UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

If you type in "Hillary Clinton health" on google, I get 4 suggestions:
Hillary Clinton health care
Hillary Clinton health care plan
Hillary Clinton healthcare reform
Hillary Clinton healthcare plan 1993

If you type in "Hillary Clinton" on Yahoo (not even "health"), I get many suggestions, but 6 out of the top 8 are health related:
Hillary Clinton illness
Hillary Clinton health issues
Hillary Clinton seizures
Hillary Clinton email scandals
Hillary Clinton illness 2016
Hillary Clinton news
Hillary Clinton health
hillary clinton's health problems

(no message)

to fit your secondary facts agenda.

(no message)

You think you can have an honest conversation with anyone?

Your link does not match your claim. Not even close.

(no message)

Giuliani screaming as a FOX TV guest / Trump surrogate "HRC is not well" in fact he says "she's so sick she'll be unfit to make decisions at the highest level". but that couldn't be true they'd say so knowing it's a false statement (though, it is)

But then, you'll certainly shout out about a tweet by someone connected to a media outlet you don't like (incorrectly - out of context - I will add) for HRC's campaign to somehow take down images of HRC seeming to be "unhealthy", whatever that is - I'll say the Bill Frist diagnosis. And morons like you get sucked into the high spin whirlpool of disinformation, neck vein popping, bleeding from your tear-ducts that something or other is somehow cheating as deemed by outlets like Breitbart.

And you wonder why I call you an idiot.

I'll grant you the last word -

The issue here is whether Google should be trying to influence the flow of information in favor of one candidate over another. You seem to be fine with that. But don't pretend you are the one calling for impartiality or transparency. You are arguing for the opposite. You want to inject bias and obfuscation into the most popular search engine. I don't. And that is why you think I'm an idiot...because I expose your biases, and you don't want people giving my words any credence.

You're an idiot


and your post is well after my post - your timeline fits your stupidity.

I know, now you'll argue I'm wrong about that too.

I said "A"
You said "not A (without support), you're an idiot"
I said, "whatever" (sensing the discussion would go nowhere.
You said "not A (without support), you're an idiot"
I said, "Here's your support."
You said, "You posted your support for A after I said not A. You're an idiot."

I think you have some confusion about the meaning of the word "idiot." For you, it is apparently a word repeated by a person who has not bothered to support their position.

The principle stands as true, it is supported with evidence, and you deny it without contrary evidence.

Granted, Google isn't altering searches right now, only search suggestions through autocomplete. If Google started removing the actual videos (showing Hillary faltering) from their search results, I think there would be a popular reaction.

(no message)