Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

In hindsight, did Borat 2 violate campaign laws?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    If most Trump supporters probably never watched the film in what way do you consider it violated campaign laws?
    Again, your comment about trump supporters watching has nothing to do with the question about campaign law.

    Why are you connecting them? Why do you think one has anything to do with the other?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

      Again, your comment about trump supporters watching has nothing to do with the question about campaign law.

      Why are you connecting them? Why do you think one has anything to do with the other?
      To be entirely frank I think you like to whip up storms in thimbles.
      "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

        To be entirely frank I think you like to whip up storms in thimbles.
        You can be Frank. I'll stick to being Robert. You made an irrelevant point, got called on it, then asked an irrelevant question and got called on it.

        If you try to focus on the actual topic you'll find less storms.
        Last edited by CivilDiscourse; 02-23-2021, 12:18 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

          You can be Frank. I'll stick to being Robert.
          It would appear that my earlier speculation was correct. I also asked you why you considered Baron Cohen had violated campaign laws.

          What is your response?




          "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
            It would appear that my earlier speculation was correct. I also asked you why you considered Baron Cohen had violated campaign laws.

            What is your response?



            You connected the two.

            "If most Trump supporters probably never watched the film in what way do you consider it violated campaign laws?"

            I find your question unclear, why do you think the two things are related?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              um what? You can pay for a foreign agent to work for your campaign, but they can't work for you for free? That doesn't make sense.
              It would make sense to me if they couldn't work for free, since that is an awful lot like a donation.

              But it turns out, that's not the case.

              Source: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/volunteer-activity/

              Although he or she may not make contributions or expenditures (including advances of personal funds), an individual who is a foreign national may participate in campaign activities as an uncompensated volunteer. In doing so, the volunteer must be careful not to participate in the decision-making process of the campaign. The Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations specifically prohibit foreign nationals from participating in the decisions of any person involving election-related activity. For example, a foreign national volunteer may attend committee events and campaign strategy meetings, but may not be involved in the management of the committee.

              © Copyright Original Source


              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                You connected the two.

                "If most Trump supporters probably never watched the film in what way do you consider it violated campaign laws?"

                I find your question unclear, why do you think the two things are related?
                I made an observation that if most Trump voters never saw the film it could not swayed their vote. Hence in that regard it was not propaganda because it most likely never reached those who support Trump

                In what regard do you consider it may have violated campaign laws?
                "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                  I made an observation that if most Trump voters never saw the film it could not swayed their vote. Hence in that regard it was not propaganda because it most likely never reached those who support Trump

                  In what regard do you consider it may have violated campaign laws?
                  Why would it need to reach them? Why did you connect the two things?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                    Why would it need to reach them? Why did you connect the two things?
                    From the OP

                    "The question I have is that this is a foreign national, admitting to deliberately trying to influence the US election."

                    N.B. Your "question" is not actually a question, it is a statement.
                    "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                      From the OP

                      "The question I have is that this is a foreign national, admitting to deliberately trying to influence the US election."

                      N.B. Your "question" is not actually a question, it is a statement.
                      Nice quote mine. Very honest of you.

                      Again, you connected this reaching trump supporters to a violation of campaign law. Why does that need to reach trump supporters?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                        Nice quote mine. Very honest of you.

                        Again, you connected this reaching trump supporters to a violation of campaign law. Why does that need to reach trump supporters?
                        It is not a "quote mine". You asked me "Why would it need to reach them? Why did you connect the two things?" And I gave my reply.

                        That opening comment of yours was reinforced [in my opinion] by your later response [the latter led to my first post on this thread] "Well if you go through the article, he was making an attack ad designed to influence the election against Trump".

                        If the film was not viewed by Trump supporters, how do you reach the conclusion that it was "designed to influence the election against Trump”?


                        The article states that Baron Cohen was making aprotest”. The reference to swaying votersare the words of Catherine Shoard, not Baron Cohen. Shoard also writes “Everything was intentional says Cohen”and quotes him directly with We knew that ultimately it would be women and people of colour who would swing the vote”. In other words, those who watched the film and who were of colour and/or women would probably be the ones most likely to be affected. Not necessarily Trump voters.

                        However, I would suggest that Baron Cohen’s speech to the ADL about Facebook, the subsequent establishment of the Stop Hate for Profit campaign, and the eventual response from both social media platforms might have had more impact on the election.

                        "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


                          It is not a "quote mine". You asked me "Why would it need to reach them? Why did you connect the two things?" And I gave my reply.

                          That opening comment of yours was reinforced [in my opinion] by your later response [the latter led to my first post on this thread] "Well if you go through the article, he was making an attack ad designed to influence the election against Trump".

                          If the film was not viewed by Trump supporters, how do you reach the conclusion that it was "designed to influence the election against Trump”?


                          The article states that Baron Cohen was making aprotest”. The reference to swaying votersare the words of Catherine Shoard, not Baron Cohen. Shoard also writes “Everything was intentional says Cohen”and quotes him directly with We knew that ultimately it would be women and people of colour who would swing the vote”. In other words, those who watched the film and who were of colour and/or women would probably be the ones most likely to be affected. Not necessarily Trump voters.

                          However, I would suggest that Baron Cohen’s speech to the ADL about Facebook, the subsequent establishment of the Stop Hate for Profit campaign, and the eventual response from both social media platforms might have had more impact on the election.
                          You really aren't being honest at all in this discussion:

                          Quote mine, you said I made a statement, not a question, when the very next sentance (that you omitted) was a question.

                          I never mentioned trump supporters, you brought it up, making assumptions about "swing the election". You connected trump supporters seeing the film to campaign law and propaganda. You've never made clear why that connection must exist.

                          You've been very unclear

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                            You really aren't being honest at all in this discussion:
                            I have answered you quite plainly.

                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                            Quote mine, you said I made a statement, not a question,
                            Your first sentence was not a question, despite the fact that it contained the phrase “The question I have”. It was a statement.
                            Your next sentence contained the question.

                            Your OP could have been composed in a more coherent manner. For example:

                            "Here we have a foreign national, admitting to deliberately trying to influence the US election. My question is, beyond the general slickness of his long campaign ad, what's really the difference between him and Russia?"

                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                            I never mentioned trump supporters, you brought it up,
                            I know that.

                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                            making assumptions about "swing the election".
                            I never used the phrase “swing the election”.

                            In the article Catherine Shoard the author wrote “Hence Borat 2. Its mission – to sway voters in advance of the presidential election – was baked into the concept.

                            That is her comment, not a direct quote from Baron Cohen.


                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                            You connected trump supporters seeing the film to campaign law and propaganda. You've never made clear why that connection must exist.
                            Given the way you composed your OP and your subsequent remark, and given that Trump lost the election, I deduced that you were attempting to suggest that a film available to stream on Amazon might, in some way, have affected voting outcomes. However, given that the decision to watch this film was consciously made, I doubt many Trump supporters would have availed themselves of that opportunity. Hence it would not have affected the vote of those already committed to supporting Trump.


                            I still do not know why you consider that this film may have violated campaign law. A question you pose in the thread's title.

                            Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 02-24-2021, 09:43 AM.
                            "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              I have answered you quite plainly.



                              Your first sentence was not a question, despite the fact that it contained the phrase “The question I have”. It was a statement.
                              Your next sentence contained the question.

                              Your OP could have been composed in a more coherent manner. For example:

                              "Here we have a foreign national, admitting to deliberately trying to influence the US election. My question is, beyond the general slickness of his long campaign ad, what's really the difference between him and Russia?"

                              I know that.

                              I never used the phrase “swing the election”.

                              In the article Catherine Shoard the author wrote “Hence Borat 2. Its mission – to sway voters in advance of the presidential election – was baked into the concept.

                              That is her comment, not a direct quote from Baron Cohen.


                              Given the way you composed your OP and your subsequent remark, and given that Trump lost the election, I deduced that you were attempting to suggest that a film available to stream on Amazon might, in some way, have affected voting outcomes. However, given that the decision to watch this film was consciously made, I doubt many Trump supporters would have availed themselves of that opportunity. Hence it would not have affected the vote of those already committed to supporting Trump.

                              I still do not know why you consider that this film may have violated campaign law.

                              Did I say it violated? I said no such thing. You keep making stuff up.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                                Did I say it violated? I said no such thing..
                                Your thread title poses the question. In hindsight, did Borat 2 violate campaign laws?

                                Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                                You keep making stuff up.
                                You appear to be suffering from problems with your short term memory.
                                "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 01:41 PM
                                18 responses
                                118 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Sparko, Yesterday, 10:23 AM
                                31 responses
                                192 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Diogenes  
                                Started by seanD, Yesterday, 03:35 AM
                                10 responses
                                100 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-25-2021, 05:55 PM
                                10 responses
                                75 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-25-2021, 05:16 PM
                                109 responses
                                434 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Working...
                                X