Trump Admits Candidacy a Scam – Drops Out Of Race

WASHINGTON — Shocking the country, Donald J. Trump, millionaire and perceived future chancellor of the United States, revealed that his presidential campaign was a scam.

The news was made only yesterday not long after audio of a conversation between Mika Brzezinski, Joe Chatting, and the Trump was leaked by Harry Shearer.

Trump: “My supporters – they love me. They’ll empty their pockets for me. They just want to see me succeed. Most of them are personal donors. [That means] I can say the only difference between campaign money and my money is what bank account it goes in.”

Trump and Brzezinski continued to discuss, with Joe Chatting, how they would publicly announce Trump’s resignation. In this dialogue, Trump admitted that every donation he received he put into a series of personal bank accounts. This means that his campaign was technically funded by his own money. And now he plans to keep it.

“I’m not going to let all that money go to waste. Look at Jeb. $130 million for nothing. You think I’m gonna go out like that?”

In CBS’s very own republican debate, Trump said, about PAC funders and other campaign donors, “…[They’re] spending billions and billions of dollars supporting people.”

Why DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz Should Be Fired

Share this article and include #FireDebbie in your description to raise visibility of the DNC’s blatant corruption. I will donate all ad revenue to the Bernie Sanders campaign when the article finishes making rounds in several days. Please turn off your adblock if you want to help or else your view won’t be counted, and please don’t refresh multiple times 🙂

With #FireDebbie trending, some are wondering just exactly who Debbie is, and why she’s unfit to be the DNC Chair. This largely centers around the attempt to stop the massive growth of independent presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, who promised to end Citizen’s United, a corrupt Supreme Court ruling. Citizen’s United, decided in January of 2010, dictates that unions and corporations can make financial expenditures in favor of a specific candidate. This gives an obscene amount of power to organizations with a lot of capital and a political agenda to push. As a result, his democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, has received most of her campaign funding from Wall Street donations and Super PACs. She tries to distance herself from these donations, as seen by #MaddisDollar, where Clinton sent out a desperate email asking for small donations of $1 in order to lower the amount of her average donation. Schultz has been accused of favoring Hillary Clinton by Sanders activists, and a recent quote from her in a CNN interview adds some merit to their claims.

“Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” she told Jake Tapper on Thursday. This is a blatant display of corruption: Unless Bernie Sanders can win the majority of delegates who have already pledged their support to Hillary Clinton, it will be difficult for him to win the democratic nomination even if he has the support of the majority of Americans. This is displayed prominently in the case of the New Hampshire primary and Iowa caucus. In the Iowa caucus, Clinton won the popular vote by a fraction of a percentage, and in New Hampshire, Sanders won by 22%. In Iowa, Hillary won 29 delegates, while Sanders only won 21. In New Hampshire, Sanders won 15 delegates, while Hillary won 9 despite her abysmal result of 38% of the popular vote.

Bill Murray Announces 2016 Presidential Run

Charleston, SC — From his home in Charleston, South Carolina, legendary actor, comedian, and writer, 65-year-old Bill Murray, shocked the country today by announcing that he will be running for President in 2016.

“I’ve been thinking about doing this for a while now, and you know, it just seems right,” Murray said. “I don’t like most of the candidates that are currently running for President. I mean, Bernie Sanders seems like a decent guy, but the rest of em’, are pretty much complete scum in my opinion.” Murray continued, “I’m always traveling around the world, but I’m proud to call America, the good ole’ U.S. of A, my home. I think there’s a lot of great people here, a lot of potential, but there’s also a lot of confusion and hate. People don’t know what to make of these Hitler wanna-be’s like Donald Trump, and the Ted Cruz’s, who want to start World War III. They feed on the hate and paranoia a lot of this country has, and because of that, you see them leading in the polls. And it’s sad that people go along with it, and can’t see it for what it really is. I think the American people are better than that and they deserve better. I just feel if I didn’t step up and at least try and do something, I don’t know if I could sleep at night. Well, I would eventually fall asleep, I’m not an insomniac or anything. But it would keep me up, that’s for sure. Look, I’m no hero, I just want to help out, and I think I can do that by being President.” Murray finished by saying, “So I’m making it official, right here, right now; I Bill Murray am running for President of the United States in 2016.”

When reporters asked Murray his plans on improving America, Murray said, “I think we ought to be personally responsible. I think if you can take care of yourself and then maybe take care of someone else then that’s sort of how you’re supposed to live. I think we’ve sort of gotten used to someone looking out for us, and I don’t think any other person is necessarily going to be counted on to look out for us.”

So far it is unclear what political party Murray will be joining.

In 2012, Murray met Obama purely by chance at a basketball game – Murray never endorsed him. In fact, when asked about the Obama/Romney race happening that year, Murray said there really wasn’t much difference between them.

“You know they both talk, they’re not so different really, you know if you shake them out, they’re not so different as people in what they say they believe it’s just whether or not they can get it done, and that requires finding that stuff, that real stuff, finding that presence of mind and spirit.”

When asked about his religious views, Murray told reporters, “Religion is the worst enemy of mankind. People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but it does not belong in politics. It imprisons your mind. Religion creates hate, racism, bigotry and keeps you from your true potential in life. No single war in the history of humanity has killed as many people as religion has. I imagine I probably won’t be too popular with the Christian vote in this country, but I’m fine with that,” Murray laughs.

The Unmasking: Ted Cruz is Definitely the Zodiac Killer

The Internet is the international online truth machine, and no matter how much the government may try to cover up massive conspiracies, the internet manages to find the truth. People in positions of prominence and authority are the most likely to be involved in such schemes, and as a result, have their secrets uncovered by diligent internet citizens. As such, Ted Cruz, a junior senator from Texas and candidate for the Republican nomination has become the center of a particularly enthralling and convincing conspiracy. We will state it simply:

Ted Cruz is definitely the Zodiac Killer.

Most people know quite a bit about the Zodiac Killer, without ever uncovering who he was. He committed a series of killings in the Bay Area of California about forty years ago – resulting in up to three dozen killings – after which the killer, presumed to be Ted Cruz, sent letters to California including a coded message.

Small steps – smoothing the way for #mHealth innovation in the NHS

If we’re going to develop digital tools that make a proper difference to people’s lives, then we need fantastic collaboration between app developers, designers, academics, clinicians and people accessing services. This is the magic that will enable great ideas and solutions to emerge.

Sound simple? Well we’ve already come unstuck a few times and we’re only at the beginning of our #mHealthHabitat journey – creating an environment in Leeds for mHealth to flourish.

It’s increasingly apparent to me that NHS institutions can be daunting bodies to collaborate with for all sorts of different reasons. But we desperately need the creativity and technical know-how of digital specialists, alongside the domain expertise of people who know intimately what it is like to live with a particular diagnosis, and people with clinical knowledge, teaming up together.

My aspiration is to make this as easy as possible, and one way to get there is to learn through doing. Once we’ve done it then it will be a little easier the next time. And so on.

A big challenge is in understanding all the checks and balances required by the NHS to protect the safety and privacy of people accessing services. It’s a minefield of information governance, regulation and ethics – all undeniably important and all tricky to balance with agile innovation – learning fast and failing quickly. It is possible to get so lost in regulation that innovation becomes a distant dream.

Last week I hooked up with MindTech, alongside a group of people bringing diverse expertise, to begin unpicking all the fundamental standards that should be considered when recommending, licencing or developing a digital tool within a mental health care context. We looked at existing sites aimed at evaluating apps including NHS Apps Library, My Health Apps and Mind Apps alongside the World Health Organisation mHealth publication.

After much head scratching we came up with a ton more questions, but also an initial list of evaluation criteria that we are going to test out in a piece of user-centred design work for a digital tool we are building with our Yorkshire Centre for Eating Disorders. We certainly didn’t come up with all the answers but I learnt that getting people with lots of different points of view in a conversation is a pretty good place to start.

When is a troll not a troll and who decides?

A few things have caught my attention in recent weeks about the labelling of unwanted behaviours on Twitter as trolling by people who don’t like those behaviours. But when does challenge or disagreement become trolling? and who decides?

So first of all let’s define the verb to troll which is described in the Urban Dictionary as:

The art of deliberately, cleverly, and secretly pissing people off, usually via the internet, using dialogue. Trolling does not mean just making rude remarks: shouting swear words at someone doesn’t count as trolling; it’s just flaming, and isn’t funny. Spam isn’t trolling either; it pisses people off, but it’s lame. The most essential part of trolling is convincing your victim that either a) truly believe in what you are saying, no matter how outrageous, or b) give your victim malicious instructions, under the guise of help.Trolling requires deceiving; any trolling that doesn’t involve deceiving someone isn’t trolling at all; it’s just stupid. As such, your victim must not know that you are trolling; if he does, you are an unsuccessful troll.

The online Cambridge Dictionary has a somewhat more measured definition: ‘to leave an insulting message on the internet in order to annoy someone’ and the online Oxford Dictionary definition is not dissimilar: ‘make a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them’.

So now we get in to trickiness – my tweet that I believe to be fair and justified might be perceived to be antagonistic and offensive by the recipient. The definitions above suggest that intent to annoy is what characterises trolling behaviour, so maybe that should be our compass.

A few bizarre trolling accusations

When Anna-Marie Crampton was recently suspended from UKIP because of her anti-Semitic comments on a blog, she claimed she had been trolled. I’m not at all clear what she meant by this but presumably trolling in this case equates to being found out and held to account… Even more bizarrely, train operator, East Anglia got lampooned extensively on Twitter, and in the press, for accusing a follower of trolling them. Their social media usage policy (still live on their website) defines trolling as: ‘routinely contacting other users who are not your own followers via our feed’- I’m not even going to start trying to unpick that one, but suffice to say not many people would agree with that definition and it certain does not accord with the ones above.

Fancy a bit of ‘show and tell’?

In Leeds we’re busy establishing the right conditions for mHealth (that is digital tools in health services) to flourish in our city – we want to build a community of people up for collaborating together for the purpose of improving experience and outcomes for people accessing health services in the city.

We think that one of the ways to build a community is to provide opportunities for people to come together and share learning in a friendly, informal environment away from the workplace. That’s why we’ve organised our first ‘show and tell’ evening at the new Open Data Institute in Leeds. You can book a free place at the event here.

We’ve got a brilliant line up for our first event with people bringing patient, carer and developer points of view. And if you’d like to share your own ideas then there’s an ‘open mic’ spot for anyone who would like to pitch in as well (2 minute slot per person).

Here’s are a bit more information about our speakers:

John Eaglesham: Developing a digital tool for self-management of chronic pain across a whole care pathway in Leeds

John became Chief Executive of Advanced Digital Institute in 2009, and has led the company from its origins as a not-for-profit institute to its current position as a thriving, fast-growing, entrepreneurial enterprise. John contributes to several key industry groups in the Assisted Living and Smart Metering sectors and advises a number of public and private sector policy-making bodies. He is also a qualified executive coach who works with a number of FTSE 250 company directors.

Kathryn Grace: Digital tools to support caring for family members with dementia from a carer perspective

Kathryn has five years experience as a family care giver, co-ordinating and meeting a complex mix of health and care needs including Alzheimer’s dementia. She has experience working in Information/Communication/Digital and People Centered Service Design. She is currently working on HealthSpark | York #yorkhealth – a social engagement initiative, WeCareDesign and Alzheimer’s family caregiver twitter/research project. Kathryn is also developing projects in health & care – introducing the potential of digital engagement and taking a people-centred approach.

Michael Seres: Creating and using digital tools to self-manage Chrons Disease and post bowel transplant self-care from a patient perspective

Michael was diagnosed aged 12 with the incurable bowel condition Crohn’s Disease. In late 2011 he became the 11th person to undergo a small bowel transplant in the UK at The Churchill Hospital in Oxford. He started blogging about his journey through bowel transplant. His blog has over 95,000 followers and he uses social media to develop global on line peer to peer communities covering over 20,000 patients. He devises social media strategies around patient engagement. Michael mentors patients and their families; is a published author & professional speaker. He is the patient lead for #NHSSM, a facilitator for Centre for Patient Leadership & digital strategy advisor to The Patients Association & Oxford Transplant Foundation.

One cop, a police force, and some social media accounts part 2

Back to the beginning (for me at least)

Over the last few years Twitter and blogging, as well as other platforms, have become increasingly mainstream in the public sector. With more and more people (particularly those in formal leadership positions) entering these spaces, and with the advent of social media guidelines for pretty much every professional group, Twitter and other platforms are increasingly being recognised and promoted as legitimate spaces for professionals to occupy.

Are the stakes higher?

My sense of what happened to @mentalhealthcop is that the stakes feel suddenly higher than a week ago – anyone can say something flippant (goodness knows I have…) make an error of judgement or have a well-intentioned tweet misinterpreted, but it might shock us to think that this could end up the subject of public debate and even hit the mainstream media. The separation of professionally led journalism and citizen led journalism (such as blogging) are increasingly collapsing – with one informing the other and in reverse.

Reputational damage

It is important t(hat people in public positions are impeccable in their behaviour in social media spaces – following guidelines and applying the offline rule ‘what would I do if this happened offline?’) I was struck by the kindness and support of @mentalhealthcop’s online community – his strong personal and professional reputation paid off. For the institution concerned it was another matter – a warning to others that what appears to be a draconian or disproportionate approach may have negative reputational implications. Institutions (or that is their bosses and communication functions) needs to be thinking as much about their own reputation as do the people who work for them.

One tiny bit of speculation

The one and only bit of speculation I will allow myself in this post is to wonder whether the police force in question acted proportionately and if the consequences of their behaviours in managing this situation may have negative/draconian ramifications for public sector professionals and institutions in the future. I do hope not. Time will tell.

One cop, a police force, and some social media accounts

Why blog about recent events in the police force? Well the purpose of my blog is to capture key learning points, reflections and even events as they emerge, which both influence my PhD research and my work role. So when @teaandtalking live tweeted her experience from an inpatient ward I thought that was a formative moment and, with her support, blogged about it. Over the last week the mental health social media sphere has been buzzing with the suspension and resumption of Inspector Michael Brown aka @mentalhealthcop’s Twitter and blog accounts. I don’t intend to describe what happened but you can check out @Sectioned_ excellent summary if you aren’t aware of it or would like to find out more.

I haven’t pestered @mentalhealthcop for an interview as he quite rightly wishes to not discuss the event in public. I am also not going to speculate about the whys and wherefores of what happened. However, with @mentalhealthcop’s blessing, I am going to share a few thoughts and reflections on what this episode might mean for public sector professionals and institutions in social media spaces.

You are what you tweet (part 2)

If you’re honest, genuine and open to other people’s views then, in my experience, you have nothing to fear from Twitter. Yes it will challenge your thinking and yes you won’t agree with everyone, but that doesn’t mean you have anything to fear.

On the whole if you stick to the rule ‘you are what you tweet’ – such as being considerate – then you can only get the very best social media has to offer.

Building relationships and networking in general is what it’s all about. My advice is get stuck in and don’t be afraid to make mistakes. We’re a forgiving bunch on Twitter and if you get something wrong, just say sorry and if the other person doesn’t understand, then that’s their problem. We all make mistakes or say something without thinking, on the whole you will not only learn from it but make new friends in the process, as I have.

My life has significantly changed since using social media (Mainly Twitter) and that’s mainly to do with following up online relationships with real life meet ups. I’ve ended up working with various healthcare professionals and also making friends with people who are also passionate about healthcare.