Here’s a good editorial from the NYT. Simply, Trump is way behind the curve of America’s opioid epidemic. Of course, conservatives and liberals have vastly different views on the most appropriate intervention strategy. Liberals argue that the state should provide effective treatment more readily. Whereas, conservatives focus on the law and order aspects and expect the addict’s family to step in to help. The big rub is that the quality of treatment often depends on family income/wealth. Thoughts?
Dr Alf is right again, there is no evidence of anything other than that of Cambridge Analytica scraping 50 million Facebook accounts for data.
Trump for better or worse secured his Presidential victory by persuading 2 million very poor people, without jobs or hope, to vote for him, in one last desperate throw of the dice. Most of these people were unemployed rust belt workers, who hadn’t voted for anyone in the last 20 years, many were not even in possession of a computer let alone a broadband account and a Facebook account.
What we are being led to believe is that 2 million of these people, if they didn’t have access to computers all had smartphones or tablets and that each of them had enough data on Facebook that could be scraped and then analysed so that Steve Bannon and his minions could then use it to get all 2 million of these people to vote at all and then having made the decision to do so, to vote for Trump.
I would want to see a full evidential trail, with evidence of smartphone ownership and up to date Facebook Profile membership before believing any of that.
Prior to this latest revelation, published by the Observer, we were told that Donald Trump was put into the White House by Vladimir Putin and his cyber warriors working in “Troll factories” and creating fake news. No proof has emerged on that front either, even though it is over a year later, supposedly with probes into Trump’s son, his daughter Ivanka and his son-in-law Jared Kushner going on in the background.
No properly constituted Western court would ever convict someone on this nonexistent evidence and the Observer’s finger pointing does not stand up on the balance of probabilities either.