• 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!

Russia spent a whopping $823 in Michigan ads

OK, well then, what exactly did Rosenstein say that makes you believe social media campaign (which would include FB) attempted to bolster Trump's chances?
And, how can it be explained that Hillary was so far ahead in the polls right up until she lost? I man, IF Russia actually tried to sway the election towards Trump, they sucked at it, and had zero effect on the coasts.
The fly-over and rust-belt states that flipped were somehow more malleable? Or, was it the fact Trump out campaigned Hillary?
Blame her for not even campaigning in Wisconsin, because that makes imminently more sense than blaming Russia.
And how is it that the MSM, with millions of daily viewers, weren't persuaded to not vote for Trump when they scoffed and literally laughed their asses off at his chance of winning?
 
sorry for the double post. Sometimes I want to edit and add a thought soon after I post and wind up doing this:3oops:
 
Mason66 said:
How do you differentiate between getting Trump elected and making sure Hillary was not elected?
Click to expand...

Doesn't one require the other?

Trump is a loud fool. Hillary a conniving old bitch.

You guys have screamed about Hillary so much folks were tuning it out.

Trump on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving. He can be counted on to foment more chaos in our system daily.

So I would expect them to support trump.
 
You expect me to believe that 13 russian trolls impacted the election more than Hillary's 50 billion dollar campaign?

Everytime PeteEU has some **** to say about republicans, can I sue him for impacting the election?

Apparantly, the russians spent ads in support of/against BOTH candidates. The whole point was to sow discord, and everytime some liberal says "we have to impeach Trump", you're just doing their work for them. Congrats. The Russians are laughing their asses off.
 
What if...? said:
Doesn't one require the other?

Trump is a loud fool. Hillary a conniving old bitch.

You guys have screamed about Hillary so much folks were tuning it out.

Trump on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving. He can be counted on to foment more chaos in our system daily.

So I would expect them to support trump.
Click to expand...

Being Anti-Hillary is not eh same as being Pro-Trump.

If somebody else had been nominated on the Republican side, how do you know if "Russia" would have done the same.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
You expect me to believe that 13 russian trolls impacted the election more than Hillary's 50 billion dollar campaign?

Everytime PeteEU has some **** to say about republicans, can I sue him for impacting the election?

Apparantly, the russians spent ads in support of/against BOTH candidates. The whole point was to sow discord, and everytime some liberal says "we have to impeach Trump", you're just doing their work for them. Congrats. The Russians are laughing their asses off.
Click to expand...



They are good little foot soldiers who've taken their marching orders with gusto.
The only chaos I see is the perpetual apoplexy on the Left. Not all of them, but a lot.
Talk about Putin Puppets.
 
Acadia said:
OK, well then, what exactly did Rosenstein say that makes you believe social media campaign (which would include FB) attempted to bolster Trump's chances?
And, how can it be explained that Hillary was so far ahead in the polls right up until she lost? I man, IF Russia actually tried to sway the election towards Trump, they sucked at it, and had zero effect on the coasts.
The fly-over and rust-belt states that flipped were somehow more malleable? Or, was it the fact Trump out campaigned Hillary?
Blame her for not even campaigning in Wisconsin, because that makes imminently more sense than blaming Russia.
And how is it that the MSM, with millions of daily viewers, weren't persuaded to not vote for Trump when they scoffed and literally laughed their asses off at his chance of winning?
Click to expand...

I can't educate you on how this works, but persuasion campaigns use polling, focus groups etc to determine effectiveness and saturation of a message.

If there is collusion, it will take the form of providing the trolls with polling information that would allow them to focus their efforts where the race is closest. Where ,for instance, the race is close and a bunch of Bernie supporters are. Then you focus your efforts there rather than on the coasts, where it won't matter.

My wife was a bigger Bernie fan than me. And her Bernie feeds were on fire with anti-hillary content. There is some evidence that some Bernie supporters either stayed home or even voted for trump in protest to the fixing of the dem nomination. And trump didn't win by much in the states that gave him the win. Well under the vote numbers for stein and Johnson.
 
One thing that I see again and again is people comparing spending on traditional media with the "relatively" low amounts spent on social media and declare that they low spending proves that it had little impact.

Advertising on social media is very cost effective. You can spend $10 on an ad that will go directly to the demographic you are targeting..or spend $1,000 on a billboard that may be completely missed by your target market.

Traditional media vs. social media is apples to oranges. It's like comparing the speed of a turtle to that of a jet. Not even in the same ballpark.
 
What if...? said:
Don't know where you're getting this.

The indictment fully supports the contention that the Russians were actively attempting to get trump elected.

That they were using the tools and techniques I've been pointing out since I came to this site.

If you don't think they decided that trump stupidity would be more disruptive than same old same old Hillary you're fooling yourself.

You'd get yawns from everybody after the benghazi nonsense. The uranium one nonsense.

Do you seriously believe they would have opened up this can of worms had she won? Both parties are utterly dependent on the tools and techniques the trolls used against us. In fact, those trolls simply exploited the division and partisanship fomented by the professional manipulators HERE. The media has been curiously silent on the nuts and bolts of how this was done.

Because going into it would make their product, advertising, less effective.
Click to expand...

An example of pro-Hillary (or rather pro-resist) incitation.

Nov. 12, 2016. The Agency continues its efforts to divide the country, hosting dueling protests in New York. One is meant to “show your support for President-Elect Donald Trump,” and another called “Trump is NOT my President.”

Nov. 19, 2016. The Agency organizes a rally in Charlotte called “Charlotte Against Trump.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dly-tried-to-throw-the-2016-election-to-trump
Click to expand...

Where there's one, there's probably more.

As posted, the Russian goal was to incite greater division in US politics. Sometimes that's best done supporting one candidate, and other times supporting the opposing candidate, and sometimes it's inciting resist type events.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
You expect me to believe that 13 russian trolls impacted the election more than Hillary's 50 billion dollar campaign?

Everytime PeteEU has some **** to say about republicans, can I sue him for impacting the election?

Apparantly, the russians spent ads in support of/against BOTH candidates. The whole point was to sow discord, and everytime some liberal says "we have to impeach Trump", you're just doing their work for them. Congrats. The Russians are laughing their asses off.
Click to expand...

No one is being "sued" for impacting the election. People where indicted for breaking US laws. If people who post here at DP break US laws to affect election results(or for any other reason), then yes, we should charge them with the crimes they committed.

Whether Russian action changed the outcome of the election is both unknowable, and irrelevant to anything. There are too many factors to get a good grasp of what effect Russian actions had, we do not know if the actions in the indictment are the only actions Russia too, so knowing what effect if any they had is not possible to determine. And whether it did or did not is irrelevant to anything, as we have no way to undo an election even if we knew Russian interference tipped the election result. What is important is that they attempted, using criminal activity, to affect our election. We need to know how, so we can work to prevent further meddling in our elections, and we need to know who, so we can properly prosecute lawbreakers.
 
haymarket said:
What was the value of all that free TV time each day for the last month where Trump invoked Wikileaks on behalf of his Russian masters. If Trump had to pay for that daily coverage - the amount would have been staggering.
Click to expand...

Do Russians control the US media?

Hmm....actually, that might explain some things.
 
Redress said:
1.25 million a month, not total.
Click to expand...

Great. How many months were they spending that much? If they spent that money every month of 2016 it would still only be .2% of total campaign spending.
 
Rexedgar said:
From a Wired article by Molly Mckew 16FEB18:




1. What was the scope of the Russian effort?

The Mueller indictment permanently demolishes the idea that the scale of the Russian campaign was not significant enough to have any impact on the American public. We are no longer talking about approximately $100,000 (paid in rubles, no less) of advertising grudgingly disclosed by Facebook, but tens of millions of dollars spent over several years to build a broad, sophisticated system that can influence American opinion.



I call your $3000 bet and go all in!
Click to expand...

Several years??!!! Why are we just catching this now??
 
What if...? said:
I can't educate you on how this works, but persuasion campaigns use polling, focus groups etc to determine effectiveness and saturation of a message.

If there is collusion, it will take the form of providing the trolls with polling information that would allow them to focus their efforts where the race is closest. Where ,for instance, the race is close and a bunch of Bernie supporters are. Then you focus your efforts there rather than on the coasts, where it won't matter.

My wife was a bigger Bernie fan than me. And her Bernie feeds were on fire with anti-hillary content. There is some evidence that some Bernie supporters either stayed home or even voted for trump in protest to the fixing of the dem nomination. And trump didn't win by much in the states that gave him the win. Well under the vote numbers for stein and Johnson.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the Bernie feeds should have been on fire with what the DNC did to fix it for Hillary against him.
 
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Tuesday, July 12, 2016


"The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.
Some $350,000 was sent to OneVoice, ostensibly to support the group’s efforts to back Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement negotiations. But OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report.
In one stunning finding, the subcommittee said OneVoice even told the State Department’s top diplomat in Jerusalem of its plans in an email, but the official, Consul General Michael Ratney, claims never to have seen them.
He said he regularly deleted emails with large attachments — a striking violation of open-records laws for a department already reeling from former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s handling of official government records..."

Netanyahu's legal problems aside, the US is just as guilty as the Russians and others in attempting to influence elections. If Hillary's campaign was so flawed that the Russian attempted influence derailed it, then she wasn't a worthy candidate. After all, she lost to Trump. Of all the candidates the Republicans could've offered, she lost to possibly the worst of them. Doesn't say much for her effort.


​
 
holbritter said:
Several years??!!! Why are we just catching this now??
Click to expand...

The previous administration knew and further, I would be money that Russia wouldn't be such an all-consuming narrative permeating our every waking hour if Hillary won. In fact, I think we'd be blissfully unaware if things went Hillary's way.
 
All I know is I voted for Trump because Russia spent $300 in Pennsylvania advertising a mean looking Hillary picking a booger on Facebook. If it wasn't for that, I would have hit the Hillary button.
 
haymarket said:
What was the value of all that free TV time each day for the last month where Trump invoked Wikileaks on behalf of his Russian masters. If Trump had to pay for that daily coverage - the amount would have been staggering.
Click to expand...

That all goes right back to a short-sighted media that thought they could take Trump down by consistently running stories that showed him in a bad light. They forgot the first rule of marketing -- no advertising is bad advertising. While they tried to take him down, it was the MSM that gave him all that free press. The coverage he got was worth hundreds of millions of dollars -- and he knew that. He played them.
 
dobieg said:
The evidence is in. Russia undoubtedly influenced the election and handed Trump the WH by spending $823 in Michigan, $1979 in Wisconsin and $300 in Pennsylvania.

Surely there can be no further arguments. Russia is the only reason Trump won.

Byron York: A non-alarmist reading of the Mueller Russia indictment
Click to expand...

Cute. While Russia did of course spend many more millions than a few hundred dollars, the thrust of your post ignores the criminal theft and publication of thousands of illegally obtained emails that drove countless news stories.

If you think that had no effect, go ahead and publish all your emails here and see what happens.
 
holbritter said:
Several years??!!! Why are we just catching this now??
Click to expand...

Greetings, holbritter. :2wave:

Excellent question! :thumbs: I can't help but think that there were those who did know - and did nothing to discourage same! :shock:
 
holbritter said:
To be fair, the Bernie feeds should have been on fire with what the DNC did to fix it for Hillary against him.
Click to expand...

Hillary supporters and never Trumpers don't seem to be able to bring themselves to acknowledge the depravity that went on in Hillary's crooked campaign. Donna Brazile's book came and went and the absolute bombshells contained within seem to not even matter.
But, you know, Russia.
 
Rexedgar said:
From a Wired article by Molly Mckew 16FEB18:




1. What was the scope of the Russian effort?

The Mueller indictment permanently demolishes the idea that the scale of the Russian campaign was not significant enough to have any impact on the American public. We are no longer talking about approximately $100,000 (paid in rubles, no less) of advertising grudgingly disclosed by Facebook, but tens of millions of dollars spent over several years to build a broad, sophisticated system that can influence American opinion.



I call your $3000 bet and go all in!
Click to expand...

So, Rex, the Russians influenced you in the who you voted for during the elections? What... you were too busy using tax payer money to interfere in the internal affairs of Syria?

Let me guess... the Russians have been financing and arming Mexicans to swarm across the US boarder to overthrow the US Government? That's what the former colonial powers of the UK and France along with their partner the USA does.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12900

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05782501 Date: 01/07/2016
Click to expand...

During mid-September 2011 French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron traveled to Tripoli to meet with and express support for the leaders of the new government of Libya under the National Transitional Council (NTC). According to knowledgeable individuals, as part of this effort, the two leaders, in private conversations, also intend to press the leaders of the NTC to reward their early support for the rebellion against Muammar al Qaddafi. Sarkozy and Cameron expect this recognition to be tangible, in the form of favorable contracts for French and British energy companies looking to play a major role in the Libyan oil industry.
Click to expand...


What is this "broad and sophisticated system" by the way? I don't have a Facebook account. What is the broad and sophisticated system?

Let me tell you who has a "broad and sophisticated system" targeting mental midgets and moral low lives in the USA. It would be the CIA and NSA and even the FBI working with those two alphabet organizations. Wikileaks reveals Satanic morality in the above quoted blue box, true wickedness, true conspiracy. But the CIA and NSA can get mental midgets and moral low lives to actually brush that off as not a bad thing. Then they perform imbecile circus acts in the media ranting and raving about Russia having influenced the US elections. I read some statement from The Atlantic explicitly stating that the Russians outright elected Trump to the White House. :lol:
 
Cardinal said:
Cute. While Russia did of course spend many more millions than a few hundred dollars, the thrust of your post ignores the criminal theft and publication of thousands of illegally obtained emails that drove countless news stories.

If you think that had no effect, go ahead and publish all your emails here and see what happens.
Click to expand...


Were those emails worse than the Russian Facebook ad of Hillary picking a booger? I know that's what got me.
 
Acadia said:
OK, well then, what exactly did Rosenstein say that makes you believe social media campaign (which would include FB) attempted to bolster Trump's chances?
And, how can it be explained that Hillary was so far ahead in the polls right up until she lost?
And how is it that the MSM, with millions of daily viewers, weren't persuaded to not vote for Trump when they scoffed and literally laughed their asses off at his chance of winning?
Click to expand...

She ignored some states.

The trolls did not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom