I ultimately don't know exactly why Putin wanted Trump to win as I'm not in Putin's head, just that he did.
I suspect because he felt Trump was the more malleable candidate, Putin probably sees Trump as an easily manipulated lough-mouth retard. Maybe/likely Putin has some leverage over Trump, be it because Trump's likely been using his businesses (hotels, resorts, casinos) to launder money in the US for Russian interest for decades. Could be why Putin is the one man Trump dare not say a negative word about.
edit: I highly suspect that Mueller's report will more than touch on whatever [secret] relation Putin and Trump have, if we ever see it, you can ignore that too and go with your feelings there as well
Originally posted by Robtard
I ultimately don't know exactly why Putin wanted Trump to win as I'm not in Putin's head, just that he did.I suspect because he felt Trump was the more malleable candidate, Putin probably sees Trump as an easily manipulated lough-mouth retard. Maybe/likely Putin has some leverage over Trump, be it because Trump's likely been using his businesses (hotels, resorts, casinos) to launder money in the US for Russian interest. Could be why Putin is the one man Trump dare not say a negative word about.
edit: I highly suspect that Mueller's report will more than touch on whatever [secret] relation Putin and Trump have, if we ever see it, you can ignore that too and go with your feelings there as well
Hell I'm not even trying to claim that he didn't want Trump to win, I simply fail to see how Trump's election could be considered the specific intent of the Russian's add campaign.
I'd also like to know why Putin (who is legitimately a very intelligent and manipulative person (contrary to Trump)), knowing quite fully how terrible it would be for Trump's reputation amid the "Russian Ties" accusations, would just outright state he wanted Trump to win in such strong words?
Doesn't that obviously undermine Tru...oh, right. That's exactly why he said that.
Originally posted by darthgooberDunno, I'm not Putin. But negative propaganda can be used to positive affect though; if used correctly.
I'm not asking that you articulate why he wanted Trump to win, I'm asking why it's logical to use more propaganda against Trump than for him if Russia's efforts were specifically about getting Trump elected.
eg Look how many people freaked out and were energized to vote against Clinton when she dared say "deplorable". Negative Trump adds could have this affect on would-be Trumpers, pulling them solidity into Trump's camp as a "oh ya, **** you then!" counter-move, where before they were fence-sitting. Anything else?
Originally posted by Robtard
Dunno, I'm not Putin. But negative propaganda can be used to positive affect though; if used correctly.eg Look how many people freaked out and were energized to vote against Clinton when she dared say "deplorable". Negative Trump adds could have this affect on would-be Trumpers, pulling them solidity into Trump's camp as a "oh ya, **** you then!" counter-move, where before they were fence-sitting. Anything else?
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd also like to know why Putin (who is legitimately an very intelligent and manipulative person (contrary to Trump)), knowing quite fully how terrible it would be for Trump's reputation amid the "Russian Ties" accusations, would just outright state he wanted Trump to win in such strong words?Doesn't that obviously undermine Tru...oh, right. That's exactly why he said that.
If the argument now is Putin's tried to make Trump look bad after Trump won, very possible and it wouldn't surprise me if so. Putin seems like a man who loves to assert his dominance over others where he can.
Originally posted by darthgoober
So you don't have any idea how it's logical at all, yet you claim that it's 100% logical AND factual?
I literally just gave you a logical reason/use of negative propaganda and used an example of how a negative against someone can turn (or be used here) to their advantage. So you're playing games now by pretending I didn't answer you spot on.
Feel free is ignore the facts I laid out and go with your feelings again though.
Originally posted by Robtard
If the argument now is Putin's tried to make Trump look bad after Trump won, very possible and it wouldn't surprise me if so. Putin seems like a man who loves to assert his dominance over others where he can.
Right. Backfire was right from the beginning. It's just taking us all a bit longer to come around.
Originally posted by Robtard
I literally just gave you a logical reason/use of negative propaganda and used an example of how a negative against someone can turn (or be used here) to their advantage. So you're playing games now by pretending I didn't answer you spot on.Feel free is ignore the facts I laid out and go with your feelings again though.
If we go with "all anti propaganda is the same and has the same effect", but that's silly. I accept that it's not all the same, really depends on the intentions of the creator, there's lots of strategy and thinking that goes into political adds. Some negative adds can be used to produce a negative and some can be used to produce a positive for the cause.
eg An add calling Trump a pedophile would likely produce outrage in people and cause more people to gravitate towards Trump than away, out of the "how dare they use those tactics, **** them!" So he loses 5 voters but gains 22 (just numbers here), that's a negative add which produced a positive result. Demographics and where adds are used also come to play, as one add may work better somewhere specific. You're welcome.
Originally posted by Robtard
If we go with "all anti propaganda is the same and has the same effect", but that's silly. I accept that it's not all the same, really depends on the intentions of the creator, there's lots of strategy and thinking that goes into political adds. Some negative adds can be used to produce a negative and some can be used to produce a positive for the cause.eg An add calling Trump a pedophile would likely produce outrage in people and cause more people to gravitate towards Trump than away, out of the "how dare they use those tactics, **** them!" So he loses 5 voters but gains 22 (just numbers here), that's a negative add which produced a positive result. Demographics and where adds are used also come to play, as one add may work better somewhere specific. You're welcome.
Really... so the stuff about Hillary's blood orgies and pedophile ring were actually pro Hillary propaganda in disguise? Because there were a fair number of totally outlandish claims about Hillary made... so it's actually very possible that Russia did give her the popular vote lol
I think we should stop debating the ads.
Just look at them for yourself:
https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/social-media-content/social-media-advertisements.htm
You can download the Russian ads, see how much they cost, sometimes get click information, etc.
Hey, Quan, you can get click info on those ads. You can see how many times they showed up in feeds, as well.
Adding it all up, almost none were clicked. None. And there are always some successful ads that get hundreds of views and dozens of clicks. Like the Pro Jeb Bush and Pro Ted Cruz ones that oppose illegal immigration (they don't even hide it: they mention Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz by name).
And the number of times they ended up in feeds? Around 50 times, each time.
And the majority of the ads? About supporting minorities, standing up to racism, and "multicultural affinity." Yeah, each of those ads is anti-Trump. Every single one.
Russia didn't influence shit.
Most of these ads I am looking through are just pro-black stuff. It's weird. Didn't know Russians loved the black community in the US so much.
Originally posted by darthgoober
But you seem to be assuming that's the case without actually comparing all the adds. Honestly seems kinda like you're just latching on to any possibility that supports a predetermined opinion you have.Really... so the stuff about Hillary's blood orgies and pedophile ring were actually pro Hillary propaganda in disguise? Because there were a fair number of totally outlandish claims about Hillary made... so it's actually very possible that Russia did give her the popular vote lol
Check out the link I just posted. Download and look through the ads yourself.
Make up your own mind. I don't buy the crap the Democrats are peddling in Congress.
I've been looking through the ads. A LOT of them.
There are a ton of SJW ads. A ton.
They appear to make up a majority of these things. I am also running across entire accounts dedicated to being anti-GOP and anti-Trump. So far, no anti-Hillary accounts. Just pro-Gun accounts that have a splash of anti-Dem and anti-Obama stuff.
I'll keep looking. If I had time, I could do more than a sample review and do a true split.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I've been looking through the ads. A LOT of them.There are a ton of SJW ads. A ton.
They appear to make up a majority of these things. I am also running across entire accounts dedicated to being anti-GOP and anti-Trump. So far, no anti-Hillary accounts. Just pro-Gun accounts that have a splash of anti-Dem and anti-Obama stuff.
I'll keep looking. If I had time, I could do more than a sample review and do a true split.
Originally posted by darthgoober
No promises, but if I get bored enough I might do a detailed sort of them. Not a huge likelihood that'll happen though... from the look of it there's freaking truckload of these things lol
Here's how I would do the split.
7 folders
1. Anti-Hillary/Anti-Dem
2. Pro-Hillary/Pro-Dem
3. Anti-Trump/Anti-GOP
4. Pro-Trump/Pro-GOP
5. Anti-Bernie
6. Pro-Bernie
7. SJW
And you can then highlight all and get a file count, inside each folder.
It can go much faster if you have previews turned on or are using a mac with the preview image thing on the right.
I found this collection of the most conservative Russian ads out there. Out of this load, only 4 were anti-Hillary and 2 of those were the same image: