Being in politics in the US at a federal level is conflict of interest for anyone.
The majority of people were already wealthy because of businesses dealing and have ties to large corps directly or with family and friends.
That isn’t even taking into account lobby money.
Let’s move on to a positive note.
This is pretty awesome. It is more aligned with how I wanted to see industry leaders being involved in politics. :tup:
Donald Trump’s transition team added three new business giants to the president-elect’s advisory council on Wednesday: Tesla’s Elon Musk, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick, and Indra Nooyi, the CEO of Pepsi.
I would love to hear people’s opinions on tillerson.
I also agree with LZ here though on conflicts being unavoidable at that level.
There are so few people who genuine exposure to geopolitics on that level… fewer still who could pass the security clearance… and fewer still who don’t have any political or reputational baggage that would prevent them from being able to hit the ground running.
sorting things out with Russia and getting the price of oil back up is going to be good for pretty much everyone… I certainly don’t automatically buy in to media bias around Russia and Putin or China… they are powerful nations in their own right and we’re in no position to be telling them what to do.
I like where this is going and he is definitely putting people in charge in a direction I like and why I voted for him. His lack of knowledge in politics may allow him to rely more on experts and I hope more of this helps out where instead of the random idiots and career politicians leading councils instead of the leaders in the industry shaping the world.
Having a council like this isn’t out of the ordinary, but it’s certainly a more robust list than what Obama had. I wonder how much influence these councils have on policy.
So he put the Uber guy on his team… Guess NY is extra fucked now. 
@Paulo I really have no opinion on Rex because I don’t know much about him. But I’ll admit my knee jerk reaction now-a-days is that when the media says he’s a terrible pick because he’s an evil businessman who works in the soul killing oil industry, I’m inclined to like him.
Also councils don’t do shit. Just another word for lobbying, but in a more marketable way.
Most media outlets have been the boy who cried wolf. Every pick is the worst ever. Why would anyone take what they say seriously anymore?
Yep, and with the collusion between media and the DNC a lot of people have seen it for what it is.
So there’s a topic for people: where do you get your news now post-election? Not an easy question, especially when so many got it wrong and continue to run with the same false narrative that caused them to miss it to begin with.
I take in a lot from Reddit but always with a grain of salt since it is obviously a very liberal bias. I try to cross-reference different news sources when I see something there.
The NPR Politics podcast has been a very reliable and unbiased view of things. They often bring up topics that are headlining elsewhere, cut the drama, and do an appropriate level of analysis.
Yeah Reddit needs to be taken with healthy skepticism but then again everything is now a days. Breaking events, especially on Reddit, have show to be misleading.
NPR rarely if ever has the opposing viewpoint from what I find. It’s likely that the format doesn’t really allow for it though. And the begging for money turns me off. Last time they had the funding drive on air the host I was listening to was clearly pissed that no one was calling and donating. I felt he was on the verge of calling the audience idiots for not giving enough, lol. It kept me entertained enough to keep listening though.
I used to watch CNN a lot. But after a while you realize that they try to create the appearance of debating both sides by having someone from the left and someone from the right, however the representative of the “right” is often a much weaker debater or (as was the case this election) doesn’t represent the logic of the side he/she is supposed to represent. FOX does this sometimes too but with the left being weaker.
You pretty much have to watch CNN and Fox and guess where the truth is somewhere in between. Then watch MSNBC just to laugh at what a bunch of twats they all are.
I find the BBC to be your best bet for US news, which is really disheartening when stop and think about it. The best place to get news about the US is from the news station of the country we won our independence from.
I read everything from Reddit, WSJ, NY Post/Daily News, Fox, CNN, Breitbart, and WaPo. You need to get info from different sources and then do your own research into the articles but unfortunately, most people live off one news source and fail to see the bias.
The power of the shared collective of people with the same ideas to collaborate on social media is also a plague of our generation. Groups of people who think for example, “Vaccines are bad” can find other people on social media outside their circles who provide differing opinions and then are able to collectively reaffirm incorrect news and viewpoints.
The problem with this is people don’t understand how to assign weighted values to their sources. They give the movie Vaxxed the same value as a published medical journal and now we have outbreaks of diseases like measles and mumps that shouldn’t exist anymore. Reading everything as fine as long as you look at Vaxxed as propaganda for retards and a medical journal as properly researched peer reviewed science.
I liken it all to reading the matrix… the green characters glowing and running down multiple screens. In isolation each bit is useless and irrelevant. Only when taken all together do things begin to make sense.
so here a title piece from Reuters this evening about how russia most certainly hacked both campaigns but ignored the RNC findings and focused attention on discrediting the Clinton campaign since Russia assumes Trump will be more favourable from a sanctions perspective.
It’s a nice OpEd piece with little factual backing
… Sorry 
‘Op-Ed piece’ is a little strong but they should have included specific sources. Intelligence agencies have NOT OFFICIALLY come out stating a direct link between Russia and the illegally acquired information from either the RNC and DNC. The reports that I’ve seen all claim information from ‘unnamed officials within the intelligence community’. People are drawing a lot of conclusions, especially since only DNC info was leaked, but we may never know the real answer. Additionally, the information they gathered and leaked may not have even changed the results of the election.
It does seem to be a lot of narrative building. Suspicions aside, unless we see actual conclusive evidence, I’m siding with Trump on this one.
DNC got hacked things got released…Those things released were true and damaging to democrats but lets put all the focus on how they got obtained :lol: