(07-31-2018 01:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 12:11 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Boys boys boys. They weren’t going after you or me. They targeted white nurses age 40-48 in western Pa. they had targeted demos. They hacked the DNC’s playbook and shared it. Cambridge Analytica had help. Why do you think they hacked the voter roll data bases? They went into their Facebook accounts with targeted messaging after certain demographics. Estimates are it was worth between 5-7%. It was highly sophisticated. This will come out. This was so so much more than what you guys are even contemplating.

But there is no indication that any of that had any impact. Trump won in a major upset is not sufficient to indicate any of that had any impact. And right now, that is the argument you are making.

There is no way to say with certainty if they had an impact or did not have an impact, none. We can make educated guesses, but in the end they are guesses.

I remember a friend sharing a NBC story on facebook. It was some crazy story about Clinton that had millions of views. I clicked the link, NBC news website opened with that article, others, ads, the whole deal. When i looked at the address bar, it began http://www.nbcnews.ru.
To say that this made-up story or others like it changed minds is impossible so say but I would guess it may have gotten anti-clinton folks out who otherwise may have stayed at home on election day.

(07-31-2018 08:10 AM)BobL Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 01:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 12:11 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Boys boys boys. They weren’t going after you or me. They targeted white nurses age 40-48 in western Pa. they had targeted demos. They hacked the DNC’s playbook and shared it. Cambridge Analytica had help. Why do you think they hacked the voter roll data bases? They went into their Facebook accounts with targeted messaging after certain demographics. Estimates are it was worth between 5-7%. It was highly sophisticated. This will come out. This was so so much more than what you guys are even contemplating.

But there is no indication that any of that had any impact. Trump won in a major upset is not sufficient to indicate any of that had any impact. And right now, that is the argument you are making.

There is no way to say with certainty if they had an impact or did not have an impact, none. We can make educated guesses, but in the end they are guesses.
I remember a friend sharing a NBC story on facebook. It was some crazy story about Clinton that had millions of views. I clicked the link, NBC news website opened with that article, others, ads, the whole deal. When i looked at the address bar, it began http://www.nbcnews.ru.
To say that this made-up story or others like it changed minds is impossible so say but I would guess it may have gotten anti-clinton folks out who otherwise may have stayed at home on election day.

"Guess," "might," and, "no way to know with certainty," are not terms used to make compelling arguments. I agree that there's no way to know. There is certainly no way to prove or disprove anything.

One question I do have. Did anyone on here receive anything during the 2016 campaign that looks like something described as being done by "the Russians"? Just wondering.

(07-31-2018 08:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 08:10 AM)BobL Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 01:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 12:11 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Boys boys boys. They weren’t going after you or me. They targeted white nurses age 40-48 in western Pa. they had targeted demos. They hacked the DNC’s playbook and shared it. Cambridge Analytica had help. Why do you think they hacked the voter roll data bases? They went into their Facebook accounts with targeted messaging after certain demographics. Estimates are it was worth between 5-7%. It was highly sophisticated. This will come out. This was so so much more than what you guys are even contemplating.

But there is no indication that any of that had any impact. Trump won in a major upset is not sufficient to indicate any of that had any impact. And right now, that is the argument you are making.

There is no way to say with certainty if they had an impact or did not have an impact, none. We can make educated guesses, but in the end they are guesses.
I remember a friend sharing a NBC story on facebook. It was some crazy story about Clinton that had millions of views. I clicked the link, NBC news website opened with that article, others, ads, the whole deal. When i looked at the address bar, it began http://www.nbcnews.ru.
To say that this made-up story or others like it changed minds is impossible so say but I would guess it may have gotten anti-clinton folks out who otherwise may have stayed at home on election day.

"Guess," "might," and, "no way to know with certainty," are not terms used to make compelling arguments. I agree that there's no way to know. There is certainly no way to prove or disprove anything.

One question I do have. Did anyone on here receive anything during the 2016 campaign that looks like something described as being done by "the Russians"? Just wondering.

Post after post after post from Mach...

if he's not Russian, he did their work better than them.

(07-31-2018 08:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 08:10 AM)BobL Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 01:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-31-2018 12:11 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Boys boys boys. They weren’t going after you or me. They targeted white nurses age 40-48 in western Pa. they had targeted demos. They hacked the DNC’s playbook and shared it. Cambridge Analytica had help. Why do you think they hacked the voter roll data bases? They went into their Facebook accounts with targeted messaging after certain demographics. Estimates are it was worth between 5-7%. It was highly sophisticated. This will come out. This was so so much more than what you guys are even contemplating.

But there is no indication that any of that had any impact. Trump won in a major upset is not sufficient to indicate any of that had any impact. And right now, that is the argument you are making.

There is no way to say with certainty if they had an impact or did not have an impact, none. We can make educated guesses, but in the end they are guesses.
I remember a friend sharing a NBC story on facebook. It was some crazy story about Clinton that had millions of views. I clicked the link, NBC news website opened with that article, others, ads, the whole deal. When i looked at the address bar, it began http://www.nbcnews.ru.
To say that this made-up story or others like it changed minds is impossible so say but I would guess it may have gotten anti-clinton folks out who otherwise may have stayed at home on election day.

"Guess," "might," and, "no way to know with certainty," are not terms used to make compelling arguments. I agree that there's no way to know. There is certainly no way to prove or disprove anything.

One question I do have. Did anyone on here receive anything during the 2016 campaign that looks like something described as being done by "the Russians"? Just wondering.

Hillary did a fine job on her own of ensuring my vote went to Trump.

Here's something those people like Mach and Bob aren't thinking about.....

there's most likely Russians, posting on facebook and twitter daily, today, posting anti Trump post. I would say the odds are a lot better in that than 230 facebook or twitter post changing one vote