Internet with bad intentions

[OKTexas]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

 

[Skylar]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

 

[OKTexas]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

Honestly, I don't use Google search, Yahoo, FB and rarely use Youtube. So I practice what I preach, it was just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

Have you always been a shitposter? If you went to school to be a shitposter, you graduated as validictorian.

Re: Your post I quoted.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

"Have gobbled"? Seriously?

No, the results were obvious when they started skewing the search results. You search for one thing and 50 things just the opposite pop up. I can't put my finger on when exactly it started, I'd say sometime after 2013 or so.

I suppose Google peaked around 2006-2011.

I didn't use Google in the early days, It was Altavista or Yahoo back then. Google sucked then.

Then they got better around 2005, so I used them then.

Now, because they were decent, they've acquired whole swaths of the internet and are manipulating it. That's not good. That's

going downhill fast.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

 

[healthmyths]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

Of course there was no praise for Obama regarding the economy, that was my whole point.

You praise Trump for hitting 4.1% GDP growth for a single quarter, yet when we had GDP growth of 5.1%, 4.9% and 4.7% you were silent as a church mouse.
U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

You praise Trump for the black unemployment rate going from 7.8 to 6.6, but you were silent as a church mouse when it went from 16.1 to 7.9.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

The point is that you are just another biased partisan, you have no objectivity.

My view is that the POTUS has limited effect on any of those things, that our economy moves in waves that do not care who is sitting in the White House.

 

[healthmyths]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

Honestly, I don't use Google search, Yahoo, FB and rarely use Youtube. So I practice what I preach, it was just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

.

Well that explains why you don't see the issues that those of us that frequently use Google have with the biased left leaning search engine.
Here is a example of a biased search result.
A search for "Trump anti-immigrant" with the quotes a specific request.
Then I'll do a search for "Trump anti-illegal immigrant" and compare the results.
55,000 results "Trump anti-immigrant"
VS
509 results "Trump anti-illegal immigrant"

So either the MSM is biased and continues to forget the following FACTS:
A) Trump is MARRIED to an Immigrant! Why then would he be "anti-immigrant"?
B) 90 million plus Americans are either like me related to an "immigrant" or ARE an immigrant that are NOT ILLEGAL immigrants.

Yet the search engine doesn't put all the "anti-illegal immigrant" results OR the biased MSM is presenting Trump as Anti-immigrant is wrong!

 

[healthmyths]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

Of course there was no praise for Obama regarding the economy, that was my whole point.

You praise Trump for hitting 4.1% GDP growth for a single quarter, yet when we had GDP growth of 5.1%, 4.9% and 4.7% you were silent as a church mouse.
U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

You praise Trump for the black unemployment rate going from 7.8 to 6.6, but you were silent as a church mouse when it went from 16.1 to 7.9.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

The point is that you are just another biased partisan, you have no objectivity.

My view is that the POTUS has limited effect on any of those things, that our economy moves in waves that do not care who is sitting in the White House.

You are right!

Those statistics are valid IN SPITE of Obama's truly anti-business, anti-American statements as illustrated by the attached.
Now be an intellectually honest person and admit that Trump's positions are 180º opposite of the below.

You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country.
NONE of these statements are "helpful" to the economy and definitely negative. How can any one other than a socialist as Obama is believe making the USA "dependent" on foreign oil is good for the nation. Or why would ANYONE want to have companies go bankrupt? These are ALL negative statements. So whatever growth occurred it happened IN SPITE OF OBAMA'S ILL INTENTIONS.
Oh one more point about the economy and Obama.
Under Obama government rules and regulations grew at the highest rate in history.
Regulation acts as a stealth tax on the American people and the U.S. economy. The weight of this tax is crushing, with independent estimates of total regulatory costs
exceeding $2 trillion annually—more than is collected in income taxes each year. This estimate, however useful as a general guide, is far from precise and likely modest.
Red Tape Rising 2016: Obama Regs Top $100 Billion Annually

One of the dumbest rules under ACA was if a small business wanted to increase employees to over 50... group health insurance must be offered.
A: Yes, depending on their size. Employers with under 50 FTE employees are not required to offer health insurance atall.Jan 8, 2018
Are employers required by the Affordable Care Act to purchase group insurance for their employees?
Wow... what a way to encourage growth!

If you truly are an honest person like I am you will admit these statements for sure DIDN"T HELP!

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

Of course there was no praise for Obama regarding the economy, that was my whole point.

You praise Trump for hitting 4.1% GDP growth for a single quarter, yet when we had GDP growth of 5.1%, 4.9% and 4.7% you were silent as a church mouse.
U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

You praise Trump for the black unemployment rate going from 7.8 to 6.6, but you were silent as a church mouse when it went from 16.1 to 7.9.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

The point is that you are just another biased partisan, you have no objectivity.

My view is that the POTUS has limited effect on any of those things, that our economy moves in waves that do not care who is sitting in the White House.

You are right!

Those statistics are valid IN SPITE of Obama's truly anti-business, anti-American statements as illustrated by the attached.
Now be an intellectually honest person and admit that Trump's positions are 180º opposite of the below.

You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country.
NONE of these statements are "helpful" to the economy and definitely negative. How can any one other than a socialist as Obama is believe making the USA "dependent" on foreign oil is good for the nation. Or why would ANYONE want to have companies go bankrupt? These are ALL negative statements. So whatever growth occurred it happened IN SPITE OF OBAMA'S ILL INTENTIONS.
Oh one more point about the economy and Obama.
Under Obama government rules and regulations grew at the highest rate in history.
Regulation acts as a stealth tax on the American people and the U.S. economy. The weight of this tax is crushing, with independent estimates of total regulatory costs
exceeding $2 trillion annually—more than is collected in income taxes each year. This estimate, however useful as a general guide, is far from precise and likely modest.
Red Tape Rising 2016: Obama Regs Top $100 Billion Annually

One of the dumbest rules under ACA was if a small business wanted to increase employees to over 50... group health insurance must be offered.
A: Yes, depending on their size. Employers with under 50 FTE employees are not required to offer health insurance atall.Jan 8, 2018
Are employers required by the Affordable Care Act to purchase group insurance for their employees?
Wow... what a way to encourage growth!

If you truly are an honest person like I am you will admit these statements for sure DIDN"T HELP!

I care little about statements made by politicians, nobody I know makes business decisions off of campaign rehetoric.

ObamaCare was far and away the most damaging thing he did to the country, and its harm goes well beyond slowing small business growth.

 

[healthmyths]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

Of course there was no praise for Obama regarding the economy, that was my whole point.

You praise Trump for hitting 4.1% GDP growth for a single quarter, yet when we had GDP growth of 5.1%, 4.9% and 4.7% you were silent as a church mouse.
U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

You praise Trump for the black unemployment rate going from 7.8 to 6.6, but you were silent as a church mouse when it went from 16.1 to 7.9.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

The point is that you are just another biased partisan, you have no objectivity.

My view is that the POTUS has limited effect on any of those things, that our economy moves in waves that do not care who is sitting in the White House.

You are right!

Those statistics are valid IN SPITE of Obama's truly anti-business, anti-American statements as illustrated by the attached.
Now be an intellectually honest person and admit that Trump's positions are 180º opposite of the below.

You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country.
NONE of these statements are "helpful" to the economy and definitely negative. How can any one other than a socialist as Obama is believe making the USA "dependent" on foreign oil is good for the nation. Or why would ANYONE want to have companies go bankrupt? These are ALL negative statements. So whatever growth occurred it happened IN SPITE OF OBAMA'S ILL INTENTIONS.
Oh one more point about the economy and Obama.
Under Obama government rules and regulations grew at the highest rate in history.
Regulation acts as a stealth tax on the American people and the U.S. economy. The weight of this tax is crushing, with independent estimates of total regulatory costs
exceeding $2 trillion annually—more than is collected in income taxes each year. This estimate, however useful as a general guide, is far from precise and likely modest.
Red Tape Rising 2016: Obama Regs Top $100 Billion Annually

One of the dumbest rules under ACA was if a small business wanted to increase employees to over 50... group health insurance must be offered.
A: Yes, depending on their size. Employers with under 50 FTE employees are not required to offer health insurance atall.Jan 8, 2018
Are employers required by the Affordable Care Act to purchase group insurance for their employees?
Wow... what a way to encourage growth!

If you truly are an honest person like I am you will admit these statements for sure DIDN"T HELP!

I care little about statements made by politicians, nobody I know makes business decisions off of campaign rehetoric.

ObamaCare was far and away the most damaging thing he did to the country, and its harm goes well beyond slowing small business growth.

You are kidding me? Nobody you know then amounts to a hill of beans in making business decisions "WITHOUT" considering campaign rhetoric (not rehetoric)!

You don't think utilities planning which take YEARS to put into place didn't pay attention to Obama's "bankrupt them" statements?

Or oil/gas exploration companies want to put any money into future explorations (again evidently you aren't aware of how much "lead time" is required) if statements by
Obama to Brazil "we'll be your best customer" were an indication of Obama's intentions.

Most successful business people (obviously you don't know any...) DO take into consideration campaign rhetoric!

And yes I will agree with you regarding the destructive aspect of ACA. Again based on CAMPAIGN rhetoric though and 7 just 7 Democrat congress believed the crap regarding Obama's "46 million uninsured Americans" as you can see below. It was FURTHER proven by the same guy who told people Jonathan Gruber architect of ACA..
"And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass."
ObamaCare architect: 'Stupidity' of voters helped bill pass

Gruber proved the 2nd point of the below with the data from ACA enrollment.

So Golfing Gator with your 2 to 3 minutes perusal time, why don't you see where you can admit you were wrong about Obama having ANY positive affect on the economy as I agreed with you I was wrong about the 400% black enterprises and we both agree that Obama's campaign rhetoric DID affect people's lives dramatically.
And while I agree with you regarding Trump being "oafish", "obstreperous" a braggart, all the characteristics you DON"T like Trump...maybe you can agree that he is NOT the
typical polished smooth suave politically correct President like Obama. And as such he is getting things done that were antithetical to Obama! Obama apologized for America.
Trump loves his family (like I do). He loves his country (like I do). And he saw where Obama and the "smooth" politically correct politicians were taking this country.
So look beyond Trump's personal characteristics and look as a business person does... IS Trump accomplishing what his "campaign rhetoric" laid out?
Is Trump truly "Anti-immigrant"? Is Trump truly racist...remember his daughter married a Jew!!!

 

[TheDude]

A) Confused?
Tell that to these folks.The Obama economy in 10 charts
Show me where Obama ever had 4.2%????

View attachment 213838

U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

Your graphs show only whole calendar years, the problem with that is that Trump has not had a calendar year over 3% yet. The 4.1% is for only one quarter.

B) Let's check out the 400% fact.. And you are right! That was a totally unrealistic and I have to admit I didn't research it. No way possible for businesses to grow
from 2.6 million black owned in 2012 to 13 million! I was wrong.

Thanks.

C) Black unemployment... Where did you get your figures because this comes from Current Population Survey (CPS)
The below shows 2 years when Black unemployment INCREASED!
So looking the below chart... Trump had a bigger reduction than Obama! Where'd you get YOUR facts???

I got my figures from your link. Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

You used Dec 2009 as your starting point.

View attachment 213839

Dec 2009 the black unemployment rate was 16.1%. In Dec 2016, Obama's last full month it was 7.9% That is a drop of 8.2%. Between Dec 2009 and Dec 2016 there are 72 months. 8.2/72=.114%. (sorry my first post was off, i was too low).

Trump's first month was Jan 2017, black unemployment was 7.8%, today it is 6.6%. that is a drop of 1.2% over 19 months. 1.2/19=0.632.

So, using your own starting point of Dec 2009, black unemployment dropped an average of .114% per month during the Obama years, and 0.632% per month during the Trump years.

Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him.

You're comparing apples and oranges, but I mostly agree with your last point.

I am comparing economic data over the last 8 years, how is that apples to oranges?

Economics, math, data and variables dude. In Trump's case it's not possible for black unemployment to have dropped 8.2%, because it started at 7.8%. The higher the unemployment number the greater possibility for decrease. Additionally, unemployment numbers are a guide only. It doesn't account for those who have dropped out of the market, and I believe it only accounts for those recently unemployed.

 

[healthmyths]

I tell you what.
You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country....

have you been drinking?

I say "Now, before you go getting all silly on me, I am not giving Obama any amount of credit of this, it was just part of the recovery that was going to happen with or without him." and your response to me is for me to show you how Obama helped? really?

This is exactly what you wrote in a previous thread...
YOU SAID: "Again, I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples of you praising Obama for the very things you are praising Trump for? Right?"

There was NO praise for Obama regarding the economy.
But as usually you make a statement without any proof.

Also I was an intellectually honest enough person to admit I was wrong about the 400% growth in black businesses.
But that's what honest people can do.
Again in your words...I am sure if I looked I will find lots of examples where you were intellectually honest enough to admit a mistake...right?

Of course there was no praise for Obama regarding the economy, that was my whole point.

You praise Trump for hitting 4.1% GDP growth for a single quarter, yet when we had GDP growth of 5.1%, 4.9% and 4.7% you were silent as a church mouse.
U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

You praise Trump for the black unemployment rate going from 7.8 to 6.6, but you were silent as a church mouse when it went from 16.1 to 7.9.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

The point is that you are just another biased partisan, you have no objectivity.

My view is that the POTUS has limited effect on any of those things, that our economy moves in waves that do not care who is sitting in the White House.

You are right!

Those statistics are valid IN SPITE of Obama's truly anti-business, anti-American statements as illustrated by the attached.
Now be an intellectually honest person and admit that Trump's positions are 180º opposite of the below.

You tell me what amongst the following statements by Obama would be helpful to the economy and to the country.
NONE of these statements are "helpful" to the economy and definitely negative. How can any one other than a socialist as Obama is believe making the USA "dependent" on foreign oil is good for the nation. Or why would ANYONE want to have companies go bankrupt? These are ALL negative statements. So whatever growth occurred it happened IN SPITE OF OBAMA'S ILL INTENTIONS.
Oh one more point about the economy and Obama.
Under Obama government rules and regulations grew at the highest rate in history.
Regulation acts as a stealth tax on the American people and the U.S. economy. The weight of this tax is crushing, with independent estimates of total regulatory costs
exceeding $2 trillion annually—more than is collected in income taxes each year. This estimate, however useful as a general guide, is far from precise and likely modest.
Red Tape Rising 2016: Obama Regs Top $100 Billion Annually

One of the dumbest rules under ACA was if a small business wanted to increase employees to over 50... group health insurance must be offered.
A: Yes, depending on their size. Employers with under 50 FTE employees are not required to offer health insurance atall.Jan 8, 2018
Are employers required by the Affordable Care Act to purchase group insurance for their employees?
Wow... what a way to encourage growth!

If you truly are an honest person like I am you will admit these statements for sure DIDN"T HELP!

I care little about statements made by politicians, nobody I know makes business decisions off of campaign rehetoric.

ObamaCare was far and away the most damaging thing he did to the country, and its harm goes well beyond slowing small business growth.

Campaign rhetoric working!!!

Under Trump's PRO energy policies...
The Energy Information Administration announced this month that the port district of Houston-Galveston began exporting more crude oil than it imported for the first time.
Houston-Galveston exports in April surpassed imports by 15,000 barrels a day, and by May the difference had grown to 470,000 barrels a day.
That port district handles more than half of all U.S. crude exports, which hit a record of two million barrels a day in May.
Opinion | The Oil Export Boom

Now remember what OBAMA said about oil IMPORTS... Obama proudly proclaims.. "And so that's part of the reason you never heard me say, 'drill, baby, drill.'"
Obama Defends Offshore Drilling But Won't Say 'Drill Baby Drill' | HuffPost

In August 2009, Obama announced he was giving $2 billion in U.S. tax dollars to state-owned oil company Petroleo Brasileiro SA of Brazil for offshore oil drilling.
At the same time, George Soros increased his stake $811 million in the same oil company. According to Bloomberg Press, 22 percent of the $3.68 billion of stocks and American depositary receipts of Petroleo Brasileiro are held by Soros Fund Management LLC.
George Soros - Conservapedia

Obama on March 21,2011 tells the Brazilians:
“We want to help you with the technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely.
And when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”
Drill, Brazil, Drill?

 

[healthmyths]

Tell me again all you defenders of "unbiased" Google, etc. that they are "fair and balanced"!

Across the four searches, fourteen news organizations ranked in the top five:
CNN, Politico, Fortune, The Chicago Tribune, Business Insider, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, CNBC, ABC, Time, The Los Angeles Times, HuffPost, and USA Today. …
Together, these outlets made up

79% of the total number of news recommendations suggested to searchers.

The number of recommendations was unevenly distributed among these organizations as well, with the five most prominent outlets—
The New York Times, CNN, Politico, The Washington Post and HuffPost—
making up half (49%) of the 1,653 total recommended links.

Study: Google Pushes Liberal News in Top 5 Search Suggestions

 

[OKTexas]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

Honestly, I don't use Google search, Yahoo, FB and rarely use Youtube. So I practice what I preach, it was just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

.

Well that explains why you don't see the issues that those of us that frequently use Google have with the biased left leaning search engine.
Here is a example of a biased search result.
A search for "Trump anti-immigrant" with the quotes a specific request.
Then I'll do a search for "Trump anti-illegal immigrant" and compare the results.
55,000 results "Trump anti-immigrant"
VS
509 results "Trump anti-illegal immigrant"

So either the MSM is biased and continues to forget the following FACTS:
A) Trump is MARRIED to an Immigrant! Why then would he be "anti-immigrant"?
B) 90 million plus Americans are either like me related to an "immigrant" or ARE an immigrant that are NOT ILLEGAL immigrants.

Yet the search engine doesn't put all the "anti-illegal immigrant" results OR the biased MSM is presenting Trump as Anti-immigrant is wrong!




View attachment 213951

View attachment 213952

That's nothing new, the MSM has been portraying anyone who is against illegal immigration as anti-immigrant, they make no distinctions. Looks to me like the searches are just reflecting the MSM and their parrots, in general.

.

 

[healthmyths]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

Honestly, I don't use Google search, Yahoo, FB and rarely use Youtube. So I practice what I preach, it was just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

.

Well that explains why you don't see the issues that those of us that frequently use Google have with the biased left leaning search engine.
Here is a example of a biased search result.
A search for "Trump anti-immigrant" with the quotes a specific request.
Then I'll do a search for "Trump anti-illegal immigrant" and compare the results.
55,000 results "Trump anti-immigrant"
VS
509 results "Trump anti-illegal immigrant"

So either the MSM is biased and continues to forget the following FACTS:
A) Trump is MARRIED to an Immigrant! Why then would he be "anti-immigrant"?
B) 90 million plus Americans are either like me related to an "immigrant" or ARE an immigrant that are NOT ILLEGAL immigrants.

Yet the search engine doesn't put all the "anti-illegal immigrant" results OR the biased MSM is presenting Trump as Anti-immigrant is wrong!




View attachment 213951

View attachment 213952

That's nothing new, the MSM has been portraying anyone who is against illegal immigration as anti-immigrant, they make no distinctions. Looks to me like the searches are just reflecting the MSM and their parrots, in general.

.

And that's so true. The MSM does that and more!

 

[Flopper]

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...iggest-censor-and-its-power-must-be-regulated

Google is a public owned company that must turn a profit, not a government utility. Of course they censor, if they didn't they would loose business to other search engines.
To be completely fair and uncensored, Google would have to display results that match keywords randomly with no attempt to filter nor to anticipate the desired result of a search. There would be no suggested searches, no elimination of junk web sites, no attempt to provide recognized authoritative sources, no attempt to filter what most users would consider objectionable.

Google is the most popular search engine in the world because if finds the information people are looking for faster. Anyone that wants to avoid Google filtering can use other search engines such as DuckDuckGo, Bing, Yahoo, Dogpile, Gigablast, etc. There are dozens of them and they don't cost a dime plus there are specialized search engines. I use them occasionally because they have some features Google does not have and they use different algorithms for filtering results, thus you get different results using the same key words.

 

[Flopper]

The majority of the major news media prints the facts of the day. For both AP and Reuters to be labeled as "leftie" news organizations ought to show you that the reason the President is accusing Google of this is because he has already decided all the major news media is "leftist." It's not. But it has to report what the Pres says and does and when he screws it up left and right, how do you want it to be reported? Not reported at all?

This great "we'll look into it" by the administration will be about as earth shattering as the Committee to Investigate Illegal Voting. There is nothing to look into.

A search engine that services over a hundred nations in dozens of languages and over a billion users is going to step on some toes if it uses any algorithm to make it's service useful and not offend it's users.

Google's algorithm favors heavily used sites. Google also favors authoritative sites. It measure authority by number links to a page. For example if there are a hundred thousand links found on the web to a New York Times story, then the page containing that story will get a much higher rating than pages with smaller number of links and thus is likely to appear near the top of search results. It the algorithm biased? Yes, but not based on content.

Then there is the content filtering which lowers ranking or blocks certain key words and phrases searches. For example, if you search on the word sex, you won't likely see any porn regardless of their authority or hits. Now if you add XXX or words associated with porn sites, then you see lots porn in results. Google does this because they believe that is what their users want.

Google will also block searches that they consider goes against their company policies, legal demands, or various government censorship laws. Remember Google is international and what might be acceptable in one country may not be in another.

 

[Flopper]

Unless your head is buried in the sand, those running the internet (Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.) are partisan and weed out conservative views. I know first hand, because Yahoo censors conservative view points. We receive most of our info. from the internet, and they're exercising thought control.

The internet and media are primarily responsible for building the snowflake. From games to Emojis to propaganda, it's taught us how to be soft, how to be a victim, and how to practice intellectual dishonesty.

Your thoughts?

Simple fix, vote with your feet, find alternative services. They'll get the message or go out of business.

.

But would it? Remember, Trump and his supporters, without evidence, have gobbled the claim that Google is 'rigging' search results.

They can't back this up with evidence. It feels true. So they believe.

How does Google write an algorithm to compensate for the fact free *emotion* of conservatives....especially those that will believe any random tale they read on twitter? Lead by a man that lies without thinking and makes up nonsense on pretty much a daily basis.

Today's baseless batshit? Trump accused Holt of NBC of 'fudging' the interview tape. The Evidence to back the claim? Jack shit. Yet conservatives just nod and grin, believing whatever Trump tells them to without evidence.

Um, how do you 'get the message' on imaginary nonsense backed by nothing like Trump's endless stream of delusional accusations?

I don't believe there is political bias built into the Google's search algorithm. What is biased are political and news web sites. That is not Google's fault. Google is going to display search results based primarily on hits, authority, and payment for listings.