Elerond

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-twitter-emoji-crooked-hillary-232647 "Source: Twitter cut out of Trump tech meeting over failed emoji deal Twitter was told it was "bounced" from Wednesday's meeting between tech executives and President-elect Donald Trump in retribution for refusing during the campaign to allow an emoji version of the hashtag #CrookedHillary, according to a source close to the situation. Twitter is one of the few major U.S. tech companies not represented at Wednesday afternoon's Trump Tower meeting attended by, among others, Apple's Tim Cook, Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg and Tesla's Elon Musk — an omission all the more striking because of Trump's heavy dependence on the Twitter platform. With some 17.3 million followers of his account, the president-elect has made Twitter into the de facto press channel of his transition operation." 2017: RIP The Funny Things Thread, replaced by Politics 2017 thread

Star Wars Rogue One, which seemed to be popular, as my local theater was screening it simultaneously on three screens (with total about 900 seats) and they were nearly sold out all their screenings. Movie itself is darkest Star Wars, but it is still full of jokes and comedic scenes and it focus on hope (which isn't that surprising considering that it is New Hope's prelude) One thing that I liked most in the movie was their explanation why Deathstar had such massive design flaw. I liked movie and I would recommend it if you are planning to go see movie in this month.

It is nationalist view of Internet and social media.

It is the new game in town, you don't need facts anymore, you just make narrative that you want and repeat it until people accept it as fact.

Walls don't stop people coming in the country. If you want stop people crossing illegally your borders it would be much better investment to hire more border patrols, because even with walls you need people to patrol those borders in order to prevent people coming over/under/from the side the wall. With eight billion dollars that Trump estimates his wall to cost you could hire about 2-3 additional people to patrol per mile of that border (somewhere between 4000-6000 people) for next 50 years. Which I would estimate to prevent more illegals than any wall alone can and it would even create more permanent jobs than building and maintaining said wall, which would mean that it would also be economically more solid option. On negative side it would not give USA bigger wall than China has and it would not allow criminals and volunteers to be sent to guard the wall like they do in GoT.

Gun violence is rare and gun violence towards strangers is even rarer, but American style gun culture has become more popular in Finland in past couple decades that has increased gun violence, but number of deaths (murders, accidents and suicides combined) that include firearm are still in relative small number, less than 200 deaths in year, although in EU level it is one of the highest when it is proportional population. That latest incident that you speak about was done by known violent criminal who was using legal weapon he loaned from his friend and he seems to have decided to go shoot random women for still unknown reasons in local bar. I don't think that this event will anyway impact in weapon laws in Finland.

There is always the new wave of Canadian tv aka The CW

In my opinion it should not be choice. Everybody needs to serve in capacity they are capable. Which is one of the reason why I support Finland's constitutional obligation to serve.

The question is why would you ever let anybody take bullet for you? Why is your life more valuable than theirs? It is one duty as citizens to protect other citizens, if you need to sacrifice your life in order to ensure that your fellow citizens are safe then that is the sacrifice one needs to make.

Logan's and Billy's narrative is based on Dolores' memories and we have seen her mixing up happenings in her head and seeing Billy in places and times where he wasn't actually.

I think he was noticed, but because only non-host there addition to William was Logan who drank himself under the table, there was no one that could actually prevent William to slaughtering the camp (as host aren't capable to really fight back if quests just want to kill them) and of course park's monitors don't care if quests slaughter hosts.

Divinity Original Sin's budget was over 4 million euros (which was at that time over 5 million dollars). Majority of their budget didn't come from KS as they only collected 1 million dollars to finish the game. Before they started their kickstarter Larian was already build their engine and engine tools in most parts and most of the game itself. Larian also did in their KS for D:OS mistake to promise too much and they had to take back some of those promises during developing the game. Divinity Original Sin 2 also had KS for it, that produced over 2 million dollars and Larian puts in their own money also in that game so it budget is about same as the budget of the first game. There are benefits and draw back in both making own engine and using general purpose engine like unity. And those benefits and draw back vary from project to project and there which is why companies make assessments of their needs and select tool according to them. One thing is certain that Obsidian didn't have their own engine ready when they started their KS and making one from the scratch would have meant additional developing time, as it takes time to build engine. And there is also one thing that needs to be taking in consideration when you compare D:OS to PoE, which is difference in typical salaries in Belgium and California. Come on now, and Obsidian had no spare funds at all. According PCGamer, Larian loaned money from banks, got outside investors and also got the Kickstarter funds. Shows enormous dedication, if nothing else. Larian's "dream RPG" concept does not really overlap with mine, but I enjoyed playing it. Maybe a better comparison to PoE will be Torment: Tides of Numenera (definitely a friendly comparison though, not as rivals), that one took much longer to be sure and still not out. Obisidian put their own money to PoE, they run out KS funds half year or so before release. Also Paradox put their funds in the game. I don't have knowledge how much they put their own funds, but quite lot. As I said Larian developed D:OS years before they brought it to KS where they seek funds to add some features they wanted and create buzz for the game. Larian started D:OS after relative success of Divinity 2 and they were also developing Divinity: Dragon Commander, but they had to release it bit too early to bring money in, so that they could focus in developing D:OS. Obsidian wasn't in best financial situation when they decided to do KS for PoE, it was bit Hail Mary move after cancellation of one of their projects. As side note: Torment: Tides of Numenera was delayed because Wasteland 2 was delayed. It was bit chain effect situation. Said delay gave TToN's design team more time to design things which they think will make game better. And they also build on work that Obsidian did with PoE as they licensed add ons that Obsidian made for Unity in order to use 2d backgrounds etc..

Divinity Original Sin's budget was over 4 million euros (which was at that time over 5 million dollars). Majority of their budget didn't come from KS as they only collected 1 million dollars to finish the game. Before they started their kickstarter Larian was already build their engine and engine tools in most parts and most of the game itself. Larian also did in their KS for D:OS mistake to promise too much and they had to take back some of those promises during developing the game. Divinity Original Sin 2 also had KS for it, that produced over 2 million dollars and Larian puts in their own money also in that game so it budget is about same as the budget of the first game. There are benefits and draw back in both making own engine and using general purpose engine like unity. And those benefits and draw back vary from project to project and there which is why companies make assessments of their needs and select tool according to them. One thing is certain that Obsidian didn't have their own engine ready when they started their KS and making one from the scratch would have meant additional developing time, as it takes time to build engine. And there is also one thing that needs to be taking in consideration when you compare D:OS to PoE, which is difference in typical salaries in Belgium and California.

PISA and other studies have ranked it among best (usually top 3 or top 5) in the world for couple decades now. But those studies are also have their critics.

Teacher unions don't prevent existence of public school system that is relatively equal to all students from all over the country, regardless of their background and wealth and that still offer some of the best education in the world. Also public schools are capable to offer excellent education that can rival even best private schools in world at least in certain circumstances (at least if we believe in the studies about the subject). Problems in school systems aren't easily pinpointed, and they are even harder to fix and lots of problems are rooted in cultural and sociological causes that don't necessary show themselves in statistics or general studies of education systems. And which it is difficult to replicate education system that is proven to work in one country to another country.

At least we can say that upcoming president of USA is quite different compared to current president when it comes to tweeting things

In episode 5 we saw Logan explaining to William how the park is founded by two people from which one killed himself just before park opened to public and how their company's lawyers haven't been able to find any information about him, not even his name. Considering that part of the story happened 15-20 years before Ford build Bernard and in current day Bernard is one of the oldest employees of the park, so they at least try to go with idea that Ford is actually only one addition to some of the hosts that even known Arnold's name. Although Elise seemed to be aware of who Arnold is before she was killed or something by Bernard, but I don't remember if Bernard told her about Arnold in some point.

Geez, I wonder if you right....that could be true. It would be a huge upset and very applicable Real spoiler is that

You have to hand it to him, he's the first troller in chief we've ever had. I seriously doubt he cares about the validity of these statements, he just does this as a tactic and to mess with the media. He seem to want to be Putin lite (lite because I don't see that he will ever carry similar respect).

That is interesting question. Hillary resigned from her position on the foundation in 2015, but Bill and Chelsea still are board members in the foundation. Also I would like to know if foundation's non-profit corporation status factors in somehow. But as Bill was actually only able to found the foundation after his presidency ended I would guess that it could have caused problems for Hillary if she had won.

Recount is systematic tool that is based on state laws that say who, when and how one can ask for recount. Recounted should always be exactly same as original count and if that is not case there is bigger problems than who won the election. Recount systems are in place to prevent human error. Recount isn't good tool to look for foul play, even though in cases like current accusation of hacking of results of electric voting as there are fail safe systems like physical prints of the votes that give ability to count votes manually. But change that recount will ever give result that differ more than few hundred votes from original count are very low. But recount systems exist to ensure that election officials do their job with care. Trump winning or losing don't really matter me personally, because I don't live in USA and I am not citizen of USA so his presidency has little impact to me. I don't agree with him on his social policy issues or economical policies, but those effect mainly only people that live in USA. Things that effect on me are his foreign policy issues, which are actually such that they are beneficial for political party that I support here in Finland. Even though I have relatives in USA, they are economical refugees or descendants of such and additionally they live in Washington state and in my understanding they voted for Gary Johnson, so their candidate isn't in competition of winning anyway. So in short I don't come up reasons in first place why these elections were unfairly. I just take my fun out from pointing out things that happen to people that have previously said opposite things about similar happenings in other elections or in other context and see how they react on the news. In other words I continue to have conversation about things that I find interesting in intellectual level and try to find how different emotional approach to subject effects other people taking part in that conversation. Meaning that my jabs in this thread aren't aimed towards Trump or his win like you interpret it put towards other people on this forum, because that is where I get my fun. And then to other subject that I already mentioned earlier but now from different perspective https://thinkprogress.org/electoral-college-trump-top-lawyers-8a8b6e0ca916#.ftt01jq9u Following is quote from the article behind the above link Electoral College must reject Trump unless he sells his business, top lawyers for Bush and Obama say Ethics lawyers for the last two presidents are in agreement. Members of the Electoral College should not make Donald Trump the next president unless he sells his companies and puts the proceeds in a blind trust, according to the top ethics lawyers for the last two presidents. Richard Painter, Chief Ethics Counsel for George W. Bush, and Norman Eisen, Chief Ethics Counsel for Barack Obama, believe that if Trump continues to retain ownership over his sprawling business interests by the time the electors meet on December 19, they should reject Trump. In an email to ThinkProgress, Eisen explained that “the founders did not want any foreign payments to the president. Period.” This principle is enshrined in Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, which bars office holders from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” This provision was specifically created to prevent the President, most of all, from being corrupted by foreign influences. Virginia Governor Edmund Jennings Randolph addressed the issue directly during a Constitutional debate in June 1788, noting that a violation of the provision by the President would be grounds for impeachment. (Randolph was also a delegate to the Constitutional Convention.) There is another provision against the danger mentioned by the honorable member, of the president receiving emoluments from foreign powers. If discovered he may be impeached. If he be not impeached he may be displaced at the end of the four years. By the ninth section, of the first article, “No person holding an office of profit or trust, shall accept of any present or emolument whatever, from any foreign power, without the consent of the representatives of the people” … I consider, therefore, that he is restrained from receiving any present or emoluments whatever. It is impossible to guard better against corruption.” Eisen said that Trump’s businesses, foreign and domestic, “are receiving a stream of such payments.” A prime example is Trump’s new hotel in Washington DC which, according to Eisen, is “actively seeking emoluments to Trump: payments from foreign governments for use of the hotel.” “The notion that his (through his agents) solicitation of those payments, and the foreign governments making of those payments, is unrelated to his office is laughable,” Eisen added. This problem will be repeated “over and over” again with Trump’s other properties and business interests. The only way to cure this Constitutional violation is for Trump to sell his companies and set up a blind trust before he takes office. Electors should insist that Trump set up a blind trust as a condition of their vote, Eisen said. Another option, however unlikely, is for “Republicans in Congress [to] admit that they endorse Trump’s exploitation of public office for private gain and authorize his emoluments as the Constitution allows.” Eisen’s conclusions are shared by Harvard Law Professor Larry Tribe, one of the nation’s preeminent constitutional scholars. Tribe told ThinkProgress that, after extensive research, he concluded that “Trump’s ongoing business dealings around the world would make him the recipient of constitutionally prohibited ‘Emoluments’ from ‘any King, Prince, or foreign State’ — in the original sense of payments and not necessarily presents or gifts — from the very moment he takes the oath.” The only solution would be to divest completely from his businesses. Failing that, Tribe elaborated on the consequences: Trump would be knowingly breaking his oath of exclusive fealty (under Art. II, Sec.1) to a Constitution whose very first Article (Art. I, Sec. 9) — an Article deliberately designed to prevent any U.S. official,especially the Chief Executive, from being indebted to, or otherwise the recipient of financial remuneration from, any foreign power or entity answerable to such a power — he would be violating as he repeated the words recited by the Chief Justice. Tribe said the violation would qualify as one of the “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” that would require Trump to be “removed from Office.” This is where the Electoral College comes in. Tribe notes that the Electoral College was “originally conceived by Framers like Alexander Hamilton as a vital safeguard against the assumption of the Presidency by an ‘unfit character’ or one incapable of serving faithfully to ‘execute the Office of President of the United States [and] preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.’” “[T]o vote for Trump in the absence of such complete divestment… would represent an abdication of the solemn duties of the 538 Electors,” Tribe said. This view is not a position of disgruntled liberals. Richard Painter, Bush’s Chief Ethics Counsel, was in complete agreement with Tribe and Eisen during a recent appearance on CNN. “I don’t think the electoral college can vote for someone to become president if he’s going to be in violation of the Constitution on day one and hasn’t assured us he’s not in violation,” Painter said. Painter also suggested a cure for the constitutional problem short of total divestment. Trump could agree to have his businesses audited and any payment from a foreign government be turned over to the United States. (Tribe does not think this would actually cure the Constitutional violation.) Thus far, Trump has not shown a willingness to do anything. Trump told the New York Times that he is under no obligation to set up a trust and he “could run my business perfectly, and then run the country perfectly.” Instead, he plans on having his adult children run the company while he retains ownership. Trump told a room full of reporters that “the law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest.” Painter told CNN that his attempts to warn the Trump transition of the legal consequences of their approach, including emails to adviser Kellyanne Conway, are being ignored. Meanwhile, Trump has already sought to leverage the office of the presidency to pressure foreign governments to take actions that would improve his bottom line. Trump admitted that he asked a group of British politicians to kill a proposed wind farm he believed would mar the views at a golf course he owns in Scotland. He reportedly asked the president of Argentina to approve permits for a high-rise in Buenos Aires. (Trump denied the allegation, although his local partner announced the project was moving forward the next day.) Trump has also had his daughter Ivanka, who is supposedly managing his day-to-day business interests, sit in on meetings with heads of state. Eisen views the current situation as dire. If Trump is permitted to be sworn in as president without selling his companies, he says, the country is facing a “wholesale oligarchic kleptocracy of a kind that we have never seen before in our history.”

There was also play piece states in Europe during cold war that successfully kept their indecency and do much better economically. And some of them even have free education and free healthcare systems that are accounted to being some of the best in the world. Those states also had strong willed governance but they succeed not making enemies from either USA or USSR. But of course it is hard to say if what they did was similar, better or lesser demonstration of political independence and sheer willpower, but at end they left their countries in better economical and political positions in the world, which of course don't mean that they necessary did better job.

I mean, we tend to view others through the lens of our existences and we apply our arbitrary standards. Maybe the general Cuban population is happy with their lives? I never hear of any rabble rousing down there. No "cracking down" by the government or stuff like that. They are never going to be a world player, or a powerhouse economy. Maybe things are fine as far as they are concerned? Situation for normal citizens in Cuba was so good that it didn't drive hundreds of thousands people risk their lives on desperate attempts to cross the sea and seek better lives elsewhere (read USA)

I would point out that ability to ask recount of vote is part of same system that made it possible to Trump to win in first place. Recount should be waste of time and money as it should give same result as original count. Speculations that it would not are reason why recount system exist in first place. It is there to ensure people that their will has been listened.

When Trump doubts the results, it's a threat to our democracy. When libs and independants do it, it's perfectly ok. I am so over the media shilling for the left. Trump didn't doubt results, he said that he don't accept any other result than his victory, before election. And isn't Jill green, making her something else than liberal (in US political sense, as she don't support all the same things as those that are counted as liberals) or independent (as she is member of a party)? I would point out that telegraph is conservative and pro establishment (which is currently controlled by conservatives) magazine in UK. But anyway at least they are willing to pay recount themselves, and recount should remove at least some distrust towards voting system and it will not change results if there hasn't been foul play. Meaning that where Trump, GOP and Democrats seem to be willing to question integrity of voting system, Jill & co are willing to but their money to check if people should actually be worried. Which in my opinion is much more admirable thing to do than what we have seen from those other doubters.