Yesterday, between classes I created an audio titled Why I will NEVER vote Democrat again. Immediately after I published this art I realized that one should never say never. In St Paul, MN, there really are only one party of candidates: Progressive. So, Yes I will vote Democrat again, very soon.
The real issue of not voting Democrat as much would be that I do not enjoy big government. Too many hoops to jump through, too much micromanagement. I would assume people who vote Democrat would want less government and more individual freedoms, because we are all unique, but I may be wrong.
That’s about the only reason I have for never voting for a certain party… oh, and free market, and universal healthcare, and the, again, the economy.
Today is Monday, Seth Godin has me wondering how good of a boss I am. The Christmas tree is set, the Vikings won, and this week we will go below zero. I am thankful for the cold because hopefully it will curtail global warming. Again, a good boss would have me teaching 24×7 and making extra when I am having a beer or making a puzzle.
8/25/2019–USA, In a world where perhaps the healthiest person is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and if Trump uses sarcasm or sneezes he is certainly mentally ill and totally unfit for office, the media has again reported accurately and without clear bias on current political situations.
Mainstream news media suggests and absolutely verifies with completely reliable unnamed sources that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, supreme court justice, is still the world’s healthiest person, ever, and in immaculate health, without question. This accurate information is very important for the average American citizen and the abnormal.
Justice Ginsburg’s bill of good health is very beneficial and incredibly necessary information for America, especially all Democrats, and their partners in the mainstream news media–who are also all Democrats in reality, in relation to supreme court nominations and the upcoming 2020 Election.
The new midlife crisis is professing your hatred for the president like a five-year old via social media for his assumed hatred as explained to you by a news media narrated and directed by advertisers.
I’ve been told that in order to understand how a person is truly feeling in a photograph, cover up their mouth and look at their eyes. The eyes don’t lie. What do you see? The same may be true with the press and their relationship with Donald Trump; cover up the mouth, the headline, and what do you see? Forget the bad click-bait leads and negative coverage, who’s there: Donald Trump.
Perhaps, if Trump wasn’t in the news people would be bored, many papers wouldn’t be read, journalists wouldn’t get paid, and advertisements wouldn’t get seen. This would change the industry greatly. Every newspaper and network every day would have to fill that Trump spot with something else, something more catchy. Social Media too. In relation to that, I don’t think it would be possible.
Now, think back, has any other President of the United States of America ever had the press set a day nationwide to respond to an idea he may have had on any ordinary day, has that happened? What other president had millions out in the streets passionate, screaming about their opinions, beliefs, holding signs wearing hats or tearing down statues, just because they were the president? I don’t think any other president… Not like this.
It’s amazing what our hatred blinds us to. Perhaps, Trump is making people more political, making people stand up and out for what they truly believe, and making people better because they are doing for themselves. Perhaps he is making each of us greater again.
Mundane, mediocre, and meek leaders would not have people taking such action, would not have us so motivated to make change. That is bold, that is planned. And that is no accident.
Trump is not asking anyone to write these stories or voice their opinion or protest… They are doing it for him, they are doing it in his name, oddly.
Read The Art of the Deal and you will understand your president better. You will have insight that has been in our universe for the last twenty years. I will share some of that knowledge right now. Trump says you can pay for good press. You can pay for mediocre press. But bad press is free. And still good. How much bad press is out there today, for free? Just Google the name Trump. What do you find?
Further, the news media and journalists should thank Trump for making writing articles easy again, selling news easy again. Most Trump articles are basically saying Trump did something outrageous, hateful, or both, feel disgusted. They are usually the same format: click-bait title, something bad about Trump, how you should feel, or what it actually means, etc… There is a cycle. Watch closely. Trump made journalists not try or think again.
We are getting standard boilerplate interpretations from the news media and social media about how we should think and feel about an individual, Trump. They are not asking us to use our own better judgement, to think deeper on a subject, they are telling us, same. We must obey and believe he is what they say. The topic: him, Trump. We are asked to believe in this idea about this person.
Now I am wondering how do you brainwash people, news media? Repition? Exaggeration? Groupthink? Herd mentality? Say bad things about someone? Who’s the Shepard? Who’s the sheep?
As unfortunate as it sounds to his critics, the news media, social media, and the world love Trump–they subconsciously seek him out, he makes them money. People buy what people are selling when Trump is in it. Look at the paper, who is in every paper? Look at the TV, who is on every channel? Trump.
He is the ultimate spectacle. People write endless op eds about Trump signaling and professing their obsession, no matter the bias. (This essay is about Trump.) There are college courses based on him, no matter the persuasion. There are entire talk shows, news segments, and caucuses solely dedicated to him, no matter the slant. And still he is the main character. That is a HUGE presence created for someone by those who despise him, unaware that visibility, in our great time and great nation is most powerful.
This Trump obsession is apparent, visibly, tangibly, and deeply disturbing. The news story and Trump are interchangeable, and have been for the last two years. We do not go a day without. Now, talk about how I’m wrong about who, you guessed it: Trump. More ubiquity, you can see it right there.
So, don’t be mad at Donald Trump if you don’t like him, be mad at yourself for looking for him, be mad at your news source for pushing his product 24/7. That’s what free will is all about; this is a free market, we live in it.
Don’t go looking for snakes, as someone once said. Ah, but snakes get people’s attention and sell papers, sell stories.
The Trump obsession may simply be supply and demand of the greatest spectacle in human history, Donald Trump. Any conscious media will not miss out on such a payday. Prepare for four more years of it, money talks; networks want to be paid. If you want something different, contact your media and ask for better, sit down and talk to that Letter to the Editor person and let them know they are furthering the problem by discussing it exclusively. If they don’t change, then you might know what is true and what is not true.
If you want something you have to ask for it, or write for it. I believe Donald Trump wants it. He wants America to be great. He wants to be talked about nonstop. He wants to be in our minds and in print every day. He tweets constantly, ad nauseam. Do you want to help him get it, or do you want to help yourself? I believe the media knows what they want and what they love to report on, even if their mouths don’t match their eyes. They want more of Trump, they know he is money. And he knows it too.
Do you consider yourself a helpful person? If so, please think about helping me by contributing to the writing on my site.
Before you read this thesis watch the entire video that I share with you above. Watch it for the information about Facebook and social media, not because you dislike or like a politician, or for politically motivated reasons.
Observe this video from a marketing and social media engineering point of view. That is how the below thesis is posed. This is in no way a political statement. This is purely for observational purposes.
Thank you for reading in advance. Also, you can donate to keep my blog current, and the information relevant. Any amount helps, even a dollar. Click the donate button. You rock!
“Parscale attributed the success of his vast social media presence to using the assistance offered by companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat and Google. He said that because the Trump campaign intended to spend $100 million on social media, companies in that area were prepared to assist the campaign in using that money effectively.
“The campaign poured money into Facebook, sending thousands of versions of tweaked ads to maximize response. Then it won the presidency by a margin narrow enough that Parscale (and Facebook) can justifiably take credit.”
The contentious 2016 United States Presidential Election may have been won with a $100 million dollars, a “secret weapon”, and Facebook when used together. Or it may have been won by any other boilerplate theory out there that can be backed by anyone, by any entity, with any statistics.
Either way, for all intents and purposes, the “secret weapon” in this theory is Brad Parscale, and his tool was/is Facebook.
Perhaps, I want to believe that the 2016 election was won honestly and fairly because I am a thoughtful American citizen and I have hope, but the more I look at the events, the more I see glaring inconsistencies in media stories of Russian Collusion and a general disbelief or ineffective attempt to look at the bigger picture objectively. Social media played a HUGE role in this particular election, perhaps, as much so, or more, as any outside forces.
I aver, when looking at possibilities, generally we must look at everything, even information that has been overlooked from 10/08/2017 about Brad Parscale’s use of Facebook’s data/advertising tools to amass a successful, though debated, campaign–one which basically won the presidency, putting his candidate in the White House.
Moreover, to me, the most concerning part of imagining, assessing, or thinking openly that Facebook et al. was used, with money, to command an election in such a way is that people still use the platform religiously every day without question as they cast blame/credit elsewhere. Perhaps this is being oblivious, or willfully blind. It can’t be Facebook, right?
Reality check: It definitely can be Facebook. The reality is an inordinate amount of people are plugged into something (social media) that they wholly do not understand (I am in that boat), and marketers, salespeople, and data analysts are taking full advantage of that reality. (Beknownst, unbeknownst to all.) And how they do that advantageous venture is with huge, huge sums of purposed money.
Perhaps, purposed money and novel strategy, with a “secret weapon”, is what won the 2016 presidential election, along with a special tool of course: Facebook (when utilized by Brad Parscale). Perhaps there are other entities pulling strings, but Parscale and his efforts warrant consideration, and notation.
Beyond Parscale and social media, the secondary key in this thesis is the $100 million dollars went to marketing–the unprecedentedly complex advertising itself, and the lack of the Clinton campaign to embed Facebook and other social media employees within their campaign offices, as the Trump campaign did. And this may have swayed the election. I consider this maneuver to be out of touch in the age of social media. That’s glaringly foolish, in my opinion.
It’s like going to the World Series and leaving all your big hitters on the bench, extremely odd for a veteran politician…
Now, after these events, it sounds obvious to have key workers from these social media entities within your organization. Have one of the most influential and most recognized companies on your side in the most important race on the planet, possibly. Don’t leave much to chance. That is not genius, that is obvious. It wasn’t to some, clearly.
Further, not having social media on your side on your account seems very out of touch with reality. Even if you despise Facebook and are not a member of the brand, you have to recognize that it is a powerful tool for connecting people everywhere. For example, I am not on Facebook anymore but I realize it’s marketing potential, (I also realize at Christmastime that my parents and in-laws like to connect with high school friends. I don’t know why… I use email).
Bringing it home, the video above is not only astonishing to me, because I am just learning about Brad Parscale, and because of the information it gives on the key marketing tactics used within social media to win an election and manipulate a demographic of people is vast and accurate, but this technology seems potentially dangerous. The scary part in any situation is that money seems to make that happen. If money wanted you to be a modern zombie or a group think solider it would already be happening. And maybe you wouldn’t know. You’d just go with it and update your status. Probably not though, you are smart. 🙂
Accordingly, maybe someday we can better predict the future of everything, that is my prediction for the future.
For what it’s worth, with much of the media linking Parscale to Russia and basically making him look like a Sith lord in article photos, I think he could certainly be a critical part of understanding the 2016 presidential election, and definitely to harnessing momentum in future elections. At least his methods are very straightforward, in appearance, and no-nonsense. Definitely they are of interest.
His use of social media tools to reach an audience with a campaign message has never been done before at such a level, and he has worked on “zero” elections before.
In general, that utilization of resources–if that is what it truly was, is progressive and inspiring to me. He has been overlooked; and he is right there in front of us. As is the power of social media, but we have other excuses. Russia is scary and influenced the election. Trump may have cheated, etc. Any narrative is believable. But look at how many people around you are on Facebook clicking around, social media, exposing themselves to it all. Marketing is more common than the other alleged threats. I hope you like this post.
What influence. What money and focused ideas can buy.
Last night I saw a movie for the first time in years. That movie was Annihilation. I had little prior knowledge of the film before seeing it. I didn’t see a trailer. I didn’t read a review. I just went and saw it with my wife. Here is the gist.
As a disclaimer I will admit I enjoyed this film. I enjoyed going to a movie for the first time in a long time. It was great, minus the idiot on his phone in the row in front of us. It was a pleasure. Thank you for reading my review of Annihilation.
Best Shot: The best shot in this film, aside from all of the visually stunning flora and fauna, is at about the midpoint when the team of experts stumbles upon a mess hall. They find a video of some sick death by a cadet before them. The crew finds the scene of his death has turned an abandoned swimming pool into an explosion of colors and what appears to be mold. This grotesquely morbid end creates creates and aesthetic I have rarely seen in films. Like zombie ants with fungus shooting from their heads. Like mummies on display. This was the best shot in my opinion. Although everything seems to sparkle and shimmer in alien phosphorescence.
Worst Shot: Spoiler alert the worsts shot is at the end when the alien in the lighthouse pirouettes the main character. It’s far too long. Far too played out. I have seen in before. It adds very little. We know that the alien is trying to mirror the humans before this point in the film. Also, the shots of the extra-marital affair involving the main character. This affair does nothing to move the plot.
Plot: Perhaps we have reached a point in the sci-fi cannon when all ideas have been exhausted to the point at which we just basically are trying to understand us, while realizing there is nothing out there beyond us. Perhaps. The pedestrian alien in Annihilation are basically the same alien in Signs, or any other cartoon alien–except for with a smaller head and limited facial features. Aliens are still somewhat green and still somewhat humanoid and thinking. However, these aliens may not understand the ideological concept of “want”, “wanting”, or “preference”. The just do. They just change. For whatever reason, it’s never really explained.
Takeaway: Annihilation is visually appealing, it’s visually appealing like Prometheus. The film offers moments of tender human relations, marriage, and longing. It also bring a bit of horror with a monster bear and the idea of going nuts in a world where, or in a bubble–ironically for our times, a bubble, where those around you are going clearly mad. Changing from one thing to another irregardless of the individuals intentions. These things happen. Like biology, I guess. Near the end of the movie the main point shows through: things change for the simple reason that they can. Outside alien entities change us for their reasons and their reasons are unknown. That’s basically it. Annihilation poses more questions than it answers while still making me thing a little bit but not offering much novel idea. It was an entertaining flick, but it has some explaining to do, and of course a work cited may be necessary in the credits.
After being put on injured reserve (IR) last season, Aaron Rodgers tenure with the Packers was put in limbo. Now, after appearing in numerous State Farm commercials Rodgers’ fate with the Green Bay Packers is rumored to be incredibly uncertain at best and at worst not impacted at all.
This potential bombshell of an assumption will come as a shock and surprise to die-hard Cheeseheads across some very small portions of the country. This fake news is downright unbelievable, unaccountable, and lacking any credibility whatsoever. This article is pure satire, but no one will read this far into it because: modern times/no one reads.
Rodgers was contacted in the future for a prophetic statement but could not answer because he was not actually contacted in the future for a statement because this article is only satire, and every just assumes the headlines are “facts”.
Amid swirling rumors and speculation and video evidence, in the form of a State Farm commercial, Rodgers solidified his trade to State Farm potentially–possibly signalling that he will be leaving for another team, or maybe he won’t. But there is video proof in the form of a video to prove this narrative.
The Green Bay Packers will never be the same successful team they once were because their team relies so heavily on one player. It will be truly sad to see him go to State Farm to film another commercial for the football season, but if you are good at something, or one thing, you have to stick to it.