Should the next president be a woman?
Yes! And it's not too late.
Okay, the odds are against this happening, but because of the overly sultriness of the presidential campaign -- the hyped lies and obvious bigotry, misogyny, and temper tantrums calling for foreign intervention from a world leader who is a dictator in everything but name only, a correction can still be made.
The president-elect can hardly be taken seriously as the next president of the United States. He is a person who has promoted impetuous behavior to a virtuous art form in the eyes of his ID (Irredeemable Deplorables), and has favorably elevated Vladimir Putin to the world's center stage.
The following, from theguardian.com, analyses the situation in terms of Facebook adherents:
. . . The Pew Research Center found that 44% of Americans get their news from Facebook.
Within Facebook’s digital echo chamber, misinformation that aligns with our beliefs spreads like wildfire. Yet fake news is not a uniquely Republican problem. An analysis by BuzzFeed found that 38% of posts shared from three large rightwing politics pages on Facebook included “false or misleading information� and that three large leftwing pages did the same 19% of the time.
What is a uniquely Republican problem is the validation given to fake news by the now president-elect. Trump has routinely repeated false news stories and whipped up conspiracy theories – whether that’s questioning Obama’s heritage, calling climate change a hoax or questioning “crooked� Hillary Clinton’s health – during high-profile rallies, while urging his followers not to trust corrupt traditional media.
The conspiracy theories are amplified by a network of highly partisan media outlets with questionable editorial policies, including a website called the Denver Guardian peddling stories about Clinton murdering people and a cluster of pro-Trump sites founded by teenagers in Veles, Macedonia, motivated only by the advertising dollars they can accrue if enough people click on their links.
Add to this the meddling (hacking) into the DNC and Hillary's e-mail server by the Russians --IMO a case can be built to deny the presidency to an entity who trash-mouthed the electoral process when he thought he was losing. I'm talking about the Electoral College which was insisted upon by Alexander Hamilton to bar the presidency to individuals having the character of Donald Trump. Sure Wiki-leaks showed some shabbiness in Hillary's messages, but consider had the RNC and "the Donald" been hacked exposing Trump in all HIS GLORY, we most certainly would have had another story.
Facebook is hardly an equal to the mainstream media (including FOX) and its newsworthiness journalism standards. I've been asking and debating:
What has the media to gain from favoring one party over the other? The ID is suspicious and fearful of them because they are educated journalists, therefor "elitists." So, should we do away with colleges and universities because they breed such distrust?
You tell me. Where am I missing education's misanthropy? Please, ID, let me know.
