dagblog - Comments for "How much did Russia actually help Trump?"

Like with the Women's March -

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:08:39 +0000

In reply to Just FWIW, I checked Hillary

Like with the Women's March - she knows when to stay outta sight.

Just FWIW, I checked Hillary

artappraiser — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:02:58 +0000

In reply to How much did Russia actually help Trump?

Just FWIW, I checked Hillary's twitter feed

A new book is out today that picks up where I left off in What Happened in explaining “Those Damn Emails.” Terrific, fact-filled read.https://t.co/i7iFnmHbNV
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) February 6, 2018

Note the subtitle of Lanis' book is: How FBI Director James Comey Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency and she's recommending it.

That was Feb. 6. Everything after that up until the last on Feb. 17 is on Florida. No mention of the indictment at all; don't mean to imply she won't comment in the future.

I suspect contributions fraud

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:40:31 +0000

In reply to I agree, the vote tampering

I suspect contributions fraud as well -

Russia also made use of stolen identities of dead Americans + convicted felons to harass Americans. Here's an example. The felons researchers can contact me privately as privacy of such records must be preserved as those whose identities were stolen are still alive + not at fault pic.twitter.com/fg33GHmHNF
— Amanda Rivkin (@amandarivkin) February 18, 2018

While not tracking <$200 donations seemed safe in say in pre-web 1990, once bots & digital payment systems became commonplace, with the ability to create and close down accounts on the fly, using SSN's of felons and dead people that will never be cross-checked or even archived seems perfect.

" Trump received about $239 million from donors who gave less than $200 in total. That amounts to 69 percent of the Trump campaign’s individual contributions". We're just starting to scrape ice off the iceberg.

Currently, @FCC requires

artappraiser — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 02:51:24 +0000

In reply to How much did Russia actually help Trump?

Currently, @FCC requires every television station in America to disclose detailed info on political advertising purchases: Purchaser, price, target, etc.@facebook and @Google could do same voluntarily, and let the crowd help handle accountability.
— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) February 19, 2018

I agree, the vote tampering

artappraiser — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 23:19:35 +0000

In reply to "water over the damn to

I agree, the vote tampering is different, it is meta, that if it happened, someone else could just as well do it next time. I can't believe that if it is proven we will end up with much of a partisan reaction except among the crazies. It will be devastating to the confidence in voting. Whereas nearly everyone on all sides thinks they are smart enough not to fall for "faux news", they are confident they really know wassup and won't fall for it. If their vote might not be registered properly, that would be a whole different thing.

"water over the damn to

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:58:00 +0000

In reply to In the end, by 2020, doesn't

"water over the damn to analyze this to death" - Not if there was actual vote tampering. Remember, there was no audit done in these states, and whether they had "tamper-proof" voting methods, we know there were a lot of immoral people around who'd do anything for the cause.

I still contend Putin wasn't hanging out waiting for Fake News marketing to take its toll - a way too iffy game plan from a guy who seems to move on a lot of fronts.

And if worked once, could work again - since no one seems to be working very hard to prevent it or even know what happened.

Look, who believes

artappraiser — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:12:34 +0000

In reply to Well, perhaps there are other

Look, who believes Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida are still near 50/50 pro-Trump and anti-Trump? I know without looking at polls that he wouldn't have a chance winning those states today. What is the use of micro-analyzing what happened except this one thing: micro targeting is the future. But the old Trump memes used to win are done, over, kaput. So analyzing how those played won't help with the future.

That's not saying tomorrow, that if this self-described really smart guy comes up with a totally new shtick to sell tomorrow, it wouldn't sell, like: the greatest health care plan of all time, an actual one this time. But lock er up, or criminal immigrant hordes killing, old Trump, that's no longer gonna sell. Move on new issues.

One next big thing looks to me like: can we trust the FBI? That's volatile right now and going to continue to be so, Trump's stoking it, Russian trolls probably too. The Florida shooting just made it worse, anything Mueller's planning to do could make it worse or better. So you have to go to: what do the people of Pennsylvania think about the FBI? Not about what they think about Hillary or more factories coming to their state, doesn't apply anymore.

In the end, by 2020, doesn't

artappraiser — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:25:43 +0000

In reply to Well, perhaps there are other

In the end, by 2020, doesn't it behoove to keep in mind that it is water over the damn to analyze this to death? Only because: demographics of the voters are rapidly changing. The whole rust belt swing voters of old are boomers that are dying and being replaced by millennials with different concerns. Throw in the major wild card of what Trump's initial appeal to his cohort will end up doing to what they think now that he goes back on his promises and they bought a pig in a poke, they come to grips with MAGA being an impossible dream.

Whatever happens with Trump, he is a huge catalyst of change.

I think the only big picture takeaway should be: micro-targeting is the future. But the traditional demographics involved are rapidly changing every day. Thank the catalyst of Trump and even the Russians for that. Even Fox et. al. are going to lose ability to affect as time goes on. Lots of micro tribes allover the place....Facebook for now, be there or be square, something else will eventually take it place.

Good point. And that could

moat — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:03:57 +0000

In reply to Well, perhaps there are other

Good point. And that could point toward the use of disinformation to influence strategy as well as voting outcomes.
The indictment of the Russians allegedly establishes a baseline of cooperation that only considers "unwitting" cooperation with trump campaigners. Any revelation of a more active form of working together would make treating the Russian component as an independent factor a meaningless enterprise.

Well, perhaps there are other

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 19:31:10 +0000

In reply to Silver makes some good

Well, perhaps there are other reasons Michigan was a surprise twice... that might change our suppositions.