Hillary Clinton: What happened

josevolution

riley540 said:

People actually like Hillary Clinton? 

No but i def didn't wan't whos currently representing us to the world do you ? 

Go Beavers

riley540 said:

People actually like Hillary Clinton? 

Way more than trump

CM189191

riley540 said:

People actually like Hillary Clinton? 

you mean the most qualified candidate to run for president, ever?

Halifax2TheMax

Go Beavers said:

riley540 said:

People actually like Hillary Clinton? 

Way more than trump

2,500,000+ more than trump. 

PB11041

HughFreakingDillon said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

that would be impossible to quantify. if what you are saying here is what I think you are saying, the billions spent on political ads in the media are a complete waste of money?

Actually it is not impossible to quantify. Especially if they are seeking Google, Twitter, Facebook to supply information about ad spend, targeting etc, which by all accounts these companies have willingly supplied as is.  So basically it comes down to in states where actual difference was made, and where that can be dialed down do the precinct level you can very well get an idea if the dollars spent on social media campaigns and digital ads swayed a voters intent, ie changed their mind.  

For example any campaign spend in Texas, California, New York, Massachusetts is and was entirely a waste.  Trump had no chance of winning New York or Massachusetts or California just as Clinton had no chance of winning Texas. 

But in the states that flipped, you have reams of data from multiple election cycles, by county and precinct that would show indications of where change agents voted.  Compared to actual advertising campaigns you would then have the precursor to whether real influence may have occurred.

Moreover, Twitter specifically being that is was not an ad spend issue to be called out because of fake accounts by Russian moles is funny.  The actual penetration of US voting adults on Twitter is so absurdly low that to think that it would have had any tangible impact on voters in rust belt gutted out counties in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania is dubious. 

But in short if you think I am implying the billions spent on political ads are complete waste, no they are not a complete waste.  But because their intent largely is not to sway voters or inform voters who may be willing to consider a change, rather they are largely designed to placate the entrenched opinion of someone who has already decided and maybe not forget to go out and follow up on that preconceived opinion.  So in the sense that they are puff pieces designed to wave pom poms they are great.  In the sense of providing valuable information to people who give a rip they are a total waste of time and money.

Kat

Absolutely. If she was in office, we'd be talking about what she's doing for families instead of stupid twitter comments. I would have liked that a lot.

PB11041

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

HughFreakingDillon

PB11041 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

that would be impossible to quantify. if what you are saying here is what I think you are saying, the billions spent on political ads in the media are a complete waste of money?

Actually it is not impossible to quantify. Especially if they are seeking Google, Twitter, Facebook to supply information about ad spend, targeting etc, which by all accounts these companies have willingly supplied as is.  So basically it comes down to in states where actual difference was made, and where that can be dialed down do the precinct level you can very well get an idea if the dollars spent on social media campaigns and digital ads swayed a voters intent, ie changed their mind.  

For example any campaign spend in Texas, California, New York, Massachusetts is and was entirely a waste.  Trump had no chance of winning New York or Massachusetts or California just as Clinton had no chance of winning Texas. 

But in the states that flipped, you have reams of data from multiple election cycles, by county and precinct that would show indications of where change agents voted.  Compared to actual advertising campaigns you would then have the precursor to whether real influence may have occurred.

Moreover, Twitter specifically being that is was not an ad spend issue to be called out because of fake accounts by Russian moles is funny.  The actual penetration of US voting adults on Twitter is so absurdly low that to think that it would have had any tangible impact on voters in rust belt gutted out counties in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania is dubious. 

But in short if you think I am implying the billions spent on political ads are complete waste, no they are not a complete waste.  But because their intent largely is not to sway voters or inform voters who may be willing to consider a change, rather they are largely designed to placate the entrenched opinion of someone who has already decided and maybe not forget to go out and follow up on that preconceived opinion.  So in the sense that they are puff pieces designed to wave pom poms they are great.  In the sense of providing valuable information to people who give a rip they are a total waste of time and money.

the point is you can gather all the data you listed above that you want.....without knowing who voted for trump that had previously thought they'd vote for clinton, the point is moot. not to mention who came out and voted that didn't vote in previous cycles, and who didn't come out who previously had. you can speculate and predict all that you want, but it is impossible to quantify. 

CM189191

PB11041 said:

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

You sound like someone trying to convince themselves they weren't suckered by russian propaganda.  Better luck to you next election cycle!  

JimmyV

PB11041 said:

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

In 2008 there was a concern that Obama's poll numbers before the election were artificially inflated with people who were scared to say they weren't willing to vote for a black man. We didn't really see any evidence that the concern was warranted in the election results, but I do wonder if there was a similar effect with Trump. Some people were unwilling to admit they were going to vote for Trump all along.

PB11041

CM189191 said:

PB11041 said:

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

You sound like someone trying to convince themselves they weren't suckered by russian propaganda.  Better luck to you next election cycle!  

Given I am neither vested in the Republican nor the Democratic party, I don't expect to have any luck the next election cycle, particularly from a boogeyman that is as fictitious as the tales Republicans have conjured about Clinton for twenty years. 

dignin

PB11041 said:

CM189191 said:

PB11041 said:

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

You sound like someone trying to convince themselves they weren't suckered by russian propaganda.  Better luck to you next election cycle!  

Given I am neither vested in the Republican nor the Democratic party, I don't expect to have any luck the next election cycle, particularly from a boogeyman that is as fictitious as the tales Republicans have conjured about Clinton for twenty years. 

Do you think Russian/Trump ties are all smoke and no fire?

CM189191

dignin said:

PB11041 said:

CM189191 said:

PB11041 said:

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the end. 

Highly unlikely.  There are a lot of people who SAY they are undecided until the last moment, and a great deal of that these days comes down to people do not want to indicate who they are going to vote for to anyone for fear of being mocked, ridiculed, shouted down.

You sound like someone trying to convince themselves they weren't suckered by russian propaganda.  Better luck to you next election cycle!  

Given I am neither vested in the Republican nor the Democratic party, I don't expect to have any luck the next election cycle, particularly from a boogeyman that is as fictitious as the tales Republicans have conjured about Clinton for twenty years. 

Do you think Russian/Trump ties are all smoke and no fire?

a foreign policy adviser on President Donald Trump’s campaign plead guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian officials that is fire, that is no longer smoke

RYME

Allahu hoo Akbar.  New York attack
inspired by Isis...  How well is Isis doing over in Iraq & Syria?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-raqqa-battle-syria-iraq-latest-deir-ezzor-bunkers-weapons-caches-defeat-a7995246.html

elvistheking44

Go Beavers said:

PB11041 said:

The thing about the conspiracy theory of collusion with Russia...

Has anyone yet shown a person who was going to vote for Clinton, but because of a Facebook ad or Twitter bot changed their mind and flipped to Trump?

Particularly in the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.  

  

There were a lot of people who waited until the last moment to decide who to vote for. Comey swayed it at the 

JimmyV

It was fire when Sessions perjured himself. It was fire when Comey was fired. It was fire when Don Jr.'s secret Russian meeting was revealed.

It has been fire for a long while now.

Go Beavers

RYME said:

Allahu hoo Akbar.
Inspired by ISIS.  How well is Isis doing over in Iraq?

What?

JimmyV

RYME said:

Allahu hoo Akbar.
Inspired by ISIS.  How well is Isis doing over in Iraq?

ISIS in Iraq has been on the decline for a while, dating back to the previous administration. ISIS on the streets of NYC is something new. Claiming that "we haven't heard much from ISIS lately" a week after an attack in the US is crazy talk.

PB11041

HughFreakingDillon said:

the point is you can gather all the data you listed above that you want.....without knowing who voted for trump that had previously thought they'd vote for clinton, the point is moot. not to mention who came out and voted that didn't vote in previous cycles, and who didn't come out who previously had. you can speculate and predict all that you want, but it is impossible to quantify. 

Again, it is not impossible to quantify.  The data is largely there, not down to the specific individually identifiable one for one person, but there is enough to data to draw upon to understand the circumstance of the event.  It is just a matter if anyone really wants to look at it.  Which they don't.  This is all political theater.   To start with it would be as simple as what was the ad spend and targeting for the aforementioned states on a digital property like Facebook, of the "colluding overseas" accounts that are suspect.   Overlap and intent would be plainly obvious.  





 

Go Beavers

PB11041 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

the point is you can gather all the data you listed above that you want.....without knowing who voted for trump that had previously thought they'd vote for clinton, the point is moot. not to mention who came out and voted that didn't vote in previous cycles, and who didn't come out who previously had. you can speculate and predict all that you want, but it is impossible to quantify. 

Again, it is not impossible to quantify.  The data is largely there, not down to the specific individually identifiable one for one person, but there is enough to data to draw upon to understand the circumstance of the event.  It is just a matter if anyone really wants to look at it.  Which they don't.  This is all political theater.   To start with it would be as simple as what was the ad spend and targeting for the aforementioned states on a digital property like Facebook, of the "colluding overseas" accounts that are suspect.   Overlap and intent would be plainly obvious.  





 

If you’re supportive of looking at voter data, then why were you so quick to poo poo the data that shows a significant number of voters were undecided at the last minute and then swung more towards trump on election day?