Sign in to follow this  
dylan winter

Kushner - " couple of face book ads" - libs please vent here

Recommended Posts

the Mueller report is apparently worse for America than the Russian campaign

jolly good stuff Trumpists

Dylan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His dad was trying to help his aunt out by sending her photo’s of her hubby getting a blow job.  Totally overblown...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jared knows what he is doing.

MOSCOW - The Kremlin on Friday, April 19, rejected special counsel Robert Mueller III report on his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, calling it inconclusive in establishing any such meddling and damaging to U.S.-Russian relations.

The report "still does not present any conclusive evidence of alleged interference by the Russian Federation in the electoral process in America," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Friday. "We continue to refuse to accept any such accusation."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

top notch evidence from the Kremlin there

The truth used to be such a marvelous concept in the USA

now dead in merca where the truth is what you want it to be

good stuff lads

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dylan winter said:

top notch evidence from the Kremlin there

The truth used to be such a marvelous concept in the USA

now dead in merca where the truth is what you want it to be

good stuff lads

D

Worse than that even.  Trumpies take Putin's word over US intelligence.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Swimsailor said:

Worse than that even.  Trumpies take Putin's word over US intelligence.  

Putin is probably a better leader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dylan winter said:

Jared Kushner Dismisses Russian Election Interference as ‘Couple of Facebook Ads’

He's only partially right. They were largely amusingly incompetent social media posts, unlikely to do anything but make a viewer laugh.

I never saw one of them before the election and had to ask around to get Rainbow Bernie.

On 11/3/2017 at 7:16 AM, Importunate Tom said:

PANIC!!!
 

Quote

 

According to Facebook, the ads bought by the Internet Research Agency represented "four-thousandths of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content." The Times concedes that "Russia-linked posts represented a minuscule amount of content compared with the billions of posts that flow through users' News Feeds every day." Between 2015 and 2017, the paper notes, "people in the United States saw more than 11 trillion posts from pages on Facebook."

The Russian contribution on other platforms looks similarly unimpressive. Twitter Acting General Counsel Sean Edgett testified that "the 1.4 million election-related Tweets that we identified through our retrospective review as generated by Russian-linked, automated accounts constituted less than three-quarters of a percent (0.74%) of the overall election-related Tweets on Twitter at the time." The Times admits that tweets by Russian operatives posing as Americans "may have added only modestly to the din of genuine American voices in the pre-election melee," and "many of the suspect posts were not widely shared."

Still, the paper insists, the tweets "helped fuel a fire of anger and suspicion in a polarized country."

 

They threw a match at the inferno! It changed EVERYTHING!!!


Actually, as I said, a kind of a dud of a match but it probably burned a bit anyway because, you know, the inferno.

This place is a good example. Lots of little Jussie Smollets around here looking for that elusive Russian shill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Importunate Tom said:

He's only partially right. They were largely amusingly incompetent social media posts, unlikely to do anything but make a viewer laugh.

It's always good to see you speak so definitively from the deep well of your ignorance, and use as your source the honest statements of a sterling company like Facebook. They've never lied before. And the idea of fake accounts on social media is stupid. Nobody does that. Nobody ever. Besides, these social media companys earn billinos in ad-revenue because they cna't convince anyone.

Alternately you might be right. Compulsive single issue shitposters ineffectually and dishonestly arguing positions might just be nasty cunts posting under their real name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dylan winter said:

Putin is probably a better leader

He certainly has convinced me that I don’t need to do ab crunches anymore.  Trump couldn’t do that.  And we live in horse country!  In the West!

The hill is really really long and steep, btw .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putin VS. Trump in a pinky wrestling match...... I'm talking about little finger, not penis.....

 Who wins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mrleft8 said:

Putin VS. Trump in a pinky wrestling match...... I'm talking about little finger, not penis.....

 Who wins?

Trump falls and claims bone spurs.  Putin would put a beating on Shitstain on the first punch.  Has Trump ever tasted the blood in his mouth from a childhood fistfight?  For a guy who says he is tough and smart, I bet we could find fifth graders that could both beat him on US History and kick his ass.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see Putin vs Trump racing Palominos down the Suicide Race hill......

good stuff ~ 1:52 seconds

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohhhh The big cheese roll thing.....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

Trump falls and claims bone spurs.  Putin would put a beating on Shitstain on the first punch.  Has Trump ever tasted the blood in his mouth from a childhood fistfight?  For a guy who says he is tough and smart, I bet we could find fifth graders that could both beat him on US History and kick his ass.  

I'll back that bet, and double it, whatever it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Ohhhh The big cheese roll thing.....

 

Oh the+humanity!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jared probably thinks the 37 people executed today by the Saudi’s suffered minor flesh wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Navig8tor said:

Jared probably thinks the 37 people executed today by the Saudi’s suffered minor flesh wounds.

They would be, to him. We're going to need a wooden stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

They would be, to him. We're going to need a wooden stake.

And the Silver bullet:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Jared probably thinks the 37 people executed today by the Saudi’s suffered minor flesh wounds.

And one of the wounded incurred a minor crucifixion. Big shout out to SA for keepin' it Christian.

Wonder when Jered is going to finish up that middle east peace process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

OH NO ... The Russians Are Cuming

The fact that you can't spell cumming is all we really need to know. Idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Importunate Tom said:

He's only partially right. They were largely amusingly incompetent social media posts, unlikely to do anything but make a viewer laugh.

I never saw one of them before the election and had to ask around to get Rainbow Bernie.


Actually, as I said, a kind of a dud of a match but it probably burned a bit anyway because, you know, the inferno.

This place is a good example. Lots of little Jussie Smollets around here looking for that elusive Russian shill.

wow

just

wow

Dylan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Russians have been at this for a long time. A lot of people in Russia and elsewhere believe that Putin really is a bare-chested horse-and Harley-riding hunting shooting flying he-man who cares about the environment.

Pushing the election chances of a deeply compromised business failure turned TV huckster was never  going to be easy, but they did their best, and......Fuck Me! The idiot won!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that thinks Russia changed the outcome is delusional. 

The last big lie is that the Russia government hacked Podesta and the DNC. 

The DNC was an inside job and Podesta was a fool that some nameless hacker punked. 

There is a reason the DNC refused to give the FBI forensic teams access to their servers. 

This is warping your brains. It is as if your whole existence depends on being able to blame losing on something other than Hillary, Democrats and Liberalism. 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 90 days leading up to the election over 1 billion campaign tweets were tweeted with over 2 trillion views. 

Face book is similarly astronomical. 

As CNN reports. Russians created 126,000,000 views. 

 https://money.cnn.com/2017/10/30/media/russia-facebook-126-million-users/index.html

Or  less than 0.0032% of all political views

And that is before you add in all the Actual campaign political advertising 

There  were over 5 trillion political advertising exposures in the 2016 campaign. The Russian efforts are not even background noise. 

I estimate that out of every 100,000 exposures to political tweets, Facebook posts and paid advertisements ... 

The Russians accounted for less than 2. 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
9 hours ago, Importunate Tom said:

He's only partially right. They were largely amusingly incompetent social media posts, unlikely to do anything but make a viewer laugh.

It's always good to see you speak so definitively from the deep well of your ignorance, and use as your source the honest statements of a sterling company like Facebook. They've never lied before. And the idea of fake accounts on social media is stupid. Nobody does that. Nobody ever. Besides, these social media companys earn billinos in ad-revenue because they cna't convince anyone.

Alternately you might be right. Compulsive single issue shitposters ineffectually and dishonestly arguing positions might just be nasty cunts posting under their real name.

Wow. I guess I might be angry if my girl lost to Donald Trump and the other contestants had votes too numerous for my little brain to count.

But not that angry. Chill out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Importunate Tom said:

Wow. I guess I might be angry if my girl lost to Donald Trump and the other contestants had votes too numerous for my little brain to count.

But not that angry. Chill out!

Nothing makes me happier here than butt-hurt old dogballs breaking out his grudge post stash. It's the white flag of Tom surrendering, his admission that he has absolutely fucking nothing to support his opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Nothing makes me happier here than butt-hurt old dogballs breaking out his grudge post stash. It's the white flag of Tom surrendering, his admission that he has absolutely fucking nothing to support his opinions.

Nothing except, you know, sourced facts to counteract your made up lies.

On 8/9/2018 at 6:42 AM, Importunate Tom said:
On 7/24/2018 at 11:17 PM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

in common parlance several > a few. gary "i'm a fucking whore" johnson had less than half the votes hillary won the popular vote by.

Do you have a source for that claim? Seems mendacious to me.

Nope.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant your opinions on Facebook and Russian interference, not your psycho grudge Dogballs. Dragging up the grudge is just your usual Pyrrhic victory dance. Do it again Dogballs! You'll totally show everyone you aren't a psycho by repeatedly bumping this thread with 9 month old posts from another thread! Winning!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

In the 90 days leading up to the election over 1 billion campaign tweets were tweeted with over 2 trillion views. 

Face book is similarly astronomical. 

As CNN reports. Russians created 126,000,000 views. 

 https://money.cnn.com/2017/10/30/media/russia-facebook-126-million-users/index.html

Or  less than 0.0032% of all political views

And that is before you add in all the Actual campaign political advertising 

There  were over 5 trillion political advertising exposures in the 2016 campaign. The Russian efforts are not even background noise. 

I estimate that out of every 100,000 exposures to political tweets, Facebook posts and paid advertisements ... 

The Russians accounted for less than 2. 

 

I thought CNN was fake news?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

If you were trying to dodge the message the tire marks on your carcass say you failed. 

I just find it interesting that you pick and choose sources.  Is CNN fake news or not?  If so, then the story used to support your thesis is considered bullshit.  

Now, to your point about impact, 126 million people seeing the ads is big, not matter how you look at it.  And some of these actually caused people to go out and do something, like attend a rally...

https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2/

But you are absolutely right, Trump himself caused the hateful, bigoted, racist, homophobic, poorly educated white trash to come out and vote for him.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

I just find it interesting that you pick and choose sources.  Is CNN fake news or not?  If so, then the story used to support your thesis is considered bullshit.  

Now, to your point about impact, 126 million people seeing the ads is big, not matter how you look at it.  And some of these actually caused people to go out and do something, like attend a rally...

https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2/

But you are absolutely right, Trump himself caused the hateful, bigoted, racist, homophobic, poorly educated white trash to come out and vote for him.  

 

Russian propaganda had zero measurable influence on the election. 

The media, Hillary and DNC hyping Russian interference had far more influence. 

They chose to make Russia an issue. They seemed to think their polling and analysis pegged it as a political winner for them. 

Did it work for them? You tell me because I have no idea how many votes the whole Russian story changed or in which direction.  My guess is darn few.  A net wash most likely. 

98% of the harm that stemmed from Russian interference was manufactured here not in the Kremlin. And that is on all of you. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Russian propaganda had zero measurable influence on the election. 

The media, Hillary and DNC hyping Russian interference had far more influence. 

They chose to make Russia an issue. They seemed to think their polling and analysis pegged it as a political winner for them. 

Did it work for them? You tell me because I have no idea how many votes the whole Russian story changed or in which direction.  My guess is darn few.  A net wash most likely. 

98% of the harm that stemmed from Russian interference was manufactured here not in the Kremlin. And that is on all of you. 

So, you are disagreeing with Us intel and the findings of the Mueller report? Based on what, you're feelings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

So, you are disagreeing with Us intel and the findings of the Mueller report? Based on what, you're feelings?

Unless you want to be specific I have no response to such a broad strawman. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Unless you want to be specific I have no response to such a broad strawman. 

What strawman?  You think it's all hype.  US intel disagrees with you.  So, what makes you think it's hype, because you don't like it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which US intel?  Quote please.  Show me one rigorous estimate of the effect the Russian efforts them selves have of changing the out come. 

Show me where the FBI, Justice, State, CIA, NSA etc said the election outcome was materially changed by something the Russian did? 

What the Mueller report did say is the Russian effort began in 2014,  long before Trump was even a whisper. 

What the Mueller report did say is it was teh DNC that determined the breach was Russian and not a disgruntled Sanders supporter. (it was the latter) 

A Q 4 U

Why did the DNC refuse to give the FBI forensic teams access to the physical servers? 

Why did the FBI accept at face value the DNC's analysis. 

Why was the FBI duped into dismissing the possibility there were political reasons behind the DNC conclusions. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack has successfully completed the "How To Ask Questions" course as administered by jzk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Which US intel?  Quote please.  Show me one rigorous estimate of the effect the Russian efforts them selves have of changing the out come. 

Show me where the FBI, Justice, State, CIA, NSA etc said the election outcome was materially changed by something the Russian did? 

What the Mueller report did say is the Russian effort began in 2014,  long before Trump was even a whisper. 

What the Mueller report did say is it was teh DNC that determined the breach was Russian and not a disgruntled Sanders supporter. (it was the latter) 

A Q 4 U

Why did the DNC refuse to give the FBI forensic teams access to the physical servers? 

Why did the FBI accept at face value the DNC's analysis. 

Why was the FBI duped into dismissing the possibility there were political reasons behind the DNC conclusions. 

 

 

Read it for yourself...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/06/us/politics/document-russia-hacking-report-intelligence-agencies.html

Amazing how much you and other Trumpies don't care.

https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia-affect-the-2016-election-its-now-undeniable/

As for the rest of your questions, I suppose you can blame your own party since they were in charge of everything for 2 years.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Swimsailor said:

Read it for yourself...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/06/us/politics/document-russia-hacking-report-intelligence-agencies.html

Amazing how much you and other Trumpies don't care.

https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia-affect-the-2016-election-its-now-undeniable/

As for the rest of your questions, I suppose you can blame your own party since they were in charge of everything for 2 years.  

I'm curious did you read that report?

You keep throwing "Interpretive " opinion out as facts but when presented with the facts you go full retard. 

For example, if you read the Wired articled you obviously missed this paragraph. 

3. Who or what was the operation targeting, and what did it aim to achieve?

The indictment mentions that the Russian accounts were meant to embed with and emulate “radical” groups. The content was not designed to persuade people to change their views, but to harden those views. Confirmation bias is powerful and commonly employed in these kinds of psychological operations (a related Soviet concept is “reflexive control”—applying pressure in ways to elicit a specific, known response). The intention of these campaigns was to activate—or suppress—target groups. Not to change their views, but to change their behavior.

Views = votes

The Russian effort is dwarfed by political spending in the US. You failed on collusion so now it's on to obstruction and influence. This is just politics and you are not man enough to admit it. If Hillary had squeaked by the loony left wouldn't give two shits about Russian influence. 

Why are you so myopic? Romney pegged Russia and it was your team resetting and knee slapping to the tune of "the 1980's called and want their foreign policy back"

In no Feynman multiverse did anyone really think Trump could win.  Sure the Ruskies wanted to weaken Hillary. A damaged president is to their advantage. But, Elect Trump?  Stop being silly. 

Why not point the finger at liberal policy? The internet is a confirmational medium.  Just look at the postings on here. Members seek out sources that confirm their biases. Dismiss contrary opinion as ridiculous and brag proudly that they never watch or read it. Education in America is dominated by liberal policy and indoctrination. Instead of teaching critical thinking and encouraging open minds they embrace and exploit the same mental tricks the Russian employ to indoctrinate students with Liberal mantras. 

I would rather graduate a student with no opinion on climate change but with the critical thinking tools to form one on their own.  

If Americans are ill equipped to identify and dismiss Russian or any propaganda, I blame liberalism. 

I'll address the Fist report later. It's a doozy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

3. Who or what was the operation targeting, and what did it aim to achieve?

The indictment mentions that the Russian accounts were meant to embed with and emulate “radical” groups. The content was not designed to persuade people to change their views, but to harden those views. Confirmation bias is powerful and commonly employed in these kinds of psychological operations (a related Soviet concept is “reflexive control”—applying pressure in ways to elicit a specific, known response). The intention of these campaigns was to activate—or suppress—target groups. Not to change their views, but to change their behavior.

I'm not sure there is any difference here between views and behavior here.  I don't give a shit about someone's views, but their behavior is what counts.  A vote is a behavior.  Someone's views are irrelevant once they mark their vote (or not vote at all).  

36 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Why not point the finger at liberal policy? The internet is a confirmational medium.  Just look at the postings on here. Members seek out sources that confirm their biases. Dismiss contrary opinion as ridiculous and brag proudly that they never watch or read it. Education in America is dominated by liberal policy and indoctrination. Instead of teaching critical thinking and encouraging open minds they embrace and exploit the same mental tricks the Russian employ to indoctrinate students with Liberal mantras. 

I seek out several  sources.  You know why they're aren't any that support your claims?  Because they are proven false by actual data and facts.  Opinion doesn't mean shit in the face of facts.  I have read the Intel report I posted and the Mueller report.  Just so happens many news outlets have already done the cutting and pasting for me.  I would spend the time highlighting the answers myself but you wouldn't give a damn anyway.  Have you read it?  Or so you simply stick by your own confirmation bias?  You have proved that over and over on this forum.  When presented with facts you deflect, ignore and just simply say "no, 1 + 1 = 3".  You are absolutely full of shit  when it comes to critical thinking and open minds.  When I was in college in 2000, I was a close minded conservative.  It wasn't until I actually opened my mind that I learned a bit about the world.  It was your side fooled by the Russians.  You want to blame liberalism for stupid republican behavior?  That's fucking hilarious.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Swimsailor said:

I'm not sure there is any difference here between views and behavior here.  I don't give a shit about someone's views, but their behavior is what counts.  A vote is a behavior.  Someone's views are irrelevant once they mark their vote (or not vote at all).  

I seek out several  sources.  You know why they're aren't any that support your claims?  Because they are proven false by actual data and facts.  Opinion doesn't mean shit in the face of facts.  I have read the Intel report I posted and the Mueller report.  Just so happens many news outlets have already done the cutting and pasting for me.  I would spend the time highlighting the answers myself but you wouldn't give a damn anyway.  Have you read it?  Or so you simply stick by your own confirmation bias?  You have proved that over and over on this forum.  When presented with facts you deflect, ignore and just simply say "no, 1 + 1 = 3".  You are absolutely full of shit  when it comes to critical thinking and open minds.  When I was in college in 2000, I was a close minded conservative.  It wasn't until I actually opened my mind that I learned a bit about the world.  It was your side fooled by the Russians.  You want to blame liberalism for stupid republican behavior?  That's fucking hilarious.  

You have the mental flexibility of a granite dildo.  

Tell me that I'm wrong when I claim that public schools indoctrinate students about Climate and other liberal touchstones instead of teaching students to think critically, marshal facts, avoid bias and decide for themselves. 

That is one of the strong advantages or the International Baccalaureate diploma. They teach the Theory of Knowledge and other critical thinking skills with less indoctrination. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Tell me that I'm wrong when I claim that public schools indoctrinate students about Climate and other liberal touchstones 

What you ignorantly refer to as "indoctrination", we call that "science", which has a well-known lefty bias. 

And horrors, we teach them about evolution too !!  

And for sure, the charter school do a far better job of learnin', except that they steal all the money. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

You have the mental flexibility of a granite dildo.  

Tell me that I'm wrong when I claim that public schools indoctrinate students about Climate and other liberal touchstones instead of teaching students to think critically, marshal facts, avoid bias and decide for themselves. 

That is one of the strong advantages or the International Baccalaureate diploma. They teach the Theory of Knowledge and other critical thinking skills with less indoctrination. 

 

You have experience with granite dildos, I take it?  Careful, enjoying anal play is a sign of being one of the gays.  Don't want to piss of Mother.  

Closed mindedness according to Trumpaloos and most Right Wingers:  having an opinion based on fact, data, empathy, inclusion and fairness.

You are wrong in your claim.  Climate science isn't doctrine.  It's science.  I've been in my child's classroom several times over the years and her teachers have been pretty damn good at teaching them to think freely and I live in a pretty damn conservative community.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Nailing Malarkey get his malarkey nailed with an unpolished granite dildo? Who'd a thunk that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2019 at 1:06 PM, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The Russian effort has been OVER hyped by the DNC, Hillary, media, Mueller, the deep state and everyone else with TDS.

OOOOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOO OOOOOOO look...  Its a new talking point..  Careful, it might just stick..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I'm curious did you read that report?

You keep throwing "Interpretive " opinion out as facts but when presented with the facts you go full retard. 

For example, if you read the Wired articled you obviously missed this paragraph. 

3. Who or what was the operation targeting, and what did it aim to achieve?

The indictment mentions that the Russian accounts were meant to embed with and emulate “radical” groups. The content was not designed to persuade people to change their views, but to harden those views. Confirmation bias is powerful and commonly employed in these kinds of psychological operations (a related Soviet concept is “reflexive control”—applying pressure in ways to elicit a specific, known response). The intention of these campaigns was to activate—or suppress—target groups. Not to change their views, but to change their behavior.

Views = votes

The Russian effort is dwarfed by political spending in the US. You failed on collusion so now it's on to obstruction and influence. This is just politics and you are not man enough to admit it. If Hillary had squeaked by the loony left wouldn't give two shits about Russian influence. 

Why are you so myopic? Romney pegged Russia and it was your team resetting and knee slapping to the tune of "the 1980's called and want their foreign policy back"

In no Feynman multiverse did anyone really think Trump could win.  Sure the Ruskies wanted to weaken Hillary. A damaged president is to their advantage. But, Elect Trump?  Stop being silly. 

Why not point the finger at liberal policy? The internet is a confirmational medium.  Just look at the postings on here. Members seek out sources that confirm their biases. Dismiss contrary opinion as ridiculous and brag proudly that they never watch or read it. Education in America is dominated by liberal policy and indoctrination. Instead of teaching critical thinking and encouraging open minds they embrace and exploit the same mental tricks the Russian employ to indoctrinate students with Liberal mantras. 

I would rather graduate a student with no opinion on climate change but with the critical thinking tools to form one on their own.  

If Americans are ill equipped to identify and dismiss Russian or any propaganda, I blame liberalism. 

I'll address the Fist report later. It's a doozy

Views = Views, which in turn harden the existing views, to make the existing views harder..  or something like that..<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, shaggy said:

Views = Views, which in turn harden the existing views, to make the existing views harder..  or something like that..<_<

In other words the Ruskies had no illusions they could swing the election and instead just wanted to stir up a torrents nest and the useful idiots in the democrat party were happy to oblige.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

um no...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2019 at 12:35 PM, Swimsailor said:

I just find it interesting that you pick and choose sources.  Is CNN fake news or not?  If so, then the story used to support your thesis is considered bullshit.  

Now, to your point about impact, 126 million people seeing the ads is big, not matter how you look at it.  And some of these actually caused people to go out and do something, like attend a rally...

https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2/

But you are absolutely right, Trump himself caused the hateful, bigoted, racist, homophobic, poorly educated white trash to come out and vote for him.  

 

"126000000 could have seen" , still only 0.004% of the political "buy"....

0.004% , That is a big operation, biggly I tell you. 

Funny thing, this news is 2 years old. OP just to stir the shit???? Hmmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this