Not only is that a stupid thing to do, it's even stupider at a Trump rally where violence is baked in.
If Trump wins...and one event like this happens, it's all that he will need to drop laws that will make the Patriot act look like the rules of Scrabble...sigh.
__________________
"WHAT HAVE WE EVER DONE TO DESERVE THIS??? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US????" -Oiler Fan
"It was a debacle of monumental proportions." -MacT
I typed in 'Hillary Clinton crimes' into Google and it brought up a whole bunch of supposed crimes she committed. I then went to Yahoo, typed in the same thing and it brought up a whole bunch of supposed crimes she committed, many links were the exact same.
So what's the big scandal here? That people are upset they have to type in the entire thing?
Google's auto complete function typically supplies you with the most popular searches that other people are using. It helps you find relevant results. So when I type in something like "Amway", it comes up with 5 suggestions:
1) Amway is bad
2) Amway scam
3) Amway review
4) Amway center
5) Amway cult
Based on those results, if I had no prior knowledge or limited knowledge of Amway, I am probably coming away with a negative view of Amway as a company just by seeing the auto-complete function on google and may alter my perception because of it.
Now you still might be thinking "no big deal", which is your choice, but these small actions can influence voters. Here is an article which talks about the level of influence this can have on elections:
We present evidence from five experiments in two countries suggesting the power and robustness of the search engine manipulation effect (SEME). Specifically, we show that (i) biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more, (ii) the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups, and (iii) such rankings can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation. Knowing the proportion of undecided voters in a population who have Internet access, along with the proportion of those voters who can be influenced using SEME, allows one to calculate the win margin below which SEME might be able to determine an election outcome.
Google's auto complete function typically supplies you with the most popular searches that other people are using. It helps you find relevant results. So when I type in something like "Amway", it comes up with 5 suggestions:
1) Amway is bad
2) Amway scam
3) Amway review
4) Amway center
5) Amway cult
Based on those results, if I had no prior knowledge or limited knowledge of Amway, I am probably coming away with a negative view of Amway as a company just by seeing the auto-complete function on google and may alter my perception because of it.
Now you still might be thinking "no big deal", which is your choice, but these small actions can influence voters. Here is an article which talks about the level of influence this can have on elections:
We present evidence from five experiments in two countries suggesting the power and robustness of the search engine manipulation effect (SEME). Specifically, we show that (i) biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more, (ii) the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups, and (iii) such rankings can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation. Knowing the proportion of undecided voters in a population who have Internet access, along with the proportion of those voters who can be influenced using SEME, allows one to calculate the win margin below which SEME might be able to determine an election outcome.
Somebody just tried to rush the stage and secret service rushed Trump away. Doesn't look like the person got anywhere near the stage. People chanting USA USA as the guy was escorted away. https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/7...238912/video/1
I would not be surprised to learn that this was staged.
I would presume that there would be decent security around such an event where there is a presidential candidate, that bringing a weapon past security (also reported as unconfirmed) would be unlikely possible.
I would not be surprised to learn that this was staged.
I would presume that there would be decent security around such an event where there is a presidential candidate, that bringing a weapon past security (also reported as unconfirmed) would be possible.
The whole thing stinks.
The problem with it being staged is the crowd would have to be in on it, or the actor is in serious danger. Also, if it were staged the cops would have to release that information to the public after interrogation which is bad news for the Trump campaign.
The problem with it being staged is the crowd would have to be in on it, or the actor is in serious danger. Also, if it were staged the cops would have to release that information to the public after interrogation which is bad news for the Trump campaign.
It is business as usual. He points out a protester, gets security to take him out. Not the first time at his events.
To heighten the drama, he has two of his guys rush him out.
Then he returns heroically, praises the secret service, and says it isn't going to be easy.
Try it for yourself and see. Simply put, Google is not showing results that people are searching for in their auto-complete bar when it comes to Hillary in particular. There is also some serious conflicts of interest when it comes to Eric Schmidt working for the Hillary campaign.
Wow. Just wow. Do you have any idea how Google predictive search works, or do you just buy into every conspiracy theory floated?
But you'd have to have the SS and SWAT members in on it. Or if they weren't then the fake attacker would be risking his life plus will probably be in jail for a while.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Someone said law enforcement said there was no gun, but haven't seen that confirmed anywhere. I agree if there had been a gun found I doubt they would have just started the rally up again.
You can hear the one guy say what sounds like 'they're calling gun' when he grabs Trump, so maybe the crowd was shouting gun. At 52 seconds.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
@marcambinder
A Homeland Security official confirms the @ABC report: no gun found, crowd panicked as a guy tried to raise a sign; someone shouted "gun."
But you'd have to have the SS and SWAT members in on it. Or if they weren't then the fake attacker would be risking his life plus will probably be in jail for a while.
Doesn't need to be a fake attacker. Claims of attack not validated as far as I know.
It was reported that Trump pointed out a protester, security removed him. Last protester I saw him do that to was actually a supporter but not of his same ethnicity.
Add 2 guys in suits to escort Trump away.
I have not yet seen anything to say this is anything more.
Let's see what comes out about the new John Wilkes Booth
@marcambinder
A Homeland Security official confirms the @ABC report: no gun found, crowd panicked as a guy tried to raise a sign; someone shouted "gun."
So in fact, it could have just been dramatics after all.
@marcambinder
A Homeland Security official confirms the @ABC report: no gun found, crowd panicked as a guy tried to raise a sign; someone shouted "gun."
It just goes to show you then mentality of those people.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Couple of guys at the scene. Saying no one saw a weapon. At least most of the media has refrained from calling it an assassination attempt. *Glares at CNN*
