Thanks. Google Analytics doesn’t work that way though does it?
Thanks. Google Analytics doesn’t work that way though does it?
Really? You expected Trump to base his speech on facts?
That should have been expected from Trump. Biden should have memorized statistics to counter the predictable bullshit.
Not that memorizing stuff is important for the job but it would have been effective in the debate for viewers who just won’t fact check anything.
there was so much jumping around and avoiding questions that it was not very helpful.
Trump did this, but where did Biden do it?
they can in turn use it as a point when luring advertisers.
Wouldn’t that be shared only with potential advertisers upon request via a password rather than just making it publicly available?
I am only speculating, are you?
That does not answer my question.
No I don’t trust their methodology. In fact I am suspicious the numbers are entirely fictitious. I imagine they are highly guarded confidential information which is not public.
And where does he get the traffic data from?
The websites would be guarding that and Google Analytics (if installed/enabled) would not divulge it to a third party.
deleted by creator
Nikki Haley voting for Trump after he called her a birdbrain proves his point.
deleted by creator
Trump posted that he had an “enthusiastic” audience at the Libertarian Party convention.
FACTS — Round 1 voting was:
Story Daniels 1 vote
Denali the Cat 1 vote
Sean Ono Lennon 1 vote
Christian Weston 2 votes
Art Olivier 4 votes
Donald J. Trump 6 votes
Toad 16 votes
RFK Jr 19 votes
Charles Ballay 21 votes
Jacob Hornberger 59 votes
Joshua Smith 73 votes
Lars Mapstead 122 votes
Mike Ter Maat 141 votes
Chase Oliver 181
Michael Rectenwald 259 votes
deleted by creator
The video is great schadenfreude but a better analysis is available (RFK Jr wasn’t well received by attendees either).
Sounds about Right.
In my quote the claim was that Australia was there enforcing the UN resolution. That resolution was made a long time ago, well before China took sides in the Ukraine war. Too late to veto the resolution now.
PS Admittedly my quote is not from a credible source. I haven’t time to test its veracity.
The “you came close to your airspace so we scare you away” response seems like regular old territorial bullying to me.
See my other comment about the EEZ.
Which UN Security Council Resolutions do you think he was referring to if not the NK sanctions?
Shanghai Daily columnist Andy Boreham pointed out… “the area they claim the incident happened is within China’s EEZ… Innocent passage is allowed but military aircraft do NOT constitute 'innocent passage”
Kind of like the many Chinese military incursions in the airspace of the Taiwanese EEZ, eh Andy?
Your doubts are incorrect.
Asked about the incident at the daily Chinese foreign ministry press conference, spokesperson Lin Jian said: “What truly happened was, an Australian military aircraft deliberately flew within close range of China’s airspace in a provocative move that endangered China’s maritime and air security in the name of enforcing UN Security Council resolutions.”
Thanks.