Spamature
President
List the things she did to herself.
New study says Yes Russia's attack on the US did help Trump win.
- Thread starter Spamature
- Start date
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Your subject change makes it clear you know you've lost.
Not only that, your second paragraph is a joke. Republicans were already voting for Trump. DUH.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Collapsed. Called a large percentage of voters deplorable and beyond redemption. Failed to campaign in rust belt states- Michigan, in particular. That's just off the top of my head.
Bugsy McGurk
President
It would have really boosted law enforcement if Trump and his toadies told law enforcement about some of the 140+\- Kremlin/Team Trump contacts. Of course, Team Trump concealed them, and then lied about them after the fact.
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
You forgot she lied about a video
STEELE DOSSIER COLLUSION WITH A FOREIGN OPERATIVE
FBI cover up of her crimes
Pay for play
anti second amendment
Spamature
President
I didn't change the subject. I just gave you counter example that you could not refute.
If it is a joke then explain how. Are you going to say the right wing media did not have you chumps and suckers believe far fetched lies for years ?
Do I need to list all of the crazy shite you guys believed in just the years before the election ?
They had already driven you to the point where you were vulnerable to Russian propaganda because you had already accepted so many lies from the right wing media's propaganda.
Spamature
President
Alinvegas
FJB
No one is denying that. But y'all didn't have to hire Mueller to find out Trump had nothing to do with it.Of course the GOP knows this and it is assuredly the reason they have tirelessly worked to block any efforts to protect America and prevent future Russian attacks on our electoral system.
They are traitors betraying our country right before our eyes.
Discussion and conclusions
Here we have (a) examined the timing of the IRA Twitter activity, which suggests a strategic release in parallel with significant political events before the 2016 election and (b) used vector autoregression (VAR) to test if the success of IRA activity on Twitter predicted changes in the 2016 election opinion polls. On a weekly time scale, we find that multiple time series of IRA tweet success robustly predicted increasing opinion polls for one candidate, but not the other. The opinion polls do not predict future success of the IRA tweets. The findings proved robust to many different checks.
The result, a one percent poll increase for the Republican candidate for every 25,000 weekly re-tweets of IRA messages, raises two questions about the effect: one regarding the magnitude and one regarding its asymmetry.
Here we have tested prediction, not causality. It seems unlikely that 25,000 re-tweets could influence one percent of the electorate in isolation (Guess, et al., 2019; Allcott, et al., 2019), although this might be more plausible than presumed at first glance, given that only about four percent of viewed tweets result in re-retweets (Lee, et al., 2015), such that 25,000 re-tweets could imply about 500,000 exposures to those messages per week. It is more likely, however, that Twitter is just a subset of a larger disinformation campaign carried out on multiple social media platforms (Issac and Wakabayashi, 2017; Howard, et al., 2018), as well as spread through social contagion (Centola, 2010) and to other parts of the interconnected ‘media ecosystem’ including print, radio and television (Benkler, et al., 2018). In this way IRA disinformation can frame the debate, meaning many more people than those directly exposed can be affected (Jamieson, 2018).
Any correlation established by an observational study could be spurious. Though our main finding has proved robust and our time series analysis excludes reverse causation, there could still be a third variable driving the relationship between IRA Twitter success and U.S. election opinion polls. We controlled for one of these — the success of Donald Trump’s personal Twitter account — but there are others that are more difficult to measure; including exposure to the U.S domestic media.
The asymmetrical effect we observed could be because specific groups and media outlets were targeted by the IRA (Jamieson, 2018; Miller, 2019) and those media outlets were particularly susceptible to disinformation (Benkler, et al., 2018), leading to considerably more re-tweets from those targeted groups (Badawy, et al., 2018).
We use macro-level data to establish a link between exposure to IRA disinformation and changes in U.S. public opinion. However, using aggregated data means we cannot know the extent to which the participants in election polls were exposed to IRA disinformation. This may not matter once social contagion (Centola, 2010) and media ecosystem effects (Benkler, et al., 2018) are taken into consideration. Nonetheless, establishing individual-level causal mechanisms should be a priority (Gerber and Zavisca, 2016; Spaiser, et al., 2017).
Here we have presented evidence that social media disinformation can measurably change public opinion polls. Though we focused on a particular high-profile example in 2016, social media propaganda is a growing problem affecting voting populations around the world, regardless of affiliation, and ought to be given serious attention in the future. Our study motivates future investigation that seeks to establish the causal mechanisms of disinformation exposure on the opinions and behavior of individuals. These future studies should measure exposure to all media in the media ecosystem, not just social media.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
No need to refute an example of something not remotely close to the topic. Now tell me again how an amount of money equal to 0.016% of what was spent on Hillary's behalf moved the polls 1%. Was Cankles Inc. not targeting voters in similar fashion to the nefarious Russians?
Colorforms
Senator
No one in the GOP was president at the timeOf course the GOP knows this and it is assuredly the reason they have tirelessly worked to block any efforts to protect America and prevent future Russian attacks on our electoral system.
They are traitors betraying our country right before our eyes.
Discussion and conclusions
Here we have (a) examined the timing of the IRA Twitter activity, which suggests a strategic release in parallel with significant political events before the 2016 election and (b) used vector autoregression (VAR) to test if the success of IRA activity on Twitter predicted changes in the 2016 election opinion polls. On a weekly time scale, we find that multiple time series of IRA tweet success robustly predicted increasing opinion polls for one candidate, but not the other. The opinion polls do not predict future success of the IRA tweets. The findings proved robust to many different checks.
The result, a one percent poll increase for the Republican candidate for every 25,000 weekly re-tweets of IRA messages, raises two questions about the effect: one regarding the magnitude and one regarding its asymmetry.
Here we have tested prediction, not causality. It seems unlikely that 25,000 re-tweets could influence one percent of the electorate in isolation (Guess, et al., 2019; Allcott, et al., 2019), although this might be more plausible than presumed at first glance, given that only about four percent of viewed tweets result in re-retweets (Lee, et al., 2015), such that 25,000 re-tweets could imply about 500,000 exposures to those messages per week. It is more likely, however, that Twitter is just a subset of a larger disinformation campaign carried out on multiple social media platforms (Issac and Wakabayashi, 2017; Howard, et al., 2018), as well as spread through social contagion (Centola, 2010) and to other parts of the interconnected ‘media ecosystem’ including print, radio and television (Benkler, et al., 2018). In this way IRA disinformation can frame the debate, meaning many more people than those directly exposed can be affected (Jamieson, 2018).
Any correlation established by an observational study could be spurious. Though our main finding has proved robust and our time series analysis excludes reverse causation, there could still be a third variable driving the relationship between IRA Twitter success and U.S. election opinion polls. We controlled for one of these — the success of Donald Trump’s personal Twitter account — but there are others that are more difficult to measure; including exposure to the U.S domestic media.
The asymmetrical effect we observed could be because specific groups and media outlets were targeted by the IRA (Jamieson, 2018; Miller, 2019) and those media outlets were particularly susceptible to disinformation (Benkler, et al., 2018), leading to considerably more re-tweets from those targeted groups (Badawy, et al., 2018).
We use macro-level data to establish a link between exposure to IRA disinformation and changes in U.S. public opinion. However, using aggregated data means we cannot know the extent to which the participants in election polls were exposed to IRA disinformation. This may not matter once social contagion (Centola, 2010) and media ecosystem effects (Benkler, et al., 2018) are taken into consideration. Nonetheless, establishing individual-level causal mechanisms should be a priority (Gerber and Zavisca, 2016; Spaiser, et al., 2017).
Here we have presented evidence that social media disinformation can measurably change public opinion polls. Though we focused on a particular high-profile example in 2016, social media propaganda is a growing problem affecting voting populations around the world, regardless of affiliation, and ought to be given serious attention in the future. Our study motivates future investigation that seeks to establish the causal mechanisms of disinformation exposure on the opinions and behavior of individuals. These future studies should measure exposure to all media in the media ecosystem, not just social media.
Spamature
President
What video ?
The Steele Dossier was not know to the public until AFTER the election.
Trump's dealing with the Russians were.
Comey's letter to Republicans that they then rushed to make public hurt Clinton. The FBI was Trumpland according to agents inside the NY office.
Also the FBI never told the public that there was an FBI investigation into the Trump campiagn until AFTER the election.
It didn't happen. There is NO evidence that Clinton traded the power of her office for favors.
While Trump admitted to bribing public officials on stage in the 1st GOP debate.
No she was not.
But of course we now know that Russian millions were flowing into the NRA coffers to fund Russian propaganda.
Spamature
President
First of all. You are spewing more Russian propaganda while you make claims about Russian propaganda. It was not $160k
From the Mueller Report.
A Russian troll factory had a $1.25 million monthly budget to interfere in the 2016 US election
See, that's how you dispute a lie.
You don't just shout lie. You SHOW it's a lie.
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
What video? you're a dumb ass to ask.What video ?
The Steele Dossier was not know to the public until AFTER the election.
Trump's dealing with the Russians were.
Comey's letter to Republicans that they then rushed to make public hurt Clinton. The FBI was Trumpland according to agents inside the NY office.
Also the FBI never told the public that there was an FBI investigation into the Trump campiagn until AFTER the election.
It didn't happen. There is NO evidence that Clinton traded the power of her office for favors.
While Trump admitted to bribing public officials on stage in the 1st GOP debate.
No she was not.
But of course we now know that Russian millions were flowing into the NRA coffers to fund Russian propaganda.
The Steele dossier was known in 2016
Comey wanted to clear the path of any doubt of Clinton's innocence
Plenty of evidence of Clinton pay for play
nothing she wants in gun control is workable because we already have back ground checks Sutherland church shooting great example
Already have laws that prevent crazy people from getting a gun.
So therefore thanks for proving my point hillary was her own undoing.,
Russian didn't have to do a thing.
Spamature
President
An investigation into Russia's attack which Mueller says Trump & Co obstructed, lied and destroyed evidence to cover up their part in it.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Actually, you're citing an accusation, likely from the very same indictment Mueller immediately began backpedaling and stalling once counsel showed up to demand a speedy trial.
Still, I'm very generous with you since you're not very bright. So let's assume you're correct. $1.25 million X 18 months. That comes out to $2.25 million. Divide that by the $1 billion spent on behalf of Cankles Inc. That comes out to 2.25% or 1/50 of what was spent on Cankles' behalf.
You're still in the hole. At least now you're just six feet under instead of thirty. Keep trying, you're fun to watch:
like the one where you said Obama abandoned three hostages in Iran?
3 million is a bald face lie.
then got drunk and blacked Slick eye and threw stuff at her staff...…..got any pictures of the Trophy she won____________
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
He did- throughout the Iran nuke deal.
Spamature
President
The dumb ass is the one that brings it up but can't name of link to it.
It was not known to the public until after the election.
By accusing her campaign of having withheld evidence ? How was that going to clear her ?
If that is the case then you should be able to name the incidences where that was shown.
And ?
Yet when ever someone shoots a group of people Republicans first response is we need more funding for mental health and ways to prevent them from getting guns.
No, you prove my point that you winger are very susceptible to propaganda.
