“I haven’t seen any evidence that the attempts to interfere in our election infrastructure was to favor a particular political party,” she said…
Well, sure, if you just shut your eyes when they show you the evidence…
1 Like
She’s a parsing pro. And a rotten bitch.
1 Like
Provided that’s what happened.
No doubt also sees no evidence (other than that brown tinged nose) that she’s a Class A Suck-Up…
Well, that’s where the hack of the Democratic analytics plays in, because that is exactly the information they got. Combine that with the illegally obtained facebook data, and some well-targeted ads that are invisible to any sort of accountability, and it wouldn’t be hard to suppress just the right voters in the right place, would it.
5 Likes
Please read as sarcasm, not misogyny … and check the front of her dress for stains.
1 Like
Trump is an expert maker of Dignity Wraiths™.
2 Likes
She can see . . .? What I find shocking is that people like Nielsen can side with rconservative wing nuts, particulary evangelicals. Nielsen is a highly educated, never married woman (read: lesbian!! or a feminazi!! worse a lesbian feminazi!!) who carries water for people who probably hate her (an educated woman) and would be willing to hang her (feminazi, educated bitch). Why? I guess she likes to be a smart woman playing a useful idiot.
1 Like
Sure. Michael Cohen, for example. Or Spicey Sean.
3 Likes
Hannity, Miller, Carlson, Nunes, etc…
4 Likes
My computer knows where I am. What makes you think that the CA data was not geographically granular?
2 Likes
Dan Coats the NDI is on MSNBC saying that the Ruskies are still trying to infiltrate state election systems. Should he call for Neilse’s resignation? Because she isn’t “seeing” what the other intel chiefs are seeing.
Were her eyes closed while fluffing?
It’s ok, they were trying to help us so who gives a flying fig about democracy, we won so they are innocent.
Yeah, if only they had their opponents voter turnout model…Oh wait they did!
More broadly, I see no reason to assume the Russians followed only one strategy- why not manipulate the herd where you co conspirators and stolen data say it will do the most good, and also see how many state voters rolls you can mess with and also see if just maybe you can flip some votes. You’re right that last option is the hardest, but the rewards would be mighty high.
Have you seen this article from five thirty eight? It opens with a very engaging what-if scenario and then goes into more analytical detail.
3 Likes
You are completely missing what the Cambridge Analytica data is all about. It didn’t say Joe BillyBob in Precinct XYZ, county ABC, state DEF is going to vote for A, so you need to go into that county’s voting systems and change his vote to B. It said Joe BillyBob has network connections, profile data, viewing and like history, etc., that suggest he belongs to a demographic where exposure to messaging that says, say, white male coal miners that look like him at the nearby BigDig coal mine will benefit from Trump and hurt from Clinton, will be effective making him more likely to be influenced to vote for Trump and drive him, in turn, to likewise influence his connections.
Remember that the Cambridge Analytica data came from a platform designed and precisely engineered for exactly one purpose: generating data useful to more precisely and effectively direct the herd. It’s called advertising and what Facebook and Google and all the rest do is enable it to be vastly more selective, strategically targeted, and effective.
The regular customers for this data don’t use it to manipulate what Amazon and WalMart report selling or think they sold. They use it to manipulate what customers actually come to buy.
Inferring from lack of evidence the Russians manipulated the count that they had no impact on the election outcome ignores the effectiveness of the advertising model and its social engineering component. Countless billions of dollars are spent each year betting on that model’s persuasive effectiveness. Maybe it failed to shift any votes. I’m betting it shifted a lot more votes than were necessary without breaking into a single voting or vote tabulation system. It’s easier doing it this way and an already proven method.
3 Likes
Remember, Kirstjen Nielsen was in charge of emergency coordination during Hurricane Katrina. She got the desperate calls from New Orleans when the levees burst. She did nothing. This year she oversaw the concentration camps for children. She’s not exactly a paragon of competence or virtue.
The 2016 election was illegitimate. The vote count was rigged in at least 39 states. A skanky Russian puppet was installed in a rigged election.
5 Likes
The midterms are all smaller scope elections than the national presidential election. I already said that the security issues with voting and vote tabulation systems presented a much greater threat/vulnerability to a change of outcome in these local scope elections.
3 Likes
Once you know, rather precisely, how a portion of a herd is going to vote and you have the registration data and ( speculatively) access to the polling books to know who in fact turned out ( polling data on the day might also tell you this), you are going to have a reasonably accurate estimate of how many votes would be needed to swing a particular state.
Yes, the basic work was done by voter suppression and precisely targeted manipulative advertising but putting in place a fail safe mechanism for swinging specific states would not be hard.
3 Likes
When you have a country that puts millions of illegal dollars of resources into a campaign, as Trump received courtesy of Putin and Russia, not much is added by other election violations, whatever the scale or action. Incidentally, Russians work cheap, thanks to Putin’s shortcomings when it comes to the Russian economy. Trump’s campaign donors would have had to pay much more to equal what organized Russian trolls, as just one example, were able to do.
It appears the total money and resources Russia devoted to Trump is still being added, with the Russian woman involved in the NRA being yet another source of election funding that Trump received from Russia. There’s also the amount of money Putin devoted to troll shops in Eastern Europe. Although I’m not sure yet whether it’s been proven beyond a doubt, there’s also strong suggestive evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. I fully expect we will still be learning more for months to come. There are also hints for us news junkies that the U.S. government is still collecting evidence on active Russians and colluders (for example, the investigators are probably learning things from Russian assets that have not yet been arrested, or Russians too difficult to reach except by computer.)
One by one, as things are proven or not proven, we’ll be learning much more. But the largely proven, even if not taken to court yet, is very substantial.
2 Likes