Connect with us

News

Despite Google’s claims they don’t favor ideologies, there’s an omission they must address

Published

on

Despite Googles claims they dont favor ideologies theres an important omission they must address

Does Google censor its search results? The answer to that question is directly related to who you ask. Google denies it. Many conservatives swear by it. The debate will probably continue even when Donald Trump leaves the White House.

Google responds to Trump: Denies favoring ideologies in search results | TheHill

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/403950-google-responds-to-trump-denies-favoring-ideologies-in-search-results“When users type queries into the Google Search bar, our goal is to make sure they receive the most relevant answers in a matter of seconds,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement.

“Search is not used to set a political agenda and we don’t bias our results toward any political ideology,” the statement continues. “Every year, we issue hundreds of improvements to our algorithms to ensure they surface high-quality content in response to users’ queries. We continually work to improve Google Search and we never rank search results to manipulate political sentiment.”

What cannot be denied is that Google gave preferential treatment to Trump’s predecessor. During all of President Obama’s State of the Union addresses, Google prominently promoted live viewings on their homepage.

They didn’t do the same for President Trump’s State of the Union addresses.

This is arguably the most clear evidence that Google favors Democrats because they can’t hide behind internet spiders or algorithm technobabble. It was a conscious decision by people in power to promote President Obama’s addresses just as it was a conscious decision by people in power to not promote President Trump’s.

Whether you like President Trump or not, you must come to one conclusion based on this evidence alone. Google didn’t like President Trump days after he moved into the White House at the very latest and demonstrated this with direct, conscious actions. It cannot be denied based on this evidence alone.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

61% of New Yorkers say no to driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants

Published

on

61 of New Yorkers say no to driver's licenses for illegal immigrants

A good majority of New Yorkers oppose giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants despite being a state known for light treatment of those who come or stay in America illegally, according to a new poll by Sienna College.

My Take

It’s insane that this is a thing. I understand the need to take care of people even though they broke our laws, ignored our sovereignty, and desire to subvert our nation’s culture by forcing their own upon all of us, but letting them drive around legally when they’re not legally supposed to be here is ridiculous.

At some point, Americans are going to wake up and realize the laws that have made us so free and safe as a people have been changed to accommodate the rest of the world. When that happens, we will not longer be America.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Democrats

Who is the current moneyline favorite for the Democratic nomination?

Published

on

Who is the current moneyline favorite for the Democratic nomination

An interesting metric to analyze politics is viewing the moneyline. In fact, online bookies are more accurate at predicting major elections than the partisan hack, Nate Silver and his FiveThirtyEight, who incorrectly guessed every tight Senate race except for the shady Arizona race. But the odd makers spend their time doing their analysis because there is money to be lost if they do poorly. So let’s take a look at one key metric and explore the reasoning as to why.

The lowest tier are the candidates so far out, that they don’t have a moneyline, even when speculated names do. This tier includes Jay Inslee, Pete Buttigieg, and Wayne Messam. Safe to assume that this metric gives these people less of a chance than candidates who have confirmed they aren’t running.

The second lowest tier are the longshots. These candidates range from John Hickenlooper through Corey Booker. These candidates are either not big faces in the Democratic spotlight or are at a serious disadvantage because they have been crowded out of their base. The same could be said about Elizabeth Warren, but she has a devoted core and the potential to make gains when the debates are in full swing.

The next tier are the vultures. Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, and Amy Klobachar need death to survive, metaphorically speaking. The vultures have their sights on a clear target: Joe Biden. If they can feast on his corpse, they’ll survive. But perhaps its Bernie’s corpse they should be gazing upon instead. In truth, I think Yang is more dark horse than vulture, but both appear dark on the outside.

Alas, we have our favorites. Beto O’Rourke, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Kamala Harris, our current frontrunner by this metric. These candidates have the most money, intersectionality points in the case of Harris, ability to win superdelegates as it currently stands, and name recognition. It’s obvious why, at a glance one would rank these names at the top. Under the surface, they also have the most stable base within the Democrat party. Don’t rely too much on polling which will fluctuate like the wind. Kamala Harris could win black vote in the south while the three other white male favorites vie for the northern swathes of the country. And the odds are almost a year out. They too will fluctuate, but I believe the moneyline accurately gives us a picture of our current frontrunners.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Twice convicted, thrice deported Alberto Martinez Flores captured again by border patrol

Published

on

Twice convicted thrice deported Alberto Martinez Flores captured again by border patrol

Deporting criminal illegal immigrants while maintaining such porous and indefensible borders often proves to be a fruitless expenditure. Many of them simply do their time in jail, get deported, then come back the way they came last time. Rinse. Repeat.

Such is the case for Alberto Martinez Flores, 42, who has multiple convictions, including assault, strangulation, vehicular assault, and unlawful imprisonment. This is not a very nice person. In fact, he’s dangerous, yet despite three deportations over the years, including last year, he always finds a way back in.

My Take

Why do people like Flores keep coming back? Because there are too many places without a wall. There aren’t enough border patrol agents. There aren’t enough beds for ICE to house the dramatic influx of humanity crossing our border illegally.

I’m not sure where I read it, but there’s a good case that can be made for increasing jail time on crimes when committed by illegal immigrants. This is something that should definitely be considered in light of our open borders.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report