• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fact check: Trump falsely claims Google 'manipulated' millions of 2016 votes

Rickeroo

Rickeroo

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
4,767
Reaction score
1,478
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Trump falsely claims Google 'manipulated' millions of 2016 votes: Fact check - CNNPolitics


"Using this method, he found that Google's results were reliably more pro-Clinton, in both red states and blue states, than Yahoo or Bing results. Then, using his previous research from elections in other countries about how search results can affect voter intentions, he came to a broad estimate of 2.6 million to 10.4 million votes potentially affected by search bias in the US in 2016."

I wonder how many votes CNN thinks were "manipulated" by Russia's meddling?
 
Terrible to put it this way, facts are rarely all that important in politics.
 
# Manual list of sites excluded from appearing as Google Now stories to read
# results. The urls are used with a UrlMatcher, and should be in the format
# specified in: webutil/urlutil/urlmatcher.h
# START: sites with high user block rate: ariane/173353.
patriotjournal.com/
angrypatriotmovement.com/
donaldtrumpnews.co/
truthfeed.com/
rightwingnews.com/
americanlookout.com/
yesimright.com/
supremepatriot.com/
viralliberty.com/
chicksontheright.com/
conservative101.com/
youngcons.com/
americasfreedomfighters.com/
thetruthdivision.com/
conservativepost.com/
fury.news/
downtrend.com/
therightscoop.com/
libertywritersnews.com/
thefederalistpapers.org/
endingthefed.com/
proud-patriots.com/
newsbusters.org/
usatwentyfour.com/
americanupdater.com/
politicalcult.com/
gopthedailydose.com/
departed.co/
thelibertarianrepublic.com/
usasupreme.com/
dailyheadlines.net/
investmentwatchblog.com/
thegatewaypundit.com/
madworldnews.com/
vdare.com/
conservativetribune.com/
twitchy.com/
freepatriotpost.com/
ihavethetruth.com/
theconservativetreehouse.com/
frontpagemag.com/
worldpoliticus.com/
usanewsflash.com/
webdaily.com/
msfanpage.link/
truthandaction.org/
amaziness.net/
glennbeck.com/
thenewsclub.info/
news.grabien.com/
ilovemyfreedom.org/
louderwithcrowder.com/
truepundit.com/
tactical****.com/
usadailyinfo.com/
redstate.com/
proamericanews.com/
thelastamericanvagabond.com/
unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com/
laacibnet.net/
subjectpolitics.com/
nationalinsiderpolitics.com/
bizpacreview.com/
toprightnews.com/
americannews.com/
everynewshere.com/
pittsburghsportsnow.com/
consfreedom.com/
patheos.com/
worldnewspolitics.com/
christianpost.com/
ascensionwithearth.com/
naturalnews.com/
theeventchronicle.com/
bukedde.co.ug/
yugiohblog.konami.com/
bdnews24us.com/
proudcons.com/
theusualroutine.com/
newsbreakshere.com/
littlepebble.org/
dailycaller.com/

https://www.projectveritas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/news-black-list-site-for-google-now.txt
Click to expand...

That is just a small part of the list. You can find more internal Google documents here: Google “Machine Learning Fairness” Whistleblower Goes Public, says: “burden lifted off of my soul” – Project Veritas

There are video recordings of Google officials saying things like...

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.”
Click to expand...

and...

“We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’re rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again.”

“We’re also training our algorithms, like, if 2016 happened again, would we have, would the outcome be different?”
Click to expand...

More here: Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam – Project Veritas

So...you'll excuse me if I dismiss CNN's quibbling over whether someone said "10 million" or "16 million". We have the words right out of Google's mouth.
 
Rickeroo said:
Trump falsely claims Google 'manipulated' millions of 2016 votes: Fact check - CNNPolitics


"Using this method, he found that Google's results were reliably more pro-Clinton, in both red states and blue states, than Yahoo or Bing results. Then, using his previous research from elections in other countries about how search results can affect voter intentions, he came to a broad estimate of 2.6 million to 10.4 million votes potentially affected by search bias in the US in 2016."

I wonder how many votes CNN thinks were "manipulated" by Russia's meddling?
Click to expand...

Even after all of the crap that's been leaked about google doing this kind of crap.

I got to hand it to whoever thought it was fine to use the "falsely claims" adage in the title.
 
Mycroft said:
That is just a small part of the list. You can find more internal Google documents here: Google “Machine Learning Fairness” Whistleblower Goes Public, says: “burden lifted off of my soul” – Project Veritas

There are video recordings of Google officials saying things like...



and...



More here: Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam – Project Veritas

So...you'll excuse me if I dismiss CNN's quibbling over whether someone said "10 million" or "16 million". We have the words right out of Google's mouth.
Click to expand...

Oborosen said:
Even after all of the crap that's been leaked about google doing this kind of crap.

I got to hand it to whoever thought it was fine to use the "falsely claims" adage in the title.
Click to expand...

And here come the dodges and mental gymnastics. Right on cue. :)
 
Rickeroo said:
Trump falsely claims Google 'manipulated' millions of 2016 votes: Fact check - CNNPolitics


"Using this method, he found that Google's results were reliably more pro-Clinton, in both red states and blue states, than Yahoo or Bing results. Then, using his previous research from elections in other countries about how search results can affect voter intentions, he came to a broad estimate of 2.6 million to 10.4 million votes potentially affected by search bias in the US in 2016."

I wonder how many votes CNN thinks were "manipulated" by Russia's meddling?
Click to expand...


Hmmm,

Methinks Trump has some foundation for his statements:



"The 2.6 million is a rock bottom minimum. The range is 2.6 to 10.4 million depending on how aggressively they (Google/Facebook, etc.) use the techniques I've been studying over the last six years"

Anyone who thinks that Main Stream Media, Social Media, and information conglomerates like Google are not manipulating opinions and thoughts really need to reevaluate their opinions.

More and more evidence is coming to light showing that whatever people accuse foreign agents (like Russia) of doing, home grown "thought control" agents are doing in spades.
 
Last edited:
Phys251 said:
^ And the projection. ;)
Click to expand...

Not even...

The New Democratic Party screams about how Russian stole the election from their Queen by manipulating Facebook, etc., yet when Google is on record discussing how they influence elections, and plan to influence the coming election, the President is false.

And here you are acting as drum major for the deniers.
 
Phys251 said:
And here come the dodges and mental gymnastics. Right on cue. :)
Click to expand...
So you're just going to ignore all of the information released by both current, and recently fired members of Google's staff. Not to mention everything that project Veritas released as well?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmmm,

Methinks Trump has some foundation for his statements:



Anyone who thinks that Main Stream Media, Social Media, and information conglomerates like Google are not manipulating opinions and thoughts really need to reevaluate their opinions.

More and more evidence is coming to light showing that whatever people accuse foreign agents (like Russia) of doing, home grown "thought control" agents are doing in spades.
Click to expand...


I think the main issue here is that people don't like it when you see what is going on behind the curtain.

Certain confirmation biases not withstanding at the very least.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmmm,

Methinks Trump has some foundation for his statements:



"The 2.6 million is a rock bottom minimum. The range is 2.6 to 10.4 million depending on how aggressively they (Google/Facebook, etc.) use the techniques I've been studying over the last six years"

Anyone who thinks that Main Stream Media, Social Media, and information conglomerates like Google are not manipulating opinions and thoughts really need to reevaluate their opinions.

More and more evidence is coming to light showing that whatever people accuse foreign agents (like Russia) of doing, home grown "thought control" agents are doing in spades.
Click to expand...


I was especially interested in the testimony about the FB "Go Vote" reminder issue at 1:40 in that video.
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

And you thought this was a rational effective response?
Click to expand...

Charming. You feel entitled to a long, nuanced response. :lol:
 
ocean515 said:
No. But I would think any poster who thinks they need to accomplish something would write something that hinted at that objective.
Click to expand...
Feel free to prove with your actions that you are entitled to the kind of response I described. :2wave:
 
Newspapers "influenced votes" before the Internet came around. Television "influences votes" too.

Sure, Google and Facebook do it bigger, but it's just the next iteration of the same thing. People aren't hard to manipulate, that's why we spend so much on advertising.

You opt into these things, so I don't see how it's illegal for a U.S. company. Maybe if they themselves are taking instructions from a foreign power.

This is the reason why I knew the Trump/Russian thing wasn't going far, because of course they were influencing the vote, they've been doing that for decades, one way or another. Why wouldn't they?
 
Mycroft said:
That is just a small part of the list. You can find more internal Google documents here: Google “Machine Learning Fairness” Whistleblower Goes Public, says: “burden lifted off of my soul” – Project Veritas

There are video recordings of Google officials saying things like...



and...



More here: Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam – Project Veritas

So...you'll excuse me if I dismiss CNN's quibbling over whether someone said "10 million" or "16 million". We have the words right out of Google's mouth.
Click to expand...

Are these the sites that I should be looking at to avoid the media echo chamber? B/c lemme tell you, those are some hard hitting journalism pieces right there. :lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmmm,

Methinks Trump has some foundation for his statements:



"The 2.6 million is a rock bottom minimum. The range is 2.6 to 10.4 million depending on how aggressively they (Google/Facebook, etc.) use the techniques I've been studying over the last six years"

Anyone who thinks that Main Stream Media, Social Media, and information conglomerates like Google are not manipulating opinions and thoughts really need to reevaluate their opinions.

More and more evidence is coming to light showing that whatever people accuse foreign agents (like Russia) of doing, home grown "thought control" agents are doing in spades.
Click to expand...


I'm starting to get the feeling that no one named Epstein was ever right in anything they've ever done or said.
 
Oborosen said:
Even after all of the crap that's been leaked about google doing this kind of crap.

I got to hand it to whoever thought it was fine to use the "falsely claims" adage in the title.
Click to expand...

The Rasmussen poll is reliably skewed toward Republicans due to their methodology. Should we accuse them of manipulating votes too?
 
NeverTrump said:
Are these the sites that I should be looking at to avoid the media echo chamber? B/c lemme tell you, those are some hard hitting journalism pieces right there. :lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo
Click to expand...

Are you comfortable with Google deciding which sites come up when you conduct a search? How about if they added vox.com to that list?

The point here isn't whether I think you should be looking at those sites or not. You can make your own decision. Heck, I look at left wing sites as much as right wing sites. You don't need to avoid anything.

But your search engine shouldn't be suppressing ANY sites.
 
Mycroft said:
Are you comfortable with Google deciding which sites come up when you conduct a search? How about if they added vox.com to that list?

The point here isn't whether I think you should be looking at those sites or not. You can make your own decision. Heck, I look at left wing sites as much as right wing sites. You don't need to avoid anything.

But your search engine shouldn't be suppressing ANY sites.
Click to expand...

It honestly does not affect me in the slightest. I don't visit junk sites.
 
bearpoker said:
The Rasmussen poll is reliably skewed toward Republicans due to their methodology. Should we accuse them of manipulating votes too?
Click to expand...

Yes...if you can show the data and evidence.

For example, I recently showed how a Fox poll was designed to manipulate their readers by grossly oversampling Democrats and I accused Fox of lying and trying to dishonestly influencing their viewers.

However, if you want to do this with Rasmussen, you'll have to pay to get access to their sampling data. I would love it if you paid and then posted that data here. I'm not inclined to pay, myself.

You mention their "methodology". Please explain what it is about their methodology that indicates they are skewed toward Republicans. If you DON'T present the data, then your claims fall into the category of...unsubstantiated blather.
 
NeverTrump said:
It honestly does not affect me in the slightest. I don't visit junk sites.
Click to expand...

Is Vox a junk site? They are regularly guests on cable news and opinion shows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom