Ha! Delaney is rather dweeb, but he and Tulsi are about the only non communist. Well, I guess Joe isn't either but then he is trying.
Supposedly, russian bots are at work supporting Tulsi. Not to mention the neo-nazis. That probably explains why you and your fellow travelers seem to like her so much. barfo
Here's the Nazi part. It should go without saying, which means I have to say it: just because the Nazi's said they had a role doesn't mean they did; just because they claim to support her doesn't mean they actually do; nor does any of it mean that she welcomes their attention. Here's the Russian part. Similar disclaimers. barfo
Translation: An outsider had a good debate performance and was the most searched candidate on google so the corporate media has brought out their attack dogs to protect the status quo.
Maybe that's the translation. But I wonder why they'd attack her rather than any of the other outsiders that had a good debate performance? Yang, for instance, is much more of an outsider than a sitting US congressperson, and had arguably a better debate than Tulsi. Also I don't see why the 'corporate media' would be threatened by a candidate polling at 1 or 2%, even if she did have a good debate. What's the threat, even if she were to win the presidency? Is she going to outlaw TV or something? The most-searched part doesn't mean much - Marianne had a lot of searches too, and polls at 0%. It's more a function of lack of name recognition. barfo
She’s the most outspoken against war, period. That’s why she is the biggest threat. The military industrial complex is perhaps the biggest cash cow for powerful private interests. Look at who sponsors Fox, CNN and MSNBC—companies like Boeing and Raytheon. Some of the biggest defense contractors on the planet. You think they might want to get their money’s worth out of their sponsorship? Seems odd to me that these companies don’t pay for traditional commercial break advertisements, yet still are willing to fund these networks to the tune of millions. Tulsi may not be polling high, the corporate news media intends to keep it that way. When one of these status quo-threatening candidates begins to pique the public interest, it’s time for a smear job. Russia?? Come the fuck on.
Why is it ok for companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and YouTube to influence elections, quite literally, with algorithms and selective preferences? Nobody seems to bring up this point when crying about election meddling. Those four companies combined have more power and influence than the Russian government, yet we are in a literal state of hysteria at the prospect of a has-been superpower (allegedly) paying $4000 for some hackers to make memes.
These guy don't believe it. But you can prove it to yourself. Google fails on damn near every query I try where I want to see some stuff not in step with the current liberal talking points. Duckduckgo on the other hand will dig it right out.
Eh, that sounds pretty tin-foil-hat to me. But I'm willing to listen and read. Show me what Boeing and Raytheon spend on Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. If it's an enormous amount, I'll start to be convinced. And I'm not sure that jewishinsider.com really qualifies as 'corporate news media' anyway. Do they get money from Raytheon also? Does the Daily Stormer take orders from the corporate news media? Does RT? barfo
I think big tech, is one of the most dangerous forces on the planet right now. Google, Amazon, Twitter, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, all of them are scary... Edit: For the record, that may be tinfoil hat, but it's just my opinion.
They do have a lot of power, and I wouldn't mind seeing them reined in. But why would they bother to influence the election (especially in the direction of the Democrats)? I guess I could see why they might want to support the party of caveat emptor capitalism... Ask yourself, which party is more likely to regulate them or break them up? And which party is more likely to merely tweet about them? The amount of money the Russians spent is far more than $4000. Read the Mueller report. barfo
Not sure I can take your personal experience with search engines to mean much because - how can I put this gently - you suck at typing. I will stipulate that if Google was inclined to do something untoward, they would have the means to do so. I haven't seen credible reports of their evil intent as it pertains to elections, but I haven't followed the story closely, so happy to look at a link if you or johnnyboy have one. barfo
I don't know if I think they steer elections and stuff (but it wouldn't surprise me), people pay good money to come up on the first page of google searches which I'm kind of ok with. Really I don't think they care about the elections as much as they care money, and they don't seem to care who gives it to them. Though I've got more 1st hand experience with Microsoft then the others.
Biden just told 200 million gun owners he considered them criminals and he would send the military to kill them and their families if elected. So we can be assured he has no chance in hell. So who's left now, anyone?
