https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/stephen-bannon-breitbart-words.html
He's also the same guy that said "I know a lot about hacking... I have a boy who's 10 year old, he can do anything with a computer." #TrueStory
According to this new york times article the published document has been circulating in journalistic circles for a while but buzzfeed is the first organization that felt it was credible enough to publish.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/business/media/cspan-russia-today.html
>Mr. Mortman [C-SPAN spokesperson] said the network’s early explanation for the interruption came from an internal analysis. He said that he was not aware of any previous such interruption.
>Had Mr. Burke and others who were watching C-Span online at the time not been interrupted, they would have heard Ms. Waters mention Russia and President-elect Donald J. Trump several times before she ended her turn on the floor.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/12/lights-go-out-pompeo-cia-hearing/
>The outage came just as Sen. Mark Warner, the committee’s ranking Democrat, was making opening remarks. He was commenting on how he and the committee’s chairman, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, are committed to examining the intelligence community’s recent assessment of Russian meddling in the U.S election...
>...The lights went out just before he uttered the word “Russia.”
Worth noting that the power outage happened during the confirmation hearing for the new CIA director
It all seems to be coming from a fairly credible ex-member of the British Intelligence. From a New York Times Article: > The former British intelligence officer who gathered the material about Mr. Drumpf is considered a competent and reliable operative with extensive experience in Russia, American officials said. But he passed on what he heard from Russian informants and others, and what they told him has not yet been vetted by American intelligence.
Here's a link to that New York Times Article. If this came out to be true, this could be a defining political moment for America.
lol i just looked up what you were talking about, and it's even worse than I thought. just look at who he's replacing:
"Mr. Perry, who once called for the elimination of the Energy Department, will begin the confirmation process Thursday with a hearing before the Senate Energy Committee. If approved by the Senate, he will take over from a secretary, Ernest J. Moniz, who was chairman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology physics department and directed the linear accelerator at M.I.T.’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science. Before Mr. Moniz, the job belonged to Steven Chu, a physicist who won a Nobel Prize.
For Mr. Moniz, the future of nuclear science has been a lifelong obsession; he spent his early years working at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. Mr. Perry studied animal husbandry and led cheers at Texas A&M University."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/us/politics/rick-perry-energy-secretary-donald-trump.html
I couldn't find an exact number, but I did find this article from December 8, 2008.
> Mr. Obama is moving more quickly to fill his administration’s top ranks than any newly elected president in modern times. He has named virtually the entire top echelon of his White House staff and nearly half of his cabinet.
It appears that he had most of his own vetting complete before election so that when he announced his nominations they were ready to be reviewed by the ethics committee.
Republican started obstructing Obama from day 1. Apparently there were delays during the Senate confirmation hearings by Mitch McConnell and the Republicans due to a perceived "lack of transparency."
> Law professor Anne Joseph O’Connell has calculated that between 1981 and 2014, 25% of nominees submitted to the Senate were not confirmed. The average time for confirmation over this period was 88.5 days, but it was 127.2 days for the Obama administration. The average time for failed appointments 179.7 days. At the 100 day mark, Reagan had filled 27 percent of PAS positions, but Obama had filled only 17 percent of his. At the one-year mark, 86% of Reagan’s PAS appointees were on board, and only 64% of Obama’s appointees had been confirmed.
>Bernie voted for the crime bill too, so it looks just as bad for him.
And he gave a speech severely criticizing the bill and warning that it would have disastrous affects, especially on minorities. He only voted for it because it had other legislation bundled within the bill. So no, it doesn't look "just as bad" for him. Meanwhile, Hillary said it was good for dealing with those "super predators" and couldn't wait to pass it.
>was supported by minorities at the time due to the crack epidemic.
Bullshit. It was criticized then just as it is now.
>While supporting the idea of addressing crime, members of the Congressional Black Caucus criticized the bill itself and introduced an alternative bill that included investments in prevention and alternatives to incarceration, devoted $2 billion more to drug treatment and $3 billion more to early intervention programs. The caucus also put forward the Racial Justice Act, which would have made it possible to use statistical evidence of racial bias to challenge death sentences.
>Given the history of selective hearing, what followed was no surprise. Black support for anti-crime legislation was highlighted, while black criticism of the specific legislation was tuned out. The caucus threatened to stall the bill, but lawmakers scrapped the Racial Justice Act when Republicans promised to filibuster any legislation that adopted its measures.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/13/opinion/did-blacks-really-endorse-the-1994-crime-bill.html
> A police spokesman said the death was currently being treated as unexplained but was not thought to be suspicious.
You mean these police?
Remember that golden shower press conference? The one about the Russian piss prostitutes? He shoe-horned in that catchphrase twice (once explicitly, once just talking about how much he loves firing people). And it was equally awkward both times. No way he'd pass up the opportunity to say it again. He loves saying his catchphrase.
You would be just about right.
>When President-elect Donald J. Trump offered Rick Perry the job of energy secretary five weeks ago, Mr. Perry gladly accepted, believing he was taking on a role as a global ambassador for the American oil and gas industry that he had long championed in his home state.
>In the days after, Mr. Perry, the former Texas governor, discovered that he would be no such thing — that in fact, if confirmed by the Senate, he would become the steward of a vast national security complex he knew almost nothing about, caring for the most fearsome weapons on the planet, the United States’ nuclear arsenal.
Salman Rushdie spent 10 years in hiding after a foreign state sentenced him to death for writing a novel. One of his translators was stabbed to death in a university hallway. Another was attacked in his home. The experience broke him down emotionally, to the point that he pretended to convert back to Islam just to make the threats go away.
Fucking men-children, invoking his name to die on the hill of making fun of fat people.
That is absolutely and utterly false. Corporate donations may only be used towards independent advertising, not direct contributions.
Feel free to educate yourself: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html
A writer for the New York Times actually wondered why national parks are so white and thought it was a problem that blacks don't have a passion for camping.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/opinion/sunday/diversify-our-national-parks.html
A factor that should be researched and reported on more. Scariest under reported story of the election, they were involved in Brexit and who knows how many other elections.
Dude spent the entire primary yelling all the things he would do "day one." I'm beginning to think this Trump character is full of shit.
There is no problem with Fed borrowing money overnight for banks, because one of the jobs of central bank is to function as lender of last resort in crisis.
>The administration veered rudderlessly from "laissez-faire" to fully dictating what the "private" banks do in less than 24 hours, and in the end let the favored banks make huge profits, bonuses, and acquisitions.
The real moral problem with this is that when banks were in bankruptcy, government did not take their ownership. Big banks are too big to fail, but that does not mean that their ownership should stay intact. Force banks to show their losses in their balance sheets (instant bankruptcy) buy the banks for a dollar and refinance them. After that any profit they make comes to government and those banks can be sold to private markets in 5-10 years.
It's just incomprehensible that when banks fail, governments creates TARP programs that ensure that owners can recover while government takes the risk.
edit:
- Paul Krugman op-ed: Banking on the Brink February 22, 2009
- Swedish banking rescue ".. When distressed assets were later sold, the proceeds flowed to the state, and the government was able to recoup more money later by selling its shares in the nationalized banks in public offerings..."
This can't be. Everyone told me before the election that rigging was a totally unfounded concern and there was no way for it to affect the election.
If it was rigged by Trump, it was pretty masterfully corrupt politicking to get basically everyone to come out and defend the integrity of the electoral process beforehand. Now there's no real way to challenge the results without looking like hypocrites.
Because we already have Pence
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html?_r=0
He offered Kasich the responsibilities of President as the VP, when Kasich turned it down, he offered it to Pence, who took the deal.
Why keep two albatross around our neck when we can narrow it down to one?
Apparently not.
>Asked about the two clemency applications on Friday, the White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, discussed the “pretty stark difference” between Ms. Manning’s case for mercy and Mr. Snowden’s. While their offenses were similar, he said, there were “some important differences.
>“Chelsea Manning is somebody who went through the military criminal justice process, was exposed to due process, was found guilty, was sentenced for her crimes, and she acknowledged wrongdoing,” he said. “Mr. Snowden fled into the arms of an adversary and has sought refuge in a country that most recently made a concerted effort to undermine confidence in our democracy.”
I've always noticed a lack of white liberals moving to black neighborhoods—they claim they're safe and wonderful, yet they live far away from them. Strange.
No one wants their neighborhood to look like black neighborhoods, where people are randomly shot, mugged, and burgled frequently.
Also, ethnic groups self-segregate in America, but not to the extent of blacks. It's pretty well-known sociology that even upwardly-mobile blacks choose to live in black neighborhoods.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/milwaukee-segregation-wealthy-black-families.html?_r=0
The folks who voted for Trump have absolutely no idea regarding what a President actually does. They are clueless.
I read recently that Obama would read between 3-400 pages of documents and briefings each night. Here is an article that described his work habits.
There is no way that Trump is intellectually capable of digesting that much material. When you are President, you can't just "wing it."
>Some progressives are still shunning the event, with reports both of white women feeling excluded by talk of race relations, and minority women citing privileged whites acknowledging too little, too late their struggle against chronic class and race discrimination.
This is very disappointing to read. These kind of squabbles can cause the opposition to Trump to fail, in other words "A house divided against itself cannot stand."
Let's hope they can put aside the turf wars to focus on the main objective, putting a stop to Trump and the GOP's radical agenda that will destroy decades worth of progress.
Trump met with Martin Luther King III today:
>Mr. King said the session, which included a discussion about voting rights, had been “constructive,” and described Mr. Trump as eager to present himself as inclusive.
>“He said that he is going to represent Americans — he’s said that over and over again,” Mr. King, the president of the Drum Major Institute, a progressive New York-based public policy organization, told reporters. “We will continue to evaluate that.”
>On Monday, Mr. King sought to defuse the furor surrounding Mr. Trump’s remarks about Mr. Lewis, saying, “In the heat of emotion, a lot of things get said on both sides.”
>Mr. King has pressed for the creation of a free photographic government identification card to make it easier for Americans who do not have driver’s licenses, including many black voters, to cast ballots, and he indicated on Monday that Mr. Trump had taken an interest in the plan.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/16/us/politics/donald-trump-martin-luther-king-jr-son.html?_r=0
> People have already been the subject of violence.
Or about the Trump supporters who are getting beat up and harassed? Or are you actually talking about the guy that was tortured for being white?
Yeah, there's a lot of violence, but it's not coming from people who support Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html
> Mr. Trump’s apparent willingness to avoid condemning Mr. Putin’s government is a remarkable departure from United States policy and Republican Party orthodoxy, and has fueled the questions about Russian meddling in the campaign. Mr. Trump has denied that, saying at the news conference that he has never met Mr. Putin, and has no investments in Russia.
The USA has supported the FSA, which turned out to be a Islamist-sympathizing and brutal group with no qualms about terrorizing civilians (like when they handed over a captured NYT reporter to Jabhat al-Nusra, an Al Qaeda affiliate, to be tortured and held for ransom)
Ummm. The polls never showed Hillary winning in a landslide. They were consistantly 2-6% in her favor, which was actually the results of the election. The polls actually showed that the undecided voters broke very heavily for Trump over Hillary, and that was the cause of the swing in the election.
The polls couldn't have been more accurate if they tried. If they had showed Trump winning the national vote they would have been wrong, and if they showed Trump winning the swing states by a small margin they would still be wrong, because of the way undecideds broke in Trump's favor. Or the way Harry Enten of 538 put it, "Trump is Just a normal polling error behind clinton."
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/
>Norm Drucker, one of pro basketball’s most prominent referees, who notoriously ejected Wilt Chamberlain from a game — the only minutes Chamberlain missed in his epic 1961-62 season — died on Friday. He was 94.
>I looked at a subscription to the Times and it was over $1000 a year.
As far as I can tell here's the basic price list. Ignoring introductory rates, you get their primary service levels:
basic: $3.75/week, which is roughly $195/year.
all access: $6.25/week, which is roughly $325/year.
home delivery (including digital and Sunday delivery): $9.40/week, which is roughly $488.80/year.
There are lots of introductory offers, besides the ones listed on that site, too. They send me emails like "give five complimentary 12-week digital subscriptions" (if anyone wants one of these, PM me your email and I'll figure out if they're still good). Those above prices seem to be on the high end, too. If you look around, you can find offers like this where you can get a year of digital subscription for $129.99 (new subscribers only).
I feel like I'm /r/hailcorporate for real now, I'm sure if you were interested you could also just call them up and find out what's the best deal for new subscribers. Personally, though, if I didn't already have a subscription, I'd consider subscribing to the Washington Post instead of the Times, since the Post seems to have better political reporting (though I tend to prefer the Times on most other issues).
For those of you who are unaware, possession of any folding knife that can be opened merely by flicking the wrist is illegal in New York state under New York's 1950's-era law designed to outlaw switchblades.
This has led to numerous arrests of otherwise law-abiding citizens carrying common utility knives particularly by New York City police eager to boost their service records with a "possession of a deadly weapon" arrest. NYC police officers have become quite adept at flicking open almost any kind of foldable knife to demonstrate that it is, in fact, a prohibited "gravity knife."
In 2016, the New York state legislature passed legislation intended to remedy this problem by changing the legal definition of a "switchblade knife" or "gravity knife" to no longer encompass common outdoor and utility knives. Unfortunately, on the last day of the year, Governor Cuomo vetoed the bill.
Some free advice to those of you who EDC any kind of foldable knife, do not take it into New York City (and particularly into the subway)--it's really not worth the risk.
More background on this issue from the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/opinion/new-yorks-outdated-knife-law.html
Do you mean "With False Claims, Trump Attacks Media on Turnout and Intelligence Rift"?
It's pretty great. Snippits include:
>In a visit to the Central Intelligence Agency intended to showcase his support for the intelligence community, Mr. Trump ignored his own repeated public statements criticizing the intelligence community, a group he compared to Nazis just over a week ago.
>Later, at the White House, he dispatched Sean Spicer, the press secretary, to the briefing room in the West Wing, where Mr. Spicer scolded reporters and made a series of false statements.
>“I was heartened that the president gave a speech at C.I.A.,” said Michael V. Hayden, a former director of the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency. “It would have been even better if more of it had been about C.I.A.”
You might find this piece from the New York Times, The Big Sleep, relevant.
It talks about the habits of the French farmers during a time well after the Middle Ages, but I think it's safe to assume that those habits would have been around in the Middle Ages too, as their lifestyles would not have changed too much.
In short, yes, a lot of peasants just did nothing, in part to conserve food, according to this writer.
>Economists and bureaucrats who ventured out into the countryside after the Revolution were horrified to find that the work force disappeared between fall and spring. The fields were deserted from Flanders to Provence. Villages and even small towns were silent, with barely a column of smoke to reveal a human presence. As soon as the weather turned cold, people all over France shut themselves away and practiced the forgotten art of doing nothing at all for months on end. > >In the mountains, the tradition of seasonal sloth was ancient and pervasive. “Seven months of winter, five months of hell,” they said in the Alps. When the “hell” of unremitting toil was over, the human beings settled in with their cows and pigs. They lowered their metabolic rate to prevent hunger from exhausting supplies. If someone died during the seven months of winter, the corpse was stored on the roof under a blanket of snow until spring thawed the ground, allowing a grave to be dug and a priest to reach the village.
Here's an article with pictures from marches and gatherings around the world - I was pleasantly surprised to see there was one in my city :)
According to this article, a few other fact-checking organizations have reviewed Snopes' findings and not uncovered any bias.
This NY Times article contends the increased attacks against Snopes are a result of its rising profile.
Me too. I was just noticing these headlines;
With False Claims, Trump Attacks Media on Turnout and Intelligence Rift
Trump's Press Secretary Falsely Claims: 'Largest Audience Ever to Witness an Inauguration, Period'
False claims, false claims.
Fucking LIES you mean.
Just so you know, only 1/5 millionaires inherit their wealth in the US. This is a very poor stereotype to perpetuate. http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0810/7-millionaire-myths.aspx https://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html
replying here for visibility.
Sharia law being put to action by peaceful muslims , no big deal
https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/asia/100000004108808/the-killing-of-farkhunda.html
meantime . . .
China Aims to Spend at Least $360 Billion on Renewable Energy by 2020
This isn't about the energy, it's about the infrastructure.
Right now, everyones traditional (fossil/nuclear) power infrastructure is based on decades old tech. So when you want to control the shit by computer console, you call the electricians and wire on the thing you need... then it's controlled by windows XP.
By rebuilding EVERYTHING using renewables, they can not only rewrite control systems (i'm betting it won't be windows 10), but they can harden the entire system both physically (like in bunkers) and in software (unique, encrypted os on hardened networks). When they're done, they will have relatively cheap, but secure (no importation of anyones bullshit) energy on a cutting edge control and delivery system.
And, just like the 50s-60s when America was firing up nuclear plants, nobody on the planet will be able to catch them for several generations.
NY Times does a good job comparing Perry to the man he's supposed to replace
> Mr. Perry, who once called for the elimination of the Energy Department, will begin the confirmation process Thursday with a hearing before the Senate Energy Committee. If approved by the Senate, he will take over from a secretary, Ernest J. Moniz, who was chairman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology physics department and directed the linear accelerator at M.I.T.’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science. Before Mr. Moniz, the job belonged to Steven Chu, a physicist who won a Nobel Prize.
>For Mr. Moniz, the future of nuclear science has been a lifelong obsession; he spent his early years working at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. Mr. Perry studied animal husbandry and led cheers at Texas A&M University.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/us/politics/rick-perry-energy-secretary-donald-trump.html?_r=0
Do you just run around making stuff up?
Is this how you gymnastics the fact this country hates Trump?
You know democrats are better off economically than republicans are, right?
Like this shit is getting old.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/07/opinion/how-did-the-democrats-become-favorites-of-the-rich.html
>> The kinds of congressional districts Democrats are now winning also tilt toward the well-to-do. Data on the median household income of congressional districts provided by ProximityOne, a company that specializes in the analysis of geographic, demographic and economic data, shows the following:
>> In 2014, the median income of households in Democratic districts was higher than in Republican districts, $53,358 to $51,834. Democrats represent seven of the 10 most affluent districts, measured by household income (four in California, two in Virginia and one in New York). Democrats also represent a majority of the 100 most affluent districts, 54-46.
Just yesterday there was an article about Obama's reading habit. I think it's going to be a long, long time before we see another thoughtful introvert in the Oval Office again.
The explanation is simple: pay-per-play, the press is just as corrupt as the politicians. The publications receive money (usually officially for "ads") in exchange for allowing "guests" to write editorials.
This is not just the British press (The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, etc.) who attack Romania's fight against corruption, but parts of the American press as well.
For instance, a couple of years ago, New York Times published an editorial titled "Romania’s Anti-Corruption Mania":
> BUCHAREST, Romania — With its wide, tree-lined boulevards and Belle Époque buildings, this city was once known as Little Paris. Today, Romania’s capital feels more reminiscent of the French Revolution as it is roiled by a legal reign of terror. [...] Romania’s anti-corruption campaign has rapidly metastasized into an illiberal crusade. The public’s insatiable appetite for justice only exacerbates the threat to the country’s democratic future. > > Romania’s democratic development would be better served by a public process whereby past misdeeds were acknowledged, documented and then forgiven.
Apparently this comic needs a fact check. GE pays no federal taxes.
>[GE's] extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. G.E.’s giant tax department, led by a bow-tied former Treasury official named John Samuels, is often referred to as the world’s best tax law firm. Indeed, the company’s slogan “Imagination at Work” fits this department well. The team includes former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.
>“There’s no way to really quantify crowds. We all know that,” Conway said.
Oh really?
Crowd Scientists Say Women’s March in Washington Had 3 Times as Many People as Trump’s Inauguration
Obama - in a big fuck you to the American people and the world - just gave full XKEYSCORE access to all 17 intelligence agencies. This is one of the worst crimes against due process and civil rights of any president ever.
That entire video was just a cringe-worthy example of middle class Bobos being absolutely appalled at the behavior of lower class minorities.
As likely as it is that Cheney used inappropriate techniques to try and suppress Zelikow's memo, what would happen today if a similar official were to circulate dissenting material? Obama and his administration have embarked on a very concentrated effort to punish whistleblowers, and I imagine that this administration's response would actually be worse than Cheney's actions. After all, Zelikow wasn't arrested and charged for his dissent.
As an example, in January the Obama administration charged John Kiriakou with espionage-related crimes for (ostensibly) naming two individuals who tortured detainees that were suspected to be Al-Qaeda operatives. Kirakou was the first US official to publicly reveal that the US was torturing detainees with water boarding, and for this act of government transparency the Obama administration wants to put him in federal prison for up to thirty years [nytimes].
Kiriakou is just one whistleblower of six that the Obama administration has charged under the Espionage Act. Given the fact that, prior to Obama, there were only three such charges in the 95 years since World War I, I have to imagine that Zelikow would now be declared a federal criminal for daring to publicly disclose misdeeds* of the executive branch.
* internationally recognized war crimes
Here is the full speech written by Marlon Brando to be read by Sacheen Littlefeather. speech
It is surprisingly hard to find and I am not sure if this is the full version as it does not seem to be 15 pages long as described. It is not included on Ms Littlefield's wikipedia page nor on the Oscar website for acceptance speechs.
it was :(.. one example:
"Everyone detected with AIDS should be tatooed in the upper forearm, to protect common-needle users, and on the buttocks, to prevent the victimization of other homosexuals." -William F Buckley, New York Times, 1986
https://www.nytimes.com/books/00/07/16/specials/buckley-aids.html
other conservatives like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell called for quarantine (or worse) in addition to forcible tattoos.
> they bring their culture and problems with them.
It's really hard to move past the mindsets of poverty & effects under-education.
Combine that with the social issues in the black community & it gets harder.
I see anger here that American dream is disappearing but for people who started in the hood & couldn't get out, progress has been stagnant for a long time. I'm skeptical that will change in the next 50 years.
>In August, around the same time the decision was made to keep the Manafort investigation at a low simmer, the F.B.I. grappled with whether to issue subpoenas in the Clinton Foundation case, which, like the Manafort matter, was in its preliminary stages. The investigation, based in New York, had not developed much evidence and was based mostly on information that had surfaced in news stories and the book “Clinton Cash,” according to several law enforcement officials briefed on the case.
Apparently the FBI deemed this "book" more deserving of their investigative power.
Jason Chaffetz, who has the audacity to threaten the Office of Government Ethics with an investigation for questioning Trump's commitment to confront his potential conflicts of interest.
That is fucking madness.
Which he then apologized for which is a rarity for presidents do do. Owned up to the mistake after it was investigated. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/world/asia/obama-apologizes-for-bombing-of-afghanistan-hospital.amp.html
Don't think this qualifies as a scandal. Not even on the same level now. It was an open and close case with an unfortunate outcome.
This can never be talked about enough. It's not a coincidence that the election after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act all the swing states where Republicans are in charge of the vote went for the Republican candidate.
Not only are the Republicans engaging in systematic voter suppression, they have pretty much admitted to it. They aren't being subtle about their intentions, because they know it's the only way that they will win and they are willing to cheat to maintain power.
Call until you get through. Inform them that you are a voting (and possibly donating) constituent. Ask about their positions or demand inquiries into questionable appointments and specific issues where voters disagree with Trump's "judgement". Voice specific concerns over Trump's cabinet picks Russia's influence over Trump and his cabinet.
And then, every day, call back and demand updates. Demand progress. Every time Trump is in the news, call your representatives. Make your representatives understand that Trump is unpopular and on the way out. Make them fight back.
Call your Democrats first to practice your spiel, express thanks. Then call your Republican representatives and express outrage. Don't swear like an asshole, be forceful and angry.
If someone can write up a good transcript, I will repost it every time I see this question... but don't wait. Call, talk, participate. These are your representatives.
That's not what /u/Tasdilan is talking about. "Firing them without a grace period" is unprecedented.
>In the past, administrations of both parties have often granted extensions on a case-by-case basis to allow a handful of ambassadors, particularly those with school-age children, to remain in place for weeks or months.
>Mr. Trump, by contrast, has taken a hard line against leaving any of President Obama’s political appointees in place as he prepares to take office on Jan. 20 with a mission of dismantling many of his predecessor’s signature foreign and domestic policy achievements. “Political” ambassadors, many of them major donors who are nominated by virtue of close ties with the president, almost always leave at the end of his term; ambassadors who are career diplomats often remain in their posts.
What Mr. "Uniter" has done is screw over the children of his political opponents, something no previous President has done.
Exit polling showed that the first issue for Trump voters was immigration followed by national security. Economy was a distant third. So don't let anyone tell you it wasn't racism. It was racism lol. It was fear of brown people taking jobs and blowing things up.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html
There is no such thing as a reliable think tank.
Think tank are part of the public relations industry, an industry that is based on manipulating public opinion.
Let's take the CATO Institute and The Heritage Foundation. They were created by big business in order to influence american public opinion. Their goals are the following : Promote markets over governement, low taxes on businessmen, low regulations, oppose measures favorable to workers unions.
If their "researcher" publish anything that doesn't fit this point of view, they immediatly get fired.
Let's take the Economic Policy Institute. It was funded by unions in order order to influence american public opinion. Their goal is the following : Promote governement over markets, higher taxes on business, more labor regulations, oppose measures favorable to large corporations.
If their "researcher" publish anything that doesn't fit this point of view, they immediatly get fired.
Let's take another example. The Center on Middle East Policy. It's backed by Israeli money. Any position defavorable to Israel is opposed. Their goal is to promote policies favorable to Israel. If their "researcher" publish anything that doesn't fit this point of view, they immediatly get fired.
The Washington Think Tank Industrial Complex is just total propaganda.
You pay them, they will say anything you want to :
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/us/politics/think-tanks-research-and-corporate-lobbying.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/think-tank-scholars-corporate-consultants.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html
You want reliable studies, look into academia. Avoid any researcher affiliated with a think-tank.
Most millionaires and up attain their wealth through their own hard work.
They work doing dull, normal jobs, but they do them on their own terms. They are usually entrepreneurs who start out on own businesses at some point.
They are almost always living well below their means. They don't buy new cars, or own fancy suits or live in the Upper East Side.
Pretty much it comes down to these two simple facts.
If you want to go from nothing to wealthy, you must:
1) Do something that pays fairly well, preferably as a business owner or contractor.
And
2) Live as though you weren't paid well at all. No one ever got rich by spending money on gadgets and status symbols.
Surprisingly, using my friends as an example, #1 is much easier than #2.
None of us make fantastic money, but we all make far more than we need. My friends are always broke while I am always afraid of becoming broke and, as such, save. I save compulsively. I dump no less than $175/wk into various savings and investment instruments NOT including the 10% of my pay I defer to my 401(k). I'm not a millionaire, but I'm doing quite well for a 31 year old single male.
Im pretty sure all of my friends have extensive credit card debt and negative net worth.
Who you gonna believe, Trump or your own lying eyes?
Edit: For all the inauguration crowd "truthers" out there (apparently that is now a thing), both of the above photos were taken at 11:15. For those who want further evidence, here is a timelapse of Trump's pathetic inauguration crowd.
This feels ironic given Trump's ideas on registering Muslims or making them carry special IDs.
Yes it is true. John Dower in Embracing Defeat recounts one tale of a woman listening to the broadcast with her whole village, and she couldn't really understand what the Emperor was saying. But, iirc, he also writes that there would generally be at least one person in each village who'd been educated and was able to relay what was being said. In the above story it was someone who had recently come from Tokyo who said "this means that Japan has lost". You can read an excerpt including this story here.
I can wholly recommend Embracing Defeat if you're interested in Japan's reaction to the surrender and subsequent occupation. It is, in my mind, an example of the kind of standard all historical works ought to aspire too. Rather than just give you a narrative, it does as much as it can (imo as much as is humanly possible) to tell you what people experienced on all levels of Japanese society and to a lesser extend within the American occupiers.
I can't answer your other questions, so I'll leave that to those who can.
Well stated.
This is what happens when you hammer people with statements like Hillary Clinton is “an abject psychopathic demon from hell”, who's so "dark and possessed" that both her & Obama "smell like sulfur."[source]
This is what happens when you have coordinated effort to vilify an open-minded segment of the population as "the enemy" ... It intensifies small-mindedness of the opposition.
This is what happens when a foreign power interferes with domestic political power: anarchy.
>I find myself wondering about the people I pass on the street - would they tell me to my face that I'm a worse enemy of America than actual foreign invaders would be because I disagree with them politically?
The proof is in the pudding.
I went to a a friend's house a few days ago where there was a mixed crowd, and while everyone was getting along splendidly and keeping the conversation fun, there were a few errant, angry, offhanded political comments from Trump supporters who for some reason felt it necessary to be dicks about their political point of view.
It isn't about cooperation in their minds. It's combativeness.
It's astroturfing using both sockpuppet accounts, and meatpuppets. NYTimes Magazine had a major article about how this shit is commonplace in Russia. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
Its cool, up until 2010 the AAP had a policy supporting female circumcision, and suggested that American doctors be given permission to perform a ceremonial "nick" on girls.
Ultimately they reversed that after a lot of angry letters. If you are mad, let them know.
Greeks do pretty well under capitalism, wherever they go in the world.
It's just that Greece itself is a corrupt and bureaucratic nightmare, so I don't think you solve that problem by letting the same institutions that screwed everything up take over all the industry.
Obama robbed the Republicans their white POTUS. Can you imagine the rage?!
The proto-Nazi GOP republicans always argue it is same of both side: both sides are smearing each other. In fact what Republicans are doing is utterly poisonous and malicious:
Every accusation they put to Obama were false. The fact are Obama was born in USA, he is a christian, he did not swear into Presidency on a koran, he was not going to take away guns, he was not going to enforce martial law. And there is no 'death panel' in ACA.
However the bad things about Trump, they are all on records and confirmed. Trump refuses to release tax return. Trump discriminates the black people. Trump did not pay his contractors. Trump sexually assaulted. Trump university is a scam. Trump hotels underpay workers. Trump's campaign is helped by Russia. Trump said publicly Mexicans are criminal.
To say both sides are playing the same games is disingenious. The fact that the proto-Nazi GOP are mostly bankrolled by the big corporates and lobbyists like NRA is extremely damaging to the democratic process in USA.
The Senate does not agree: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/health-care-congress-vote-a-rama.html?_r=0
"In its lengthy series of votes, the Senate rejected amendments proposed by Democrats that were intended to allow imports of prescription drugs from Canada, protect rural hospitals and ensure continued access to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, among other causes."
Regarding these two things:
> - On 9/11, for far too long after it was clear flight 11 had been hijacked, no fighters were scrambled to intercept the flights heading toward NY or DC, even though ATC had informed NORAD that planes were being hijacked. However, once planes were scrambled, they flew far below top speed towards NY and DC and their pilots weren't even informed of what was happening in NY nor were they told to intercept the second plane heading toward NYC.
> - There were well-established automatic procedures for intercepting aircraft that were either off course or had lost communication. Yet there were no interceptions of any of the four hijacked aircraft on 9/11. Real nice.
It simply was not as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be. These audio recordings might help you gain a better perspective on just how chaotic 9/11 was for flight responders as well as military personnel.
To be grandfathered in means that you're allowed to keep the deal originally promised to you. For example: if you have a cell phone plan with X amount of data, but your provider decided to change the terms, you may keep the original plan until you decide to "upgrade" or change plans.
It sounds like she's confident that her son will get the same deal, only future generations will get the privatized social security. I'm not sure what the current proposals are (currently checking) but I'd bet that the people ~40 and older will have the current system, while people below will see privatized social security
Edit: Nov 26 2016 NY Times says "Republicans say their proposal would apply to future beneficiaries, not to those in or near retirement." So this is why I say those ~40 and younger currently
Actually he was, he was in litigation of not allowing African Americans to be a tenant in one of his apartments in the 1970's....
Again actions speak louder than words.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html
Eddie Huang's response to this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/14/opinion/sunday/hey-steve-harvey-who-says-i-might-not-steal-your-girl.html
"I told myself that it was all a lie, but the structural emasculation of Asian men in all forms of media became a self-fulfilling prophecy that produced an actual abhorrence to Asian men in the real world."