Trump's Oklahoma Rally

[DivineOb]

The real irony there was that the lion's share of them actually were done AFTER the election was over.

How is that ironic by any definition?

[rogue06]

You counted?

Facebook did as I've noted previously

Actually they have a pretty darn good idea. In battleground states, according to Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr, they spent a whopping $1979 on ads targeting Wisconsin. In Michigan the total spent was $823. And in Pennsylvania, it was $300.

And for just a bit more context, when Colin Stretch, Facebook's general counsel, testified before the Senate about Russian interference in the election he said that they constituted "about four-thousands of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content."

Further, as I noted in another thread

And according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.

What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."

So

• a minuscule amount was spent.
• the ads equaled about 0.004% of the contents in News Feed
• a decided majority of those who actually saw the ads only saw them after the election.
• 25% of the ads were never seen by anyone before or after the election.
• and Facebook said "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."

Yet you want us to believe they tipped an election. Seriously?

I don't want you to "believe" anything. I'm just providing the facts.

The fact is that they can look at what sort of stuff was put out, when it was put out and when and if anyone clicked on it.

Here's something more for you to chew on.

On the day after Mueller released the 13 Russians back in February (the indictment that blew up in his face when they showed up and he started giving a list of excuses why he didn't want to prosecute them) Facebook ads vice-president Rob Goldman issued several tweets that was studiously ignored by most of the MSM since it contradicted the account they wanted to push.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45880[/ATTACH]

Did you get that?

He later got in trouble with his bosses for, as the New York Times^[1]1. Facebook has a pretty well documented history of leaning left including targeting conservatives for scrutiny and censorship (Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News) -- even going so far as to censor the Declaration of Independence

[rogue06]

How is that ironic by any definition?

In case you don't realize it, any efforts spent to sway an election after the election is over is the definition of ineffective. So those wringing their hands over it are doing so over one of the most inept attempts in modern history.

But go ahead, ignore that since it just doesn't fit into your narrative.

[DivineOb]

In case you don't realize it, any efforts spent to sway an election after the election is over is the definition of ineffective. So those wringing their hands over it are doing so over one of the most inept attempts in modern history.

But go ahead, ignore that since it just doesn't fit into your narrative.

I don't know where you're getting your numbers from but the amount spent was far more than chump change and it reached millions of impressions and hundreds of thousands of clickthroughs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...erence-effort/

And there were good reasons to continue posting the ads after the election. If you can't think of any then you aren't trying very hard.

[rogue06]

The fact is that TikTok has deep connections with the communist Chinese government. Even the folks at the far left Vox have reported on concerns over this connection:

Source: What�s going on with TikTok, China, and the US government?

^[1]Source

© Copyright Original Source

Add into the mix that the company's CEO, Zhang Yiming, issued a letter in 2018 stating that his company would "further deepen cooperation" with Communist Party of China authorities to promote their policies. And Bloomberg reported that TikTok's "privacy" policy reserves the right to share any information they get with the communist Chinese government.

So at the very least the Chicoms control the content on what gets shown on the site. But there may be much more than that. There is evidence that TikTok is loaded with Chinese surveillance software, which has resulted in a class action law suit against them.

So while the TDS crowd still desperately clings to their collusion delusion of Russian election interference (where there is little evidence of the Russian government being involved) they are positively giddy about a Chinese company, with (at the very least) close connections with the Chinese government -- who strictly censors anything and everything they don't approve of -- being involved with election interference.

This conclusively demonstrates that they don't give a rat's rear end about foreign interference in U.S. elections as they have pretended.







1. And it isn't just Republicans who have expressed concerns. The Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asked the U.S. Army to open an investigation into them and their practices (which resulted in the military banning TikTok from all government issued devices). And just before doing that Schumer joined with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark) sent a joint letter to the Director of National Intelligence requesting a security review of TikTok and its parent company.

[rogue06]

I don't know where you're getting your numbers from but the amount spent was far more than chump change and it reached millions of impressions and hundreds of thousands of clickthroughs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...erence-effort/

And there were good reasons to continue posting the ads after the election. If you can't think of any then you aren't trying very hard.

The numbers are from Facebook itself as I've made clear (see post #122).

Essentially they spent less than what a restaurant chain does in running commercials in a large city -- again, with the lion's share coming after the election.

I can imagine every campaign manager and advertising executive are dying to know how they had the massive effect that the left claims it did with so little effort and expenses.

I think it was Bryon York who did some quick analysis and discovered that these guys spent all of a whopping $3200 in all of the battleground states. Not per state but total. That's equivalent to something like 1 maybe 2 late night commercials on a local station.

For some perspective, back during the 2004 race then Newsweek editor Evan Thomas nonchalantly admitted on the now defunct Inside Washington show on PBS that media support was worth up to 15 points to John Kerry in his bid to be president

[DivineOb]

The numbers are from Facebook itself as I've made clear (see post #122).

Essentially they spent less than what a restaurant chain does in running commercials in a large city -- again, with the lion's share coming after the election.

I can imagine every campaign manager and advertising executive are dying to know how they had the massive effect that the left claims it did with so little effort and expenses.

I think it was Bryon York who did some quick analysis and discovered that these guys spent all of a whopping $3200 in all of the battleground states. Not per state but total. That's equivalent to something like 1 maybe 2 late night commercials on a local station.

For some perspective, back during the 2004 race then Newsweek editor Evan Thomas nonchalantly admitted on the now defunct Inside Washington show on PBS that media support was worth up to 15 points to John Kerry in his bid to be president

Should we investigate why WaPo concludes that far more money was spent and why the ads achieved far more visibility?

[rogue06]

Should we investigate why WaPo concludes that far more money was spent and why the ads achieved far more visibility?

Take it up with all the execs at Facebook, some of whom testified under oath and as I've shown are anything but friends with Trump or conservatives.

[DivineOb]

Take it up with all the execs at Facebook, some of whom testified under oath and as I've shown are anything but friends with Trump or conservatives.

Where did they testify to those miniscule dollar amounts? The article I found which mentions those (also from WaPo) predates the one which indicates that the spend was much greater than what you cite. Is it possible that some of your information is outdated?

[DivineOb]

Brad Parscale is preparing to step down. As one does after humiliating their boss on the world stage.

Tee hee.

[rogue06]

mail-fraud.jpg

[shunyadragon]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45923[/ATTACH]

Congratulations to those who made effort to stop the spread of COVID 19 at crowded public rallies.

Oh, ah . . . by the way the Republican's in North Carolina were found guilty of manipulating absentee ballots. The only time it has happened in recent history.

Two other staff members have tested positive for COVID 19.

[rogue06]

Congratulations to those who made effort to stop the spread of COVID 19 at crowded public rallies.

Oh, ah . . . by the way the Republican's in North Carolina were found guilty of manipulating absentee ballots. The only time it has happened in recent history.

Two other staff members have tested positive for COVID 19.

We've covered this before. I provided you with several examples and IIRC so did BtC.

LiBerAl L0gIk
shunyhyp.jpg

[JimL]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45923[/ATTACH]

Believe me if it were possible to get away with false mail in ballots it would be republicans who would be trying to get away with it. The only reason they don't like the idea is because 1) they know they couldn't get away with it. and 2) they know they can't win if everyone is able to vote. Paul Weyrich "I don't want everyone to vote, the more people vote the less chance republicans win". Basically, you conservative republicans just don't believe in democracy which is evident by the corrupt wannabe dictator you continue to support.

[rogue06]

.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45925[/ATTACH]