Tag Archives: President

Amy Klobachar Announces Bid For Presidency from the North Pole

On a blustery Sunday afternoon in The North Pole, Amy Klobachar announced her bid for the presidency in front of a polar vortex.

Advertisements

President Trump Declares Thanksgiving “Trumpsgiving”, New National Holiday in Honor of Himself

In an unprecedented last minute executive order, President Trump declared Thanksgiving as the newly rebranded national holiday, “Trumpsgiving”, according to anonymous high-level sources close to the administration.

The presidential name change took place early this morning, moments before the kickoff of the Macy’s Thanksgiving’s Day Parade. In response many cheered at the news, as others publicly screamed at the sky in agony.

Reports close to the unnamed sources Thursday, described the new holiday as similar to Thanksgiving but tremendously and hugely and bigly better for all Americans everywhere, a great success, like no other. And that people will love it, you’ll see.

***

The majority of readers at Students and Tuition donate at least $2 per article.

If you can’t get to my Paypal page because it’s busy, keep trying.

https://www.paypal.me/TSNiebeling

Happy Trumpsgiving,
TS_

Obama’s reemergence into Politics is a Sign of Concern for Democrats in the 2018 Midterms

Recently, in the news, when I Google search Trump or politics, I see a familiar name come up: Barack Obama.  (Maybe Google is being bias towards me!  I better ask Trump.) Obama is the president I voted for twice.  He is the shining beacon of hope.  He is a person of passion, a leader with decency, and someone who always looked great for the cameras, every day, and his staff.  (Am I drawn into the idea that life is a fairy tale… no, I am not, not really.  Nothing is ever that squeaky-clean.  Now, after the fact, after his presidency, this seems impossible, or a charade.)  That being said, Obama’s appearance in the media this time strikes me as a HUGE concern for Democrats across the nation in relation to the midterms.  This concern could spell a “red tide” in November.

Let me try and explain my opinion:  Obama, to me, is the fixer that Hillary could never be for the Democrat Party.  In many, if not all cases, Obama is entirely more likable and he knows how to persuade people better than any other Democrat candidate.  (Politics aside, I would love to have a beer with President Obama.)  He is the person that people can generally get behind, he is compassionate, where as Donald Trump may not appear to be to many.  He is the antithesis of Trump in a plethora of ways: party, planning, and personality.  Where Trump is straightforward and may not be politically correct, Obama is kind, amiable, and he smooths politics over with more politics (which is some cases, after the fact, may seem deceptive and manipulative.)  Obama becoming necessary pre-2018 midterms should be a concern for anyone promoting progressive or blue, he–a man not running for office again (presumably) is in effect running against the man in office and for a party.  Obama will be competing with Democrats for the Democrat party.  His sun will outshine his lunar-like contenders in most situations.  Obama’s void in the midterms as a candidate, after his presence now, could set Democrats back lightyears, he is a massive powerhouse to fill, a resource that essentially only the news media has, he belongs to no party, to the benefit of Republicans.

His reemergence seems more forced than planned, more emergency than by chance.  For one: the former president and first lady said they were “going to take a little break” from politics after his presidency.   It is subjective to try and understand what constitutes as a “little break”, however I feel the break would have been a bit longer had the blue wave become more of a sure thing at this juncture.  I believe there is some internal ideas, within polling–which are really an unreliable guess, that the midterms will not be such a hand out to the losing part of the 2016 election.  Mind you, that election was a sure thing for Hillary and it didn’t work out so well, alas polling said otherwise.  President Obama coming back from his “break” so closely to the midterms makes me wonder, is it out of choice or necessity for the party.  Or maybe he just likes the press relatively speaking–in relation to Trump, accordingly, they, the press, love and love him, Obama.

Those ideas stated, I believe there is more but it’s all speculative, it’s just of an opinion of mind.  I believe that Obama is and was great for the Democrat party.  He promoted ideas that may not have seen fruition but he may have given many Americans hope.  In a time where the news media promotes a lack of hope he seems more than necessary.  But is that hopelessness for the Democrat party in relation to the midterm election, or to the idea that America is exclusively progressive, or that the America people deserve better, or that our times are horrible and changing for the worse, or just the opposite?  I guess it depends on how you look at the equation.  Perhaps things are getting better now–the economy, the authority of the law and how those entities enforce it, politics are being recharged whether anyone likes it or not–and maybe becoming tough and becoming accountable and not just smoothing things over with words and politics and an appearance of perfection is the human way to move forward–or the constitutional, American way to move forward.  Those are just general guesses and in no way of my precise ideation.

I’ll finish up with: I am not entirely sure about the outcome of the midterm elections, but it is telling, to me, that the Democrats pull their (forgive the pun) trump cards at this point in time.  (But I don’t know the exact history of such a thing.)  Maybe it is too soon for Obama.  Maybe he should have come back a bit later, perhaps before the 2020 presidential election and rallied the troops, championed the party, behind the new face of the party.  He could have brought back fond memories.  However, not so.  Now, Obama will be front and center in a media that truly either absolutely loves you, or absolutely-hates-your-fucking-guts.  Which is very unfortunate because it’s easy to see the potential media bias and where those entities want the country to go.  Accordingly, I believe the Democrat party should be more hopeful than certain, more concerned than confident; likewise, the Republican party shouldn’t bet on this concern as well, they should run it as if they were to lose, because everyone, even if they don’t admit it, loves an American underdog story.  And by way of what the news media promotes, that story may come true in the 2018 midterms.

***

Thank you for reading my words.  Now I ask: Do you consider yourself a helpful person?  If so, please think about helping me by contributing to the writing on my site.  Make a donation that truly matters! 
You can donate any amount, anywhere, at anytime, even a penny helps, at:  
Thank you for your contributions,
TS_

 

How Trump’s “Secret Weapon” may have Bought the Election from Facebook for $100 Million Dollars and You just Updated your Facebook Status

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.[18]

“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.”[19]

— Philip Bump, The Washington Post”

Link: Brad Parscale

***

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.

Minnesota man to consider $5 donation during next MPR membership drive if he reads one positive unbiased article about Trump, published by the mainstream news organization

static.politico

President of the United States of America pointing across a room at an unknown person, one positive article to garner $5 donation to MPR from local man. Photo by Getty

Reports broke Tuesday that local Minnesota man, who happens to be a millennial, a college grad, and a recent republican voter–although no party affiliation at this time could be confirmed, to consider donating $5 to next MPR membership drive if they write one positive unbiased article about president Donald Trump.

This incredible news came to a slough of jeers, guffaws, and mumbles from friends, colleagues, and family who happened to be unflinching MPR supporters.  Their reaction was to vehemently detest the idea that MPR as an organization could be biased in anyway towards anyone with differing ideas always–those not of the Progressive-Democratic ilk.

Though, these reports are wholly unconfirmed and unverified, the local male will be watching reports and reading articles ever closely looking for any indication that objective reporting exists in the state of Minnesota, and as he suggested, if he finds this to be the case he will consider contributing his $5 donation and become a highly member.  We all wait with bated breath.

Recount: Clinton’s Double Jeopardy; How Hillary will Win the 2016 Presidential Election

“My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.”

RT

Firstly, I will say that I am obsessed with the recount. I cannot go for a few hours without checking it, the news. This recount affinity is an intriguing part of my life. I enjoy critiquing the news and pundits and both sides of the parties–that never get’s old apparently, to me. Even though it is shit. Nothing changes–and nothing will. It is as if I still have Facebook. Sometimes I can’t escape it. That kind of social media… Those kind of clicks on a website. It is HUGE. Big money for “real” news. This recount thing is going to make history.

I must also say, holy shit. I never thought I would say this, but I think Hillary will actually win this thing. She will enact her magical double jeopardy of a recount; waiting for the blame to be called first, by Trump, having patience, calling in a favor, and then pouncing with limited time to form a proper and meaningful defense by the presumed winner. It seems too obvious now. The long wait (3 weeks have others have said), the third party candidate comes out of nowhere seemingly for innocuous purposes (globalist), and the media says the recount won’t change anything.

(To cover that last part, the media was wrong about the entire election. What makes them so sure that they will be right this time about the recount? I am not so sure, as a matter of fact I am concerned about how many news outlets say a change in votes is “highly unlikely” or “near impossible” or a “long-shot”. To me this talk directly mirrors the rhetoric used by the media to describe the chances of Trump winning the 2016 presidential election. (Which he did.) Pollsters had it wrong, the media bought in; now the media says they have it right, no count change in the recount, and most are buying in. Fuck.)

Aside from the above hypothesizing, the recount is really good for getting people to read the headline of an article only. Just throw in the word: recount. Put whatever shit you want to in the paragraphs below it: hyperbole, emotion, fallacies, etc. They will read. If you are a mainstream site you’ll get hits. If you are a WordPress blogger, yours truly, you may get someone to look harder at your page for a second. From onset of the recount, one thing I do appreciate is that talking about how horrible Trump’s transition team is won’t hold traction for long, for news sources, this is obvious. I won’t be the person to regurgitate this prediction. Thank you, No Agenda Show.

I posit, with celerity: Trump lost footing from the start by saying in the debates that he would challenge the election results. (No shit. I would too if it were warranted.) His opponent only needed him to say it once before they started pulling it apart; they are lawyers, these are words. Hillary conceded: she plays the victim now–people sympathize–and who couldn’t, only standing up again because others stood up for her. And of course no one will have the energy or time before inauguration to say, hey let’s recount the recount. This is after Hillary is ready to take office. Ready to play the role she has practiced for her whole life.

It sounds stupid, and easy. I know it’s a short theory, half-concocted, ridiculous, and thick with what a regular person would call a conspiracy theory. Yet, as my stepfather said over the phone the other night nothing would surprise him about this election. Certainly the media is making out great with these scatalogical themed stories. They come out ahead, ironically, seldom behind. If by chance something crazy happens in the recount–new votes are found, mysteriously, or if the numbers just don’t add up–don’t be surprised. No one has the right to be. We live in a world where losers no longer lose.

I’ll be straightforward with you, I got nervous the second people started discussing the date of December 19th, when the electoral college places their actual vote. I didn’t even know that was the date. And I have written more on the electoral college than most of my ex-progressive liberal alt-left friends have, the ones who came about and told me I was stupid for thinking that the electoral college would vote for us all, so don’t vote. Well, they did. And I did. Oops. Probably should have read that history. Now they want to change the rules of the game they played so hard to win. What do you do tho?

So, on December 20th, when you wake up to find Hillary Clinton has been elected president, don’t be surprised. It’s Clinton’s Double Jeopardy, she can’t lose the recount, even though she already lost the election; it was set in motion at the debates–when no one would accept the results, really. I mean, it is entirely possible. Don’t for one second skim through the headlines and think, oh, it couldn’t happen, because that happened to the majority of the popular voting people of America. They thought they had it. Don’t be like them. Don’t be sad.

Control Room, a different view of American military and the media which champions it

Control Room is an intensely powerful documentary featuring a different side of the Iraq War—a side not written to promote American propaganda, the media or the military, and how those entities, media, military, and journalism create and maintain wars around the globe. Control Room gives real-life, graphic accounts of the beginning of the Iraq War, as seen by the people of Iraq, from the United States’ introduction of nuclear weapons found to be held by Saddam Hussein, to the infamous Bush speech touting “mission accomplished”. This documentary shows the Iraqi confrontation in a different light, in a human light. One thing I think the American public needs to see is an event from a different angel, from the eyes of living individuals. These individuals are not just targets, they have lives and loved ones. This film offers a different take on occurrences which may appear objective and clear, concerning the United States military actions and their media counterparts.