Politics 2020 Field - DNC (2 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Lanny said:
I agree that Biden would win by the largest margin but Warren would be formidable and almost as certain a victor in an election with Trump.
Click to expand...
I not sure, tg
jonnyboy said:
I don’t deny there was meddling goin on. There were some Russian bots that put forth a minimal effort to cheerlead for one candidate or another (yes, there was pro-Hillary stuff coming out of the same bot farm, they were looking for clicks more than anything). The thing I take issue with is people claiming it swayed the election in Trumps favor. That’s not the case, sorry. That’s just an excuse the Democrats came up with instead of owning up to the fact they ran literally the only person on earth who could’ve lost to Donald Trump. They blew the election in epic fashion and to this day refuse to own up to it. The DNC cheating Bernie Sanders didn’t help either. That cost them quite a few voters I’m sure.

The idea that a Russian bot farm cranking out corny memes put Trump in office is fucking ridiculous. And there’s no evidence to support people being “swayed” by it.

The biggest deterrent to the Democratic Party is the Democrats themselves. They are corrupt assholes like the republicans, they are just not as good at it. They need to get their shit together before they blow it again.
Click to expand...
You are right on about running the worst possible candidate against Trump.
I haven't heard many on the democratic side admit that either.
Most independents and libertarians admit it was a big time mistake.
 
Meanwhile, numerous states are cancelling Republican primaries and caucuses to prevent challenge to Trump's coronation. None of the challengers are likely to defeat him, but could give true conservatives a chance to express displeasure. That would hurt Trump's little feelings.
 
jonnyboy said:
I don’t deny there was meddling goin on. There were some Russian bots that put forth a minimal effort to cheerlead for one candidate or another (yes, there was pro-Hillary stuff coming out of the same bot farm, they were looking for clicks more than anything). The thing I take issue with is people claiming it swayed the election in Trumps favor. That’s not the case, sorry. That’s just an excuse the Democrats came up with instead of owning up to the fact they ran literally the only person on earth who could’ve lost to Donald Trump. They blew the election in epic fashion and to this day refuse to own up to it. The DNC cheating Bernie Sanders didn’t help either. That cost them quite a few voters I’m sure.

The idea that a Russian bot farm cranking out corny memes put Trump in office is fucking ridiculous. And there’s no evidence to support people being “swayed” by it.

The biggest deterrent to the Democratic Party is the Democrats themselves. They are corrupt assholes like the republicans, they are just not as good at it. They need to get their shit together before they blow it again.
Click to expand...
The Brits, Germans, French, Ukrainians and others don't think it's ridiculous, they think it's fact. The Russians have interfered with other elections and got their candidate to win. Now they've done it in the United States.
 
Lanny said:
The Brits, Germans, French, Ukrainians and others don't think it's ridiculous, they think it's fact. The Russians have interfered with other elections and got their candidate to win. Now they've done it in the United States.
Click to expand...
I respect your opinion but disagree based on a lack of facts. There is nothing proving the effectiveness of the Russians meddling. Simply proving they meddled isn’t enough to prove it was effective in brainwashing thousands of people into voting for Donald Trump. I don’t know if there is any way to prove that.
 
jonnyboy said:
I respect your opinion but disagree based on a lack of facts. There is nothing proving the effectiveness of the Russians meddling. Simply proving they meddled isn’t enough to prove it was effective in brainwashing thousands of people into voting for Donald Trump. I don’t know if there is any way to prove that.
Click to expand...

Russians-Elections-1200x630.jpg


DORvzgwW0AA1gf5.jpg:large
 
Last edited:
jonnyboy said:
I respect your opinion but disagree based on a lack of facts. There is nothing proving the effectiveness of the Russians meddling. Simply proving they meddled isn’t enough to prove it was effective in brainwashing thousands of people into voting for Donald Trump. I don’t know if there is any way to prove that.
Click to expand...
It's been shown that the Russians affected other elections in other countries.
Also, our intelligence says they affected our election for Mr. Trump and against Secretary Clinton.
1 + 1 = 2
 
Lanny said:
It's been shown that the Russians affected other elections in other countries.
Also, our intelligence says they affected our election for Mr. Trump and against Secretary Clinton.
1 + 1 = 2
Click to expand...
Our intelligence (and I use that term very loosely) says a lot of things that end up being untrue. The fact is there is no data to conclude that people’s opinions were effected to a greater or lesser degree when viewing one candidate or another. You can keep saying “Russia meddled” and technically not be wrong, but getting one detail correct doesn’t validate the rest of the wild theory.
 
jonnyboy said:
Our intelligence (and I use that term very loosely) says a lot of things that end up being untrue. The fact is there is no data to conclude that people’s opinions were effected to a greater or lesser degree when viewing one candidate or another. You can keep saying “Russia meddled” and technically not be wrong, but getting one detail correct doesn’t validate the rest of the wild theory.
Click to expand...

Do you understand that advertising was a 150 billion dollar business last year? A lot of money is spent on persuading people to think and do certain things so it's reasonable to say that there were many who were influenced by the Russian advertising on social media.Sure you say it can;t be proven how many, just as you can;t prove it didn't have any influence, but you would rather walk around with your head in the sand rather than have anything done to prevent or at least discourage the Russian corruption. If it's not effective, why has Russia poured so much money into influencing our elections. Pull your head out johnny. A lot is happening around you.
 
jonnyboy said:
Our intelligence (and I use that term very loosely) says a lot of things that end up being untrue. The fact is there is no data to conclude that people’s opinions were effected to a greater or lesser degree when viewing one candidate or another. You can keep saying “Russia meddled” and technically not be wrong, but getting one detail correct doesn’t validate the rest of the wild theory.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's effectively what I was attempting to relate when I said they didn't pull the levers for us.

I enjoy reading your perspectives. Keep it up, Sir. :twothumbs:
 
jonnyboy said:
Our intelligence (and I use that term very loosely) says a lot of things that end up being untrue. The fact is there is no data to conclude that people’s opinions were effected to a greater or lesser degree when viewing one candidate or another. You can keep saying “Russia meddled” and technically not be wrong, but getting one detail correct doesn’t validate the rest of the wild theory.
Click to expand...

Do you think Russia would continue to get involved with other countries election if they didn’t think it was working or had an impact?
 
crandc said:
Meanwhile, numerous states are cancelling Republican primaries and caucuses to prevent challenge to Trump's coronation. None of the challengers are likely to defeat him, but could give true conservatives a chance to express displeasure. That would hurt Trump's little feelings.
Click to expand...

I am genuinely interested in how you yourself define a true conservative.

And a true liberal.
 
Time for a flashback from the past.

While campaigning for the White House in 2008, Joe Biden criticized the Republicans’ handling of the financial crisis and said, “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here's what happened.’”
 
jonnyboy said:
Our intelligence (and I use that term very loosely) says a lot of things that end up being untrue. The fact is there is no data to conclude that people’s opinions were effected to a greater or lesser degree when viewing one candidate or another. You can keep saying “Russia meddled” and technically not be wrong, but getting one detail correct doesn’t validate the rest of the wild theory.
Click to expand...

Do companies pay large amounts of money for advertising? According to records, According to studies, 151 billion was spent in 2018. Why would companies pay out that kind of money if advertising doesn't change peoples mind and get them to buy their product? If, like you seem to think, it doesn't affect anything wouldn't companies be better off not spending the money and keeping it as profit?
 
CupWizier said:
Do companies pay large amounts of money for advertising? According to records, According to studies, 151 billion was spent in 2018. Why would companies pay out that kind of money if advertising doesn't change peoples mind and get them to buy their product? If, like you seem to think, it doesn't affect anything wouldn't companies be better off not spending the money and keeping it as profit?
Click to expand...
Russia didn’t spend 151 billion. Buzz off.
 
jonnyboy said:
Russia didn’t spend 151 billion. Buzz off.
Click to expand...

Mark Zuckerberg testified to Congress that Russia made a single $150 ad buy on Facebook, and nothing more.

Meanwhile Politico revealed way back on January 11, 2017, that the Ukranian government (the one Biden bribed, not the one that voters replaced them with) had assisted the Clinton Campaign in trying to smear the Newly elected Trump as being mentally unfit.
 
MARIS61 said:
Mark Zuckerberg testified to Congress that Russia made a single $150 ad buy on Facebook, and nothing more.

Meanwhile Politico revealed way back on January 11, 2017, that the Ukranian government (the one Biden bribed, not the one that voters replaced them with) had assisted the Clinton Campaign in trying to smear the Newly elected Trump as being mentally unfit.
Click to expand...

Fake News and you didn't even put forth a fake link.
 
jonnyboy said:
Why not offer up an actual figure?
Click to expand...

What difference does it make? [/Clinton]

Your position, as I understand it, is that not a single vote was influenced by Russia. Maybe I'm misstating that, so feel free to correct.

My position is that there is no way to be sure about whether any votes were influenced.

I don't see the dollar figure changing either of those positions. Also, I don't know if the actual amount is known for certain. I know it has been revised upwards a couple of times.

barfo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top