There are thousands of extremely important things in the US gun debate that make me far more furious than whether Trump smiled or not for a farking photo.
What does anybody get out of these discussions? Is going around in circles, day after day, arguing the same points with the same person, with no ground ever being given, actually satisfying in any way?
It doesn’t seem like it, and when it gets down to arguing over Trump smiling in a photo… Well, you’re not really having a political discussion anymore.
I’ve been saying this in here for six plus months.
12 won’t change. He’s a despicable troll. But we can’t change that, and there is no use in trying.
The other posters who have no self control, don’t ignore him and continually bicker over everything are the problem, and they are making this thread unreadable for almost everyone else on the forum. If they ignored the guy he would be gone within a week.
You keep saying this. Are you deliberately lying, or have you not read anything the FBI put out or has been linked to in this thread? I posted a link to Fox News where they pretty much state what you just said is wrong, and further set out significant money, resources and work done to influence the elections.
Claiming it was a few facebook posts and a few memes is either incredibly stupid or lying given the evidence now in the public domain.
I think the first article says that they are investigating whether or not the Russians were in bed with Cambridge. You’re right though that the link isn’t proven yet.
The purpose for posting it though was to refute the allegation that the conduct was just a couple of Facebook ads. It was clearly more involved than that.
Still catching up on this thread, but just wanted to chime in on this one.
I use Facebook ads among other forms of advertising in my job. How narrow you can focus your reach on social media is insane. I run ads aimed at a specific age group in specific postcodes at specific times of day/week. Literally no one outside of the parameters I set ever see them.
In terms of response, a $70 Facebook video ad netted me 95ish% of participants for a program I’m running. The other 5% came from the $4.5ish thousand I spent on newspaper ads, flyers, school newsletters and public activations.
I would be interested to know which, if any, “mainstream” companies do not include social media AT ALL in their marketing mix.
“At the heart of the Russian fraud is an essential, embarrassing insight into American life: large numbers of Americans are ill-equipped to assess the credibility of the things they read. The willingness to believe purported news stories, often riddled with typos or coming from unfamiliar outlets, is a liability of today’s fragmented media and polarized politics. Even the trolls themselves were surprised at what Americans would believe. According to the indictment, in September, 2017, once U.S. authorities had begun to crack down on the fraud, one of the defendants, Irina Viktorovna Kaverzina, e-mailed a family member, saying, “We had a slight crisis here at work: the FBI busted our activity (not a joke). So, I got preoccupied with covering tracks together with the colleagues.” She went on, “I created all these pictures and posts, and the Americans believed that it was written by their people.”