Trump Takes Undeserved Credit For Softbank Investment & Job Promises, As Company Sells Him On A T-Mobile Sprint Merger
from the Sad! dept
In 2014 Sprint owner Softbank gave up on its planned merger with T-Mobile after regulators at the DOJ and FCC made it clear they planned to block the deal. And, just like the blocking of AT&T’s attempted T-Mobile merger, this wound up being a good thing, as it protected what passes for competition in the wireless space, driving T-Mobile to compete even more intensely. That said, Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son hasn’t given up on a Sprint T-Mobile merger, back in August making it abundantly clear he’d be trying again should the FCC see a shift in leadership:
“There?s a key figure who will determine if Son makes another run at T-Mobile: the yet-to-be named new head of the FCC. If Son feels that person is more amenable to a combination to take on market leaders AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., he will probably try again, said the people, who asked to not be identified because the matter is private.”
Fast forward to this week, and Son appears to have found a ray of hope named Donald Trump.
Trump and Son met this week at Trump Tower in Manhattan, shortly afterwards announcing a “new plan” to bring $50 billion in investment and 50,000 new jobs to the United States. Trump was quick to proclaim on Twitter that this investment and job growth was solely thanks to his existence:
Masa (SoftBank) of Japan has agreed to invest $50 billion in the U.S. toward businesses and 50,000 new jobs….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 6, 2016
Masa said he would never do this had we (Trump) not won the election!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 6, 2016
So, about that.
Most news outlets were quick to unskeptically repeat the idea that this investment was somehow a Trump master stroke, despite no actual details being released after the meeting. But a few outlets pointed out that this “new $50 billion investment” appears to be something the company actually announced in October as part of a pre-existing, four-year global investment strategy into a variety of startups and other projects. Previous reports on the fund note that while some of this money could come to the States, Softbank’s $35 billion investment into the fund isn’t even U.S. specific.
In short, the $50 billion investment and the 50,000 jobs are largely fairy tale numbers wholly unrelated to Donald Trump doing much of anything. It’s also worth noting that when asked, Son himself wasn’t actually willing to specifically credit Trump with any of it:
“…The contours of the deal Trump announced Tuesday appear in line with the company?s previous investment plans. In October, SoftBank announced it would create a $100 billion fund ? with the backing of Saudi Arabia ? in a bid to become the ?biggest investor in the technology sector,? Son said at the time.
Son on Tuesday did not say whether the new investment pledge was a result of Trump’s victory, but he did say he was celebrating Trump’s White House win.
“I just came to celebrate his new job,? Son said. ?I said, ?This is great, the U.S. will become great again.?”
So in short, Softbank’s investment pledges have absolutely nothing to do with Trump, and were announced before Trump even won the election. Not that you’d know that by reading 90% of the news coverage about the plan. Meanwhile, where these 50,000 jobs will be coming from — and whether they’ll actually materialize at all — is anybody’s guess. The job growth certainly isn’t happening at Sprint, where the company under Softbank ownership has been consistently laying off thousands of employees as it tries to trim $2.5 billion in operation expenses annually after years of continued missteps.
It’s relatively clear Masayoshi Son is pining for an FCC that will let the company finally fuse Sprint with T-Mobile. And there’s every indication he’ll be getting his wish from the new FCC. Trump’s telecom advisors are a who’s who of industry-tied think tankers and lobbyists, all of whom have publicly stated the FCC should be hamstrung and defunded. One of them doesn’t even believe telecom monopolies are real. Their selection for FCC boss, whoever it is, is extremely unlikely to support using regulatory authority to block mega-mergers, regardless of Trump’s campaign promises to stop such deals.
While massive job creation promises are routinely bandied about in the run up to telecom mega-mergers, those promises never actually materialize. In fact the opposite happens as redundant positions are eliminated and customer support and service corners are cut to accommodate the debt taken on from the deals. Meanwhile, eliminating a major player in the wireless space results in consistently worse service and higher prices. This is, despite ample historical precedent, a lesson we’re culturally unwilling to intellectually digest. Rinse, wash, repeat.
That said, this little public relations fracas was still a win for Trump and Masayoshi Son. Trump gets to falsely take credit for a several-month-old plan he had nothing to do with, and Son gets to fill Trump’s head with the idea that if he supports his looming merger — money, jobs and miracles will rain from the sky.
Filed Under: donald trump, investment, jobs, layoffs, masayoshi son, mergers, telcos
Companies: sprint, t-mobile
Comments on “Trump Takes Undeserved Credit For Softbank Investment & Job Promises, As Company Sells Him On A T-Mobile Sprint Merger”
I like fairy tails! Especially the ones with the big tuft at the end.
This, though, seems more like a fairy tale…
Trump Takes Undeserved Credit
This is such OLD NEWS!!!
Can we get some fresh material please? The guy seriously thinks he is Gods greatest gift to the Presidency… he has said it himself!
Which brings attention to a problem. The President should not be impacting trade and economy this much. Even if it works out for the better people need to start getting worried. What if the next president you hate gets in and starts doing this.
Clean out the dirty diaper that is congress folks, if you do, you can put a stop to this shit!
We should take voting for the president away from the people and send it back to congress like it was originally. The people keep calling this shit a democracy and calling this farce “the most important election of our time” every vote for president while completely ignoring the more important people voted into congress.
Shame on America! You keep foolishly calling for a King!
Re: Trump Takes Undeserved Credit
Voting for President was never with Congress (you may be confused with voting for Senate members who were chosen by state legislators until the 17th Amendment was ratified). It was always with the states who allocate their electoral votes as their legislatures choose. Since well before the Civil War, most state legislatures have chosen to have their electoral votes given to the winner of the statewide popular vote for President.
Re: Re: Trump Takes Undeserved Credit
yea, you are correct I keep brain farting state legistlatures with just legislature and my brain farts over to congress…
thank you for the correcting it was needed!
Re: Trump Takes Undeserved Credit
Shame on America! You keep foolishly calling for a King!
And they freak the hell out at those who don’t bow to him.
Voter fraud much?
Seems Hillary didn’t win the popular vote by nearly as much as people thought. Seems the lefts attempt to change the outcome backfired.
https://www.hermancain.com/major-problem-with-detroits-ballots-votes
Re: Voter fraud much?
It is well known that average democrat is not very intelligent despite making the claim they are more intelligent than the average republican.
As per this recent election cycle, Democrats are more than willing to commit to a Pyrrhic victory than sanity should allow. Just look at ole Nancy Pelosi and the very old and out of touch Democratic leadership that refuse to hand the reigns over to more competent folks.
Enjoy your parties folks… they have done you such a GREAT SERVICE! have they not?
Re: Re: Voter fraud much?
Hey dingus quit deflecting. The adults are talking about Trump, not your Hillary strawman you have so lovingly crafted.
Re: Re: Re: Voter fraud much?
Two things.
I was not talking about Hillary you tool. I was talking about the Party and its voters. As to why that got flagged helps to prove many claims that TD and many readers are biased towards a specific party.
The Democrats themselves make the claim that they are on average dumber than the right because they claim they cannot obtain a proper education due to “white privilege.” It is all over the fucking news!
If you keep this shit up then yes TD will lose more readers. Have you folks on the left learned nothing from the past election and your constant desire to shut down those you “think” are on the right?
There is no deflection here, just the truth as I see it and if that hurts you then I must be hitting a sore spot. If you want to run off everyone else with an opinion you don’t like go right on ahead you cry babies… you will just continue to squeeze yourselves farther into the corner as you cry larger puddles of tears.
Remember Democrats… you are far more responsible for Trumps ascension than the Republicans. You constantly find your worse nightmares on the roads you take to avoid them!
Re: Re: Re:2 Voter fraud much?
“As to why that got flagged helps to prove many claims that TD and many readers are biased towards a specific party.”
No you got flagged (by readers and not the site, btw – facts matter) because you threw out a bunch of insults and didn’t address the topic at hand.
“The Democrats themselves make the claim that they are on average dumber than the right because they claim they cannot obtain a proper education due to “white privilege.” It is all over the fucking news!”
That’s literally the first time I’ve heard that, especially since it makes no sense (white Democrats are saying that? That seems strange). Perhaps a citation or 2?
“If you keep this shit up then yes TD will lose more readers”
If those readers are like the comments that have sprung up here recently, good riddance.
“Remember Democrats… you are far more responsible for Trumps ascension than the Republicans”
This seems to be the claim a lot since the election. Are you guys preparing yourself for the inevitable disaster his presidency will be? You seem to be distancing yourself from choosing him. If not, why are you not owning the victory of the guy you wanted?
Re: Re: Re:3 Voter fraud much?
“No you got flagged (by readers and not the site, btw – facts matter) because you threw out a bunch of insults and didn’t address the topic at hand.”
Birds of a feather flock together, a well known phenomenon where you can tell the view points of another based on the type of people they attract. This really is not rocket science.
And if you don’t think that it requires low intelligence to help get either Hillary OR Trump elected then I have no idea what you think intelligence is, so enlighten me.
“If those readers are like the comments that have sprung up here recently, good riddance.”
This is bad no matter how much you think about it or look at it. I don’t care how people do not agree with me, I will never even imply that they need to be shut up or sent away or work to drive them away intentionally. This is a major failing of the way people like you think. If you only care to share your ideas with your own kind then you start too look like the groups of people that only inbreed with themselves and that does not look pretty.
“This seems to be the claim a lot since the election. Are you guys preparing yourself for the inevitable disaster his presidency will be? You seem to be distancing yourself from choosing him. If not, why are you not owning the victory of the guy you wanted?”
I did not choose Trump, just letting you idiots know that I also blame you and not just the Republicans for it. It’s funny that you think I voted for him but I suppose you like most others only see the issues as either a R or D despite the constant gnashing of teeth to the contrary.
Do assume that just because I trash talked Democrats more than Republicans today, I am a Republican.
Re: Re: Re:4 Voter fraud much?
“Do assume that just because I trash talked Democrats more than Republicans today, I am a Republican.”
That looks too much like a Freudian slip… mean to be worded as…
“Do NOT assume that just because I trash talked Democrats more than Republicans today, I am a Republican.”
I am an independent. I have not once, ever, in my life voted for a Republican or Democrat! Though I do not promise that I never will either!
Re: Re: Re:4 Voter fraud much?
“Birds of a feather flock together, a well known phenomenon where you can tell the view points of another based on the type of people they attract. This really is not rocket science.”
Nor is the fact that you’re blaming a party for actions they did not commit, and trying to derail the conversation.
“I don’t care how people do not agree with me”
Agreeing isn’t important. Adult discussion based on facts without name-calling and shrill rants is. You’ve clearly failed at the latter no matter your differences in opinion with other readers. Hint: saying that anyone who didn’t agree with your stance must be stupid is not adult debate.
“This is a major failing of the way people like you think”
Describe “people like me”. I’ll bet you make numerous hilarious false assumptions.
“Do assume that just because I trash talked Democrats more than Republicans today, I am a Republican”
Experience tells me that people who dive straight into partisan trash-talk, especially in defence of Trump, tend to identify as such. You may not be such a person. However, I do notice that you’ve said nothing about the actual subject of this article, only dived in to act like a fool. Why that is might be up for discussion, but it’s quite evident what you’ve done. I apologise if you’re offended that the community are treating such posts as they deserve, but that’s reality.
Re: Re: Re:5 Voter fraud much?
“Adult discussion based on facts without name-calling and shrill rants is. You’ve clearly failed at the latter no matter your differences in opinion with other readers. Hint: saying that anyone who didn’t agree with your stance must be stupid is not adult debate.”
Quick question… what is the difference between directly and indirectly belittling someone? Does it really matter? If you keep letting things like this get your little billy goats you won’t have many left to lose. Stop focusing on the message so much and focus on the subject it speaks too, it only makes it too easy to fool you and lead you astray if you worry about someone directly insulting you. The fact that someone directly insults me or passive aggressively insults me the way you do makes no difference. Both directions have achieved an insult and whining like a baby like you and many others like do about it only reveals that your ego’s are weak and pathetic. Go find some brass and fashion yourself a pair… you really need them!
“Describe “people like me”. I’ll bet you make numerous hilarious false assumptions.”
Likely no more than you have made about me, but here goes. You voted for a political party, matters no which one that fact that you did help foment candidacies like Hillary and Trump, and think that a vote for president is very important compared to other civil duties that actually are more important. You also ignore other more important elected positions and frequently support regulation while watching it fail to do its job as in the case of the FCC that this site talks about so much. You also likely falsly blame capitalism for free-market failures despite the fact that we no longer have a free-market of any kind and the fact that capitalism and free-market has nothing to do with each other!
Now tell me what I got wrong?
“Experience tells me that people who dive straight into partisan trash-talk, especially in defence of Trump, tend to identify as such. You may not be such a person. However, I do notice that you’ve said nothing about the actual subject of this article, only dived in to act like a fool. Why that is might be up for discussion, but it’s quite evident what you’ve done. I apologise if you’re offended that the community are treating such posts as they deserve, but that’s reality.”
Ah yes, you are correct experience does tend to show that people who dive into partisan trash-talk do have certain identities, but please advise us of where I defended Trump in any of my statements?
I will give a pass since I left out a very important word and you were responding before you saw the correction. I am not a Republican just because I trashed the Democrats today. I am both sides worst enemy… a person cannot be easily fooled.
Yea, no apologies needed, especially when they are fake. I am just trying to teach an important lesson here.
It is a fool that takes offense and something not intended to offend them, but it is an even greater fool that takes offense as something that was intended to offend them for they have played into the hands of their enemies.
The lesson is… endure the meaningless prattle and name calling. The only things we should be flagging are people advertising their fucking shades and crap-ware addled links.
If you do seek to drive people away they do actually leave, and that only results in the place becoming stagnant. Which is something I do not want TD to become. There are instances where I would rather play devils advocate than to see that occur, so quit the bullshit and spine up! TD works best when all mouth breathers feel like they can have a voice here! Plus you get the added benefit of reaching a broader audience to boot which benefits TD.
So do TD a favor and never tell people to go away, even if some of its less than intelligent writers have said the same. Only a fool would ask people to go away, better to keep them around and pray for their enlightenment!
Re: Re: Re:6 Voter fraud much?
If you do seek to drive people away they do actually leave, and that only results in the place becoming stagnant. Which is something I do not want TD to become.
If you don’t want this place to become stagnant, then stop filling it up with useless shit that adds nothing to the discussion.
Here’s a clue, since you clearly are missing it – you’re the problem.
Any mention of Trump, and there you & the other tards are with your republican/democrat/left/right horse shit. Since he’s president-elect and all, and you guys are such winners (cue the other fucktard with the 900+ seat link in 3…2…1…) you really need to come to terms with the fact that all of his stupid-ass, 13yo-with-a-new-phone tweets are going to get attention.
And by attention, I mean negative, as frankly, he’s making himself look like a fucking retard.
Want to address the real problem and SOLVE it?
Tweet to that cheeto-faced dumbass to close his fucking twitter account and start acting like a fucking adult.
Re: Re: Re:7 Voter fraud much?
Hey assclown two things.
Your team brought up trump first… go back and read again with a 2nd grade teacher in tow so you might learn.
You claim I am the problem despite not even talking about the same thing I was talking about originally. I am kind enough to tell you what I think your problem is, but you have yet to tell me what mine is. You sure do act superior though. Hint Hint… people already know you are not.
You guys are just lost!
Re: Re: Re:8 Voter fraud much?
Your team brought up trump first… go back and read again with a 2nd grade teacher in tow so you might learn.
Because the article is about (wait for it, WAIT FOR IT…) Trump.
Second, I think I have told you what the problem is. And quite clearly:
Any mention of Trump, and there you & the other tards are with your republican/democrat/left/right horse shit. Since he’s president-elect and all, and you guys are such winners (cue the other fucktard with the 900+ seat link in 3…2…1…) you really need to come to terms with the fact that all of his stupid-ass, 13yo-with-a-new-phone tweets are going to get attention.
So in terms of that second grade teacher you’re talking about, have him/her help you first.
That way, you might not look like such a retard going on about the superiority complexes that other people have.
(Hint – when the person you’re dealing with appears to have the mental equivalent of a hammer, it’s safe to assume that you are superior).
Re: Re: Re:9 Voter fraud much?
The article was about the Detroit recount and the “likely” Democrats that failed to properly reset the machines after certain errors resulting in double counts that appear to be in favor of Democrats. Which article are you talking about? Trump could not have not existed in this scenario and it would not change anything I said in response to the post about the article.
You guys brought up Trump and forced him into the chatter… you really should have got that second grade teacher!
You guys need to get over it… I don’t even like Trump but you guys hate him so much that you are going to force everyone to talk about him and then blame them for him being brought up!
Re: Re: Re:10 Voter fraud much?
Yeah, sure.
Scroll up to the top of the entire webpage (which happens to be the title of this TD article): Trump Takes Undeserved Credit For Softbank Investment & Job Promises, As Company Sells Him On A T-Mobile Sprint Merger
How the fucking fuck is a Detroit recount relevant to this?
Care to explain that, given how smart you are and how lost the rest of us are?
Now tell me…do you fucking understand NOW why the post was flagged in the first place?
Re: Re: Re:11 Voter fraud much?
ha ha ha haa….
holy shit you clueless clown!
The article in question is not the one at the top of the page,
it’s buried in a flagged post.
But I forgive you!
Re: Re: Re:12 Voter fraud much?
And again, since you still don’t seem to get it…what the fucking fuck does an article about a Detroit recount have to do with the TD article?
What’s that? Nothing?
That’s why it was flagged.
That’s why your response to it was flagged.
And that’s why folks like me feel superior to you in terms of intellect. It’s because we are.
Re: Re: Re:13 Voter fraud much?
Man you are dense… I give up…
Re: Re: Re:14 Voter fraud much?
I give up…
It was inevitable. You never had a chance anyways.
Re: Re: Re:15 Voter fraud much?
You might be right…
Never argue with stupid, they try to drag you to their level and win with experience.
A valuable lesson to learn.
Re: Re: Re:16 Voter fraud much?
Perhaps you could find a newer post, and bring something totally unrelated up there too.
Then complain about it being flagged.
Then call other stupid for calling you out on it.
That’s what makes you an idiot.
That’s why we make fun of you.
Re: Re: Re:14 Voter fraud much?
You seem to be the dense one. Your subject was off topic which is why it was flagged. If you want to spew random topics, go to facebook.
Re: Re: Re:15 Voter fraud much?
Sorry for the loss of your brain cells. Lets take it down to a level you can understand.
The original post was already off topic, I responded to it which of course makes mine off topic. The 3rd response was additionally off topic since Trump nor Hillary were brought up in the post. Yet the original off topic posts were flagged while the 3rd was not.
The community is trying to control a narrative in a way that makes it clear that there is a bias here, regardless of TD’s involvement and I was pointing that out. It went downhill from there.
If the TD community wants to flag certain types off content then realize that there will be a price that the community pays for it and by TD for potential lost readership and that is something I do not want to happen. There is simply not enough active people posting at TD, in my opinion, for us to be worrying about off subject posts derailing things. I for one would rather deal with it and have a greater number of voices with different ideas and things they believe are associated even if I do not see a connection.
If you continue to try to silence people because they post things you do not agree with then you just make yourself into a hypocrite if you flag them instead of responding back or just ignoring them.
So get with the program and stop losing track of the subject material.
Re: Re: Re:16 Voter fraud much?
So you kept an off topic post going with your bullshit, then defend it like you’re right?
And then have the nerve to complain about it being flagged.
And then call everyone else stupid for calling you out on it.
Go bitch at Brietbart, tard. They like your kind of stupid there.
Re: Re: Re:6 Voter fraud much?
“You voted for a political party, matters no which one that fact that you did help foment candidacies like Hillary and Trump”
First strike – I wasn’t even in the country at the time of the election, let alone an eligible voter.
“You also ignore other more important elected positions and frequently support regulation while watching it fail to do its job as in the case of the FCC that this site talks about so much”
I take great interest in the politics of any country that affects me, so wrong again. Also, why should this site not write about something that’s completely within their remit? The FCC is directly associated with several subjects of this blog – politics, technology, communication, etc. Are you saying they should ignore subjects that directly interest them because they’re in the news a lot?
“You also likely falsly blame capitalism for free-market failures “
I’m not entirely sure what you’re referring to here, but I’ll assume you’re wrong again.
“Now tell me what I got wrong?”
3 out of 3 major points by my count. So, why should anyone respect whatever opinion comes out between such lies and false assumptions?
“please advise us of where I defended Trump in any of my statements?”
The article is about Trump, your comments were completely attacking Democrats who have nothing to do with the subject of the article. If that’s not a defense, it sure is an attempt to deflect attention from him.
“The lesson is… endure the meaningless prattle and name calling”
I do. i’m also a little bored and like poking at people like you who pretend they’re superior, while demonstrating no such thing with their words or actions. I’m not offended by you, only passing time till its time to leave the office.
“So do TD a favor and never tell people to go away”
I’ll continue not doing that, thanks. You can stay, I just believe the place would be better without you. As do other readers, it seems.
Re: Re: Re:7 Voter fraud much?
Oh… you are young. I do not necessarily count this as a strike but you have yet to gain wisdom. The odds will be against you and you will likely become everything I though you were unless you you go and learn for yourself. And I am glad if you truly do not match up with my assumptions about you which does give me hope.
“The article is about Trump, your comments were completely attacking Democrats who have nothing to do with the subject of the article. If that’s not a defense, it sure is an attempt to deflect attention from him.”
I see… you are talking about a different article, that may explain your confusion then. The community has flagged that article and post I was responding too, and that is what I was belittling the Democrats over not the article attached to the top of the page here. But even then, how in the flip can you connect this to a defense of Trump? There is no deflection here of any kind, you really need to understand what that means.
“I do. i’m also a little bored and like poking at people like you who pretend they’re superior, while demonstrating no such thing with their words or actions. I’m not offended by you, only passing time till its time to leave the office.”
It’s okay to poke, poke away… and not the illusion of superiority is entire constructed of your own imagination. All I am doing is pointing out some obvious issues… and if that makes you feel that way then I look at it as only being as guilty as you choose to feel about it. You have not been in the debate for long, but the Democrats have waged and extensive campaign of intellectual superiority over that of Republicans. There has been a significant level of passive aggressive belittling of Republicans by Democrats and the Democrats think they are excessively cute regarding it as well.
What is occurring for these “snowflakes” is that they are becoming stagnant and unable to defend their positions. All they can do is resort to calling people racist, bigot, xenophobic, homophobic, or in your case “insulting”. Turn about is indeed fair play, even though I will admit that is is less productive.
As a person that views from the outside, the Usual R vs D, left vs right war going on I can assure you.
No one has standing to complain about someones derogatory or belittling of the other side.
The Democrats with their pseudo intellectual superiority
-vs-
The Republicans with their pseudo moral superiority
has been a long running gag… and for too long. You are falling right into it with this exchange. Had I understood sooner that you were not even talking about the same thing I was, this would have ended sooner.
Re: Re: Re:8 Voter fraud much?
Dude, you have serious reading comprehension issues and a cognitive dissonance that rivals our beloved trolls (God bless them, at least they trolled more generally instead obsessing with Democrats).
Re: Re: Re:8 Voter fraud much?
“Oh… you are young”
Thanks. An age where 41 is considered young gives me hope for a few more decades to discuss reality with intelligent folk. As shame people like you chase them all away with your drivel.
“I see… you are talking about a different article”
I’m talking about the article which is the subject of the post on which you’re commenting, which is ab out Trump’s words and actions. The one which everybody else here is talking about. What did you think the discussion was about?
“All I am doing is pointing out some obvious issues”
No, you’re attacking strawmen, the imagined beliefs of those you’re arguing with, which bear no relation to reality. You failed to get a single fact about me correct, let alone the subject of the discussion at hand.
I do notice you abandoned your attempts to magically divine my political beliefs after it was noted that you got every fundamental fact about me utterly wrong. So, you have some shred of honesty, it seems.
Let me repeat – you are attacking a fantasy. Your weapons include falsehoods, distortions, frantic attempts to derail the conversation already in place and an attempt to act superior even though you’ve failing spectacularly. please continue, it’s entertaining.
“You are falling right into it with this exchange”
This exchange is a person addressing figments of his imagination with simplistic assumptions and everyone else making fun of him. Your lack of self awareness is impressive.
Re: Voter fraud much?
Ooh, more fake news. That’s exactly what we needed… dumbass
Re: Voter fraud much?
Why are the right wing’s “smoking guns” always clearly biased blog posts?
Anyway, I won’t address the “meat” of the claim, only to note that when you search the author’s name, the first thing that came up for me was a list of articles that include one titled “Herman Cain’s Editor Warns Marijuana ‘Invites Demonic Infestation’”. Which contains the following opening:
“Dan Calabrese, the editor-in-chief of Herman Cain’s website, has grabbed plenty of attention with his rants about gay people, attacks on pro-choice women and promotion of the Hillary Clinton “shoe truther” conspiracy.”
Well, he’s clearly someone to trust…
You could point to the primary source, which of course is a story of underfunded precincts unable to replace broken technology, easily fixed with proper funding and oversight – something that would satisfy all parties’ complaints about the process, as well as expose the problems with voting machines that don’t leave a decent verifiable paper trail.
“He blamed the discrepancies on the city’s decade-old voting machines, saying 87 optical scanners broke on Election Day”
…but of course this is factual and non-partisan. Unsuitable in the minds of people who accept misleading blog posts as their primary news source.
When only one or two companies control all of the US’s telecommunications, they will be able to demand whatever they want from the government, as they will have the power to shut the US down. How many businesses would be destroyed by a 24 to 48 hour interruption in their phone and Internet connections?
Re: Re:
You mean like Bell? They actually had very little power and did whatever the government told them to do. And we actually had better service and more innovation than we do today.
We've seen this before …
… the central planning economic activity by paid government public servants but for the sole specific benefit of private business activity – it’s called fascism. This is not proper government activity.
Re: We've seen this before …
dissonant much? While true… this is not proper government activity you are blatantly lying about this being a sole benefit of private business activity.
Carrier is owned by a conglomerate. I do not recall Trump saying anything about the conglomerate controller Carrier… convenient right? But that is a publicly traded company not a private one.
Also, American citizens are being employed with does put the money back into the American economy instead of out of it like in Mexico.
This is NOT fascism even if it is uncomfortably close to it, the businesses still could have told Trump to suck it if they wanted! Stop this BS rhetoric and spew or you will make the same stupid mistakes that the left has been making by playing out their cards by using them in the wrong situations making them watered down and useless!
Re: Re: We've seen this before …
Meant to add that UT is the “public” conglomerate that owns/controls Carrier.
Re: Re: We've seen this before …
“… that is a publicly traded company not a private one.
“
Just because a company’s ownership is publicly traded does not make a public operation as the government is – the company is still a private business as it is not taxpayer-funded and not constitutionally accountable to anyone despite it’s immorally gained personhood.
You don’t realize the illusion being presented in all of these Trump meeting stories. Had these been genuine meetings and Softbank actually told Trump to “suck it”, there would have been no story on this whatsoever. The fact that private business is meeting with any government to actually DO business is EXACTLY what fascism grows from. This is not FREE MARKET activity.
“Stop this BS rhetoric and spew or you will make the same stupid mistakes that the left has been making by playing out their cards by using them in the wrong situations making them watered down and useless!”
Disabuse yourself of the notion that it is your place to tell someone to stop doing something that they aren’t actually doing. This whole Trump charade is planned by both the “left” and the “right”, which doesn’t actually exist but makes armchair deviants prideful to claim being conservative or progressive or of a certain party or side (consider reading Tragedy and Hope before responding: http://www.joeplummer.com/tragedy-and-hope-101). Cut the Hegelian dialectic out. It’s unproductive and beneath you.
Re: Re: Re: We've seen this before …
You are so close to understanding.
“This whole Trump charade is planned by both the “left” and the “right””
You have it backwards… it is a result of the terrible plans and charades by both the left and the right. Really you should just call it by the globalists of which both the left and right are members. Trumps ascension is the futile last ditch attempt to rebuke the globalists by the ignorant populists… the problem is that everyone is so entranced by Trump’s bluster that they fail to see that the Globalists have already won. Trump is more akin to the classic D vs R fight. Both seek to enslave us… they just disagree on how to accomplish this… it’s just that the R and the D lately agree a lot more than they have in the past and Trump is the direct result of the R’s shitting on their base and Hillary is the direct result of the D’s shitting on their base.
Re: Re: Re:2 We've seen this before …
“You are so close to understanding”
Trump IS A PART OF THE GLOBALISTS BY THE IGNORANT POPULISTS. Since when is a person whose “legal” net worth in the billions that is a result of kowtowing to this group not working for or on behalf of this group? Each of his business deals legitimizes this group. The man is a friend of the Clintons and is stacking his cabinet and administration with all corporately-enriched military veterans, including in places that they aren’t needed, a populist administrative behavior if I’ve ever seen one. Trump’s “government” is on the verge of being a corporate military junta via electoral college.
The D’s & R’s are political scientists. Their job is to science the shit out of getting people to think against their and their families’ own best interests. It doesn’t matter which side plays which role. The D’s used to be the R’s. The R’s used to be the D’s. They have reversed roles multiple time but always towards the same goal. Two wings on the same bird. Their “bases” are illusions. It’s their globalist puppeteers’ greed vs. the “base” electorate’s best interests. Trump is the perfect puppet and has already backtracked on nearly every promise he made and hasn’t even been inaugurated yet while filling the swamp with more of the same crap the electorate has had no choice in voting out the past 200+ years. Bush and Obama exhibited the exact same behavior.
Re: Re: Re:3 We've seen this before …
We might be splitting hair here.
I do agree with you that Trump is a Globalist… I just do not think he is part of the Globalists. I think of Trump as a Dictatorial Globalist as in he wants it all for himself and not share… the other Globalists are okay with sharing so long as it is kept to the 1% rule of power.
Does that make a whole lotta difference? In my opinion not really, which is why I did not vote for Trump, like you I saw through it even though it looks like we both saw through it in different ways.
And I completely agree with your thoughts about the Political Scientists…
I am actually happy to meet another person similar to myself even though we have arrived at different conclusions about how we got here.
Yes… Trumps back tracking is exactly what I told my friends that did vote for him is likely to happened given Trumps own past and political rhetoric.
There was once a time I was considering voting for Trump… and that was when it had a chance to shatter the Republican party which seems to be a no go any more. However get got the party nom so I said fuck him and realized that the party destruction I had hoped could be achieve through Trump was just not going to happen.
Re: Re: Re:4 We've seen this before …
Kudos to your awakening to what Trump really is.
Overall, I don’t believe in any of this “democracy” crap – it relies on collectivism and central planning that sacrifice any individual for the sake of socialism for the rich. In this society, voting clearly does not matter.
Re: Re: Re:5 We've seen this before …
Yea I saw through trump from the beginning, I was only willing to vote for him to help destroy the Republican party to serve a specific end… however that did not work out at all.
You are right “democracy” is crap and anyone supporting it is a lost fool. Yes, the voting is clearly making no difference and has turned out to be a significant waste of time and effort.
It really does appear that most of the people can be fooled most of the time… that or they feel unable to change anything and do nothing instead.
Re: Re: We've seen this before …
Learn what publicly traded means, then come back to talk.
Re: Re: Re: We've seen this before …
This isn’t “talk”. You’re b*tching about the archaic definition of “publicly traded”, which means “a limited company whose shares may be purchased by the public and traded freely on the open market and whose share capital is not less than a statutory minimum; public limited company” (source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/publicly+traded)
My experience in calling a publicly traded company a private business (or operation) comes from going beyond assessing valuations of the holdings of indexed ETF’s; the structure of publicly traded holdings is a moot point that the initial respondent to my comment is conflating with the actual NATURE of a publicly traded company’s OPERATION, which, when combined with central planning of a government, is fascism. Regardless of its accountability to shareholders, if a publicly traded company’s operation is not accountable to tax payers, it’s a private business (or operation). Thanks for bringing this down to minutiae. As you were …
What he said was it wouldn’t have happened had Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton been elected. Seeing as how poorly the markets have been doing in the past month I guess you are correct, he is full of it.
Re: Re:
“What he said was it wouldn’t have happened had Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton been elected”
Did he? I don’t see the link to where that’s shown. Could you provide it? Also, how does that tally with the fact that the deal was made before the election?
“Seeing as how poorly the markets have been doing in the past month”
Wait, I thought that the markets weren’t a proper indicator of the country’s economic success? At least, that’s what I’ve been hearing ever since Obama made them rise above the level they were at before Bush’s financial collapse started. Strange.
Re: Re:
Given how the markets been doing over the last few years, then I find it hard to believe all those pissed off middle class Trump supporters whining about no jobs left are nothing more than lazy pricks, unwilling to work.
Right?
Re: Re: Re:
It is just the market acting a bit slow. Actually the things you saw during Obamas presidency were results of Reagans tax cuts and the 2008 bailout was a result of Roosevelts democratic cabal with Glass and Steagal… Pay attention you owl.
Well, yay..
Well, money will probably rain from the sky into Softbank’s pockets… and maybe Trump’s too. Jobs will almost certainly rain from the sky like anything else that falls when dropped…. and it’ll be a miracle if the public don’t end up feeling like they’ve been pissed on from a great right.
Does that count?
By the way, that would be "tale", as in; "Tale told by an idiot", which quote is singularly appropriate given the teller of said "aren’t I wonderful" tale. ‘Far as I know, fairies don’t come with butt-ornamentation.
“Trump Takes Undeserved …. “
Fill in the blank
Trump tweets are not news. Ignore them.
Re: Re:
I wish they weren’t news. But Trump has spent the last year declaring the news media to be liars and worse, and has replaced traditional news releases with tweets. Trump has real power – economic, military and nuclear – and his tweets have been the most reliable indictor of his thoughts and plans. They cannot and should not be ignored.
With Donald Trump just having demonstrated that he can drop Boeing’s stock market value by $1 Billion with single tweet – even temporarily – it’s news.
With his staff tweeting politically motivated conspiracy theories leading to a fellow wingnut shooting up a business randomly added to their crack-addled fantasy – it’s news.
Everything is because of Trump
Can we start a meme that says anything that happens between election day and inauguration day is because of Trump and not the result of long-term plans finally coming together?
Carrier brings some jobs back to the US? Because of Trump.
Softbank promises jobs and investments? Because of Trump.
Fidel Castro dies. Because of Trump.
Ron Glass and Florence Henderson die. Because of Trump.
Re: Everything is because of Trump
Can we start a meme that says anything that happens between election day and inauguration day is because of Trump and not the result of long-term plans finally coming together?
For fucks sake no – we’ve already got his goddamned twitter feed spewing that horse shit.
I don’t need a visual of that dimwit to go along with it.
Re: Re: Everything is because of Trump
I can see the phrase “He Who Must Not Be Retweeted” coming over the mental horizon….
Re: Re: Re: Everything is because of Trump
Because being passive aggressive has worked out so well for you guys?
Still not getting it I see.
Like Lo Pan told Jack…
“You were not put on this Earth to get it”
Re: Re: Re:2 Everything is because of Trump
Yeah, Trump negated all the criticism when he started acting more presidential after the primaries. And when he "drained the swamp" of all the corporate lobbyists. No backpedaling on the wall, repealing ObamaCare, jailing Hillary, deporting illegal immigrants etc.. None of his staff picks turned out to be the not-so-closeted Nazis, Infowars wingnut conspiracy theorists or climate deniers he was previously associated with.
Guess you sure showed everyone. Give yourself a pat on the head.
Re: Re: Re:3 Everything is because of Trump
Gotta love those trump surrogates when they claim that trump tweets are presidential simply because he is the prez elect
… (you see – that in its self makes it so – LOL)
Re: Re: Re:2 Everything is because of Trump
I don’t understand your comment – do you think we really do need a meme to go along with it?
50,000 new jobs? Ha, ha! LOL!
What happens when two companies merge? Inevitably, they shed jobs, not create new ones.
If anyone believes this claim, they are either totally uninformed or stupid.
So, whenever I see a news outlet being praised by the left for telling the truth about Trump, they do so with pretty blatantly editorialized statements like “Trump said this, which isn’t true” or “Trump said that, without evidence”. Yet with stuff like this, where some pretty basic understanding of the facts undermines what Trump says, there’s no mention of those facts anywhere. It should be pretty simple for news outlets to lay out those facts without coming across as editorializing. It seems like news outlets are paying lip service to standing up to Trump but not taking even the most basic steps to actually stand up for the truth. In other words, we’re doomed.
Re: Re:
OTOH, news outlets praised by the right have no prob in this area because everything trump says is absolutely true.
The CEO said he wouldn’t have done the same if Hillary had been elected. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Re: Re:
The CEO said he wouldn’t have done the same if Hillary had been elected
Given that telco mergers typically result in a net decrease of jobs, I wouldn’t break may arm patting myself on the back quite yet.
Re: Re:
But a few outlets pointed out that this "new $50 billion investment" appears to be something the company actually announced in October as part of a pre-existing, four-year global investment strategy into a variety of startups and other projects.
So he’s capable of seeing into the future and knew that Trump would win? Or he was willing to risk dropping a $50 billion dollar deal had Hilary won?
Between those two options and ‘The deal was already planned out and going to happen either way’ I’m pretty sure I know which I’d say is more probable.
Re: Re:
The CEO said he wouldn’t have done the same if Hillary had been elected. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Again, this was announced in October. So how did he know that Trump would be elected back in October?
Re: Re:
“The CEO said he wouldn’t have done the same if Hillary had been elected”
Strange, I keep asking for citations but they’re never supplied. Almost as if this is an outright lie…
haha
please stop feeding the troll
We are all aware that mergers eliminate jobs, not create them, right?