attrayant

14 hours ago, rooster59 said:

If you look at the pricing and you add it up, back of a napkin, it would be roughly $35,000 a night

Only a bit more than a couple of night's stay in a hospital.

5 hours ago, mogandave said:

Can we get back to Biden reversing his position four times in two days?

Yes let's get back to this, since I saw nothing about it in the OP.  No one prior to you has mentioned this.  Tell me more.

42 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

you have no idea which election meddling in the past or present had more effect, if it had any at all.

 

Another claim I didn't make.  At least you're admitting there was election meddling now.  I guess that's some kind of progress.

3 hours ago, wayned said:

He will never cancel the speech.  Look at the huge number of people that normally go to the center of DC to watch the 4th of July festivities.

 

And they'll all be pissed off at the closure of the space around the reflecting pool at the Lincoln Memorial by the secret service.

2 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

not true. it is the severity or effectiveness of the attempt.

Which is directly correlated to the reach.  Go back and study basic marketing.

2 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

facebook ads did not get trump elected, neither did Russia.

 

Which is in response to something I did not say.

1 minute ago, elmrfudd said:

16 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did misinformation from these attempts reach 29 million Americans?

 

perhaps the more important question is not this mystical "reach" but the effect.

 

Reach and effect are directly correlated.  The more people reached, the greater the effect.

I'm still trying to figure out why Trump thinks "stone cold" is an insult.  Does it mean something other than emotionless?  The only other reference I can find is to a pro wrestling actor, Stone Cold Steve Austin.  After more than two years Trump should be able to come up with better insults to hurl during his temper tantrums.

7 hours ago, webfact said:

There was no indication where the Facebook post was filmed. 

What a shame.  He'd probably make some real money if people knew where to send it.  

My question was "how is this map "a better representation" of anything?"  Your answer is:

7 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

The Associated Press finds that Clinton won 487 counties nationwide, compared with 2,626 for President-elect Donald Trump.

Way to not answer the question.  You have just changed the map into a sentence.  The question remains: how is the map OR your new sound bite "a better representation" of anything?

13 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

a better representation is here:

 

 

 

 

This is an excellent example of how Trump supporters can't seem to digest anything more complex than a picture, sound bite or slogan.  Here's the same map with everything except Wyoming and Washington DC erased:

There are more people in that little blue pixel on the right than there are in the entire state of Wyoming.  So how is this map "a better representation" of anything?

20 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

How about: "no because there are forthcoming elections and the country can wait another couple of years" ?

 

 

This is a reason (a bad one) why no president should ever be impeached.  Is that the argument you really wanted to make?

3 minutes ago, HHTel said:

Out of a population of almost 330 million, the best candidates offered were Trump and Clinton!!!

 

What?  Who said they were the best?  Or is this your opinion?

46 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think he should be impeached even if no chance of conviction.
 

This is the correct answer.  Trump has violated his oath of office, obstructed justice in some cases and in others attempted to do so, therefore Article 1 of the constitution requires Congress to take corrective action.  Even according to his most fervent supporter, Lindsey Graham, impeachment is not necessarily about criminal wrongdoing. It's about "cleansing the office".

I can't speak to the post-secondary education sector, but the private school I used to teach science at says their enrolment is also low at about 50% of where it was when I taught there about 6-8 years ago.  I'm thinking the economy must surely be a factor in addition to lack of interest from students.

When I was hired there I was shocked to see the science classroom was just an empty room that could be used to teach anything.  To get a sense of my despair, type "thailand science classroom" into a google image search and see what images come up.  Then take out the word "thailand" and search again.  The difference is night and day.  And this stuff isn't even expensive.  Beakers, test tubes, humboldt burners, chemicals and reagents... just a few baht per student.  I ended up supplying my own lab equipment from home so the students could at least have something to do with their hands instead of just listening to me talk at them for three hours a week.

I feel so bad for the kids.  It's just so sad.