Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Russian interference with the 2016 election

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Charles View Post
    It was such a weak win that if it was not for the Russians it probably would not have been a win at all.
    Yup. They spent less than what a restaurant chain does in running commercials in a large city -- with the lion's share coming after the election.


    I can imagine every campaign manager and advertising executive are dying to know how to do that.





    In fact I think it was Bryon York who did some quick analysis and discovered that these guys spent all of a whopping $3200 in all of the battleground states. Not per state but total. That's equivalent to something like 1 maybe 2 late night commercials on a local station.


    For some perspective, back during the 2004 race then Newsweek editor Evan Thomas nonchalantly admitted on the now defunct Inside Washington show on PBS that media support was worth up to 15 points to John Kerry in his bid to be president ("Let’s talk about media bias here. The media, I think, want Kerry to win. They’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic, and this glow is going to be worth maybe 15 points." )
    Last edited by rogue06; 07-15-2018, 12:45 PM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      I'm not sure of the point you're making. I was referring to the popular vote. "In the final count, Hillary Clinton’s lead in the popular vote of the 2016 presidential election was nearly three million votes."

      http://time.com/4608555/hillary-clin...ar-vote-final/
      Oh, you were talking about the full election after all? In that case, I retract my retraction. You claimed that Hillary Clinton won a majority of the popular vote. But 48.2% isn't a majority; a majority is more than half. Hillary Clinton won a plurality, not a majority.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
        Oh, you were talking about the full election after all? In that case, I retract my retraction. You claimed that Hillary Clinton won a majority of the popular vote. But 48.2% isn't a majority; a majority is more than half. Hillary Clinton won a plurality, not a majority.
        I kinda thought you were wrong when you admitted to being wrong, but I thought maybe I misunderstood, but it's clear that I was right about you being wrong when you admitted you were wrong - you're right!
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          I kinda thought you were wrong when you admitted to being wrong, but I thought maybe I misunderstood, but it's clear that I was right about you being wrong when you admitted you were wrong - you're right!
          00000000000000ars1a3.jpg

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            Yup. They spent less than what a restaurant chain does in running commercials in a large city -- with the lion's share coming after the election.


            I can imagine every campaign manager and advertising executive are dying to know how to do that.





            In fact I think it was Bryon York who did some quick analysis and discovered that these guys spent all of a whopping $3200 in all of the battleground states. Not per state but total. That's equivalent to something like 1 maybe 2 late night commercials on a local station.


            For some perspective, back during the 2004 race then Newsweek editor Evan Thomas nonchalantly admitted on the now defunct Inside Washington show on PBS that media support was worth up to 15 points to John Kerry in his bid to be president ("Let’s talk about media bias here. The media, I think, want Kerry to win. They’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic, and this glow is going to be worth maybe 15 points." )
            It was paid for in crypto currency and likely we will never know the amount spent.

            Jim
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
              Oh, you were talking about the full election after all? In that case, I retract my retraction. You claimed that Hillary Clinton won a majority of the popular vote. But 48.2% isn't a majority; a majority is more than half. Hillary Clinton won a plurality, not a majority.
              She won ~2.1% MORE than trump, or aproximately 2.9 MILLION more votes.

              Jim
              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                I kinda thought you were wrong when you admitted to being wrong, but I thought maybe I misunderstood, but it's clear that I was right about you being wrong when you admitted you were wrong - you're right!
                Careful about the use of language here. To say she won the majority of the votes isn't quit the same as saying she won BY A majority. The former can mean either by a majority or by a plurality. The later is more precise and refers only to >50%.

                This isn't nat Sci and honestly I don't think this topic warrents that sort of splitting hairs given the problem is the fact trump received 3 million fewer votes than clinton. The nation preferred her over him.

                If we are talking about a true mandate from the people, then it may be more correct to require a true majority. I'm actually not 100% sure what is the approprate use there, but it would seem right that would require a true majority.

                Jim
                Last edited by oxmixmudd; 07-15-2018, 10:46 PM.
                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                Comment


                • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  She won ~2.1% MORE than trump, or aproximately 2.9 MILLION more votes.

                  Jim
                  Too bad that running up the popular vote, in California, isn’t how the rules work, huh? You sound like the sore loser complaining about his team losing the World Series by pointing out his team had more total points over 7 games and ignoring the fact the rules are whoever wins 4 games first.
                  "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                  GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                    Careful about the use of language here. To say she won the majority of the votes isn't quit the same as saying she won BY A majority. The former can mean either by a majority or by a plurality. The later is more precise and refers only to >50%.

                    This isn't nat Sci and honestly I don't think this topic warrents that sort of splitting hairs given the problem is the fact trump received 3 million fewer votes than clinton. The nation preferred her over him.

                    If we are talking about a true mandate from the people, then it may be more correct to require a true majority. I'm actually not 100% sure what is the approprate use there, but it would seem right that would require a true majority.

                    Jim
                    No, California preferred her over him. Remove California and she loses by over a million votes.
                    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      She won ~2.1% MORE than trump, or aproximately 2.9 MILLION more votes.

                      Jim
                      That wasn't the claim made. The claim was she won a majority, which is false. If it had said she won more, then fine, but that's not a majority.

                      I should add something else important, however: An implicit attitude I've noticed among people criticizing the electoral college here and elsewhere is an assumption that had it not been in place, Hillary would have won. We don't know that. We can't know that.

                      In the current system, the goal is to win the electoral college. Neither campaign was aiming for the popular vote because they knew it didn't matter for anything other than posterity. In fact, I once saw someone argue that the "popular votes" are not actually popular votes at all, because they are not the decider. At any rate, the goals of candidates were win the electoral college. If a popular vote were the deciding factor, they would have had different campaign goals and would have done a number of things differently. This could easily result in different voting patterns and different results.

                      But perhaps more importantly, we must consider the effect the electoral college has on voting patterns, irrespective of campaigning. Suppose I live in California or Alabama. I know my vote doesn't matter. Therefore, I am probably more likely to vote third party or not bother to vote at all. Similarly, suppose I live in a swing state like Florida, where my vote matters substantially more than in a popular election. I am therefore probably more likely to vote for Trump or Hillary rather than voting third party or not voting at all.

                      There is no way of knowing how this would all shake out. Would Hillary still win? Or would the different votes, both due to the difference in "vote weight" and campaign strategies, cause things to shake out differently? We don't and can't know.

                      Heck, even if the numbers end up the same, the idea Hillary would have won even in a popular vote scheme assumes it's a version in which a plurality is sufficient, rather than one where, if no one gets a majority, it's settled in some other way (likely either the way it's handled now if no one wins an electoral majority, i.e. it going to the House of Representatives, or it being like in Italy or France where the election is re-done with just the top two candidates).

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                        It was paid for in crypto currency and likely we will never know the amount spent.

                        Jim
                        Actually they have a pretty darn good idea. In battleground states, according to Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr, they spent a whopping $1979 on ads targeting Wisconsin. In Michigan the total spent was $823. And in Pennsylvania, it was $300.

                        And for just a bit more context, when Colin Stretch, Facebook's general counsel, testified before the Senate about Russian interference in the election he said that they constituted "about four-thousands of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content."

                        Further, as I noted in another thread
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        And according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.

                        What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."

                        So
                        • a minuscule amount was spent.
                        • the ads equaled about 0.004% of the contents in News Feed
                        • a decided majority of those who actually saw the ads only saw them after the election.
                        • 25% of the ads were never seen by anyone before or after the election.
                        • and Facebook said "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."


                        Yet you want us to believe they tipped an election. Seriously?

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          Actually they have a pretty darn good idea. In battleground states, according to Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr, they spent a whopping $1979 on ads targeting Wisconsin. In Michigan the total spent was $823. And in Pennsylvania, it was $300.

                          And for just a bit more context, when Colin Stretch, Facebook's general counsel, testified before the Senate about Russian interference in the election he said that they constituted "about four-thousands of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content."

                          Further, as I noted in another thread

                          So
                          • a minuscule amount was spent.
                          • the ads equaled about 0.004% of the contents in News Feed
                          • a decided majority of those who actually saw the ads only saw them after the election.
                          • 25% of the ads were never seen by anyone before or after the election.
                          • and Facebook said "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."


                          Yet you want us to believe they tipped an election. Seriously?
                          You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

                          You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
                          When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

                          Jim
                          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 07-15-2018, 11:19 PM.
                          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                            You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

                            You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
                            When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

                            Jim
                            I would apologize for the "you don't know anything about" line. Rogue you are a good fellow, and I don't know what you necessarily know about those sorts of things, and it is not my intent to go hostile on you. So please accept this apology.

                            Jim
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

                              You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
                              When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

                              Jim
                              I don't want you to "believe" anything. I'm just providing the facts.

                              The fact is that they can look at what sort of stuff was put out, when it was put out and when and if anyone clicked on it.

                              Here's something more for you to chew on.

                              On the day after Mueller released the 13 Russians back in February (the indictment that blew up in his face when they showed up and he started giving a list of excuses why he didn't want to prosecute them) Facebook ads vice-president Rob Goldman issued several tweets that was studiously ignored by most of the MSM since it contradicted the account they wanted to push.


                              Did you get that?
                              Most of the coverage of Russian meddling involves their attempt to effect the outcome of the 2016 US election. I have seen all of the Russian ads and I can say very definitively that swaying the election was *NOT* the main goal.



                              The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn’t align with the main media narrative of Tump [sic] and the election.


                              The main goal of the Russian propaganda and misinformation effort is to divide America by using our institutions, like free speech and social media, against us. It has stoked fear and hatred amongst Americans. It is working incredibly well. We are quite divided as a nation.

                              He later got in trouble with his bosses for, as the New York Times (which covered that part), his "unusually candid statement that flouted Facebook’s well-sculpted messaging strategy, which has generally been to stay as far away from partisan debates as possible"[1] -- but not before a couple other Facebook executives, including Andrew Bosworth ("VP AR/VR at Facebook. VP of Ads before that. Co-Invented News Feed, Messenger, Groups, and more" and who has been called one of CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s most trusted lieutenants), praised Goldman for what he did, tweeting it was an "Important thread here."








                              1. Facebook has a pretty well documented history of leaning left including targeting conservatives for scrutiny and censorship (Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News) -- even going so far as to censor the Declaration of Independence. And who can forget how Facebook representatives told Obama’s 2012 campaign that they had been allowed to use the platform in ways that would have otherwise been prohibited, because Facebook was "on our side" and then grumbled about Cambridge Analytica doing the same thing because it helped Trump.
                              Last edited by rogue06; 07-16-2018, 09:25 AM.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                                You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

                                Jim
                                Rogue would like you to acknowledge the facts rather than hyperventilate over what you think must've happened, Jim. You're not presenting a good look here.
                                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                                sigpic
                                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                354 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                361 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X