Russia Reactivates Its Trolls and Bots Ahead of Tuesday’s Midterms

[Fort Fun Indiana]

NONE of the broadcast channels made mention of Biden's corruption until WELL after the election.

Because there is nothing to mention. This is a cult fantasy.

 

[pknopp]

By what measure? I am curious how you arrived at that, considering it's virtually unknowable.

OK, argue it's unknowable. Even that is saying it might not have happened. The fact is you have to provide some solid facts to show it was an there have been none. It's just the other side of the coin to the Republicans arguing the last election was stolen.

It's all arguments made by poor losers.

 

[Darkwind]

Because there is nothing to mention. This is a cult fantasy.

Oh look, the misinformation specialist is here spreading his lies yet again.

 

[berg80]

You refuting the fact that vox is a left wing opinion shitrag?

Doosh

I'm stating you can't refute the facts in the article.

 

[wamose]

I didn't vote for Hillary because she was corrupt. I didn't vote for Trump because he is corrupt. The entire Hunter thing stinks awful.

Why is it we can't do better than this?

Everyone knows social media slants liberal so this Russia stuff doesn't really add up. Russia prefers weak Democrats, period. And as far as Trump goes, he wasn't even in the top 75% for corruptness. Trump was annoying because of his need to self promote as much as he does. He pats himself on the back WAY too much. He did do a lot of great things for our country but his constant need for applause and affirmation annoyed even me, a supporter. But, having said that, I'd vote for him again in a heartbeat. Policy is everything.

 

[Auld Phart]

Because there is nothing to mention. This is a cult fantasy.

Because there is nothing to mention.

Why?

because Joe said so?

 

[blackhawk]

You see what you want to see regardless of the truth. It's what makes you a Trumpleton.

The irony in your response has been noted it's amusing to see morons like you never get that you are the very thing you rant about now fuck off.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Democrats are getting an early start explaining away their massive loss.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

OK, argue it's unknowable

Softball.

How many people were influenced by the recent Snickers ad campaign? Hard to say exactly, but they can count market share every week and measure it.

Now, how many were influenced by a political ad? We don't have an accurate way to measure such a thing. Only the evidence that informaion campagns do have a non zero effect, using the other tools in other areas.

Argued.

The "solid facts" that information campaigns gave a nonzero effect are numerous. That's why you see advertisements. No need to rehash that.

So, how many people were and still are affected by Russian information campaigns?

Unknowable. But anyone who says "zero" is delusional or lying.

 

[pknopp]

Everyone knows social media slants liberal so this Russia stuff doesn't really add up. Russia prefers weak Democrats, period. And as far as Trump goes, he wasn't even in the top 75% for corruptness. Trump was annoying because of his need to self promote as much as he does. He pats himself on the back WAY too much. He did do a lot of great things for our country but his constant need for applause and affirmation annoyed even me, a supporter. But, having said that, I'd vote for him again in a heartbeat. Policy is everything.

He has been sued so many times for being corrupt it's pathetic.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why?

because Joe said so?

Thas like asking g how we know there is nothing g to mention about the existence of Bigfoot. Only a fool would ask, "why, because Bigfoot said so?"

 

[berg80]

OK, argue it's unknowable. Even that is saying it might not have happened. The fact is you have to provide some solid facts to show it was an there have been none. It's just the other side of the coin to the Republicans arguing the last election was stolen.

It's all arguments made by poor losers.

How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?

One of my least favorite questions is: “Did Russian interference cost Hillary Clinton the 2016 election?” The question is newly relevant because of special coun…

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[Nostra]

The user on Gab who identifies as Nora Berka resurfaced in August after a yearlong silence on the social media platform, reposting a handful of messages with sharply conservative political themes before writing a stream of original vitriol.

The posts mostly denigrated President Biden and other prominent Democrats, sometimes obscenely. They also lamented the use of taxpayer dollars to support Ukraine in its war against invading Russian forces, depicting Ukraine’s president as a caricature straight out of Russian propaganda. The fusion of political concerns was no coincidence.

The account was previously linked to the same secretive Russian agency that interfered in the 2016 presidential election and again in 2020, the Internet Research Agency in St. Petersburg, according to the cybersecurity group Recorded Future.

It is part of what the group and other researchers have identified as a new, though more narrowly targeted, Russian effort ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections. The goal, as before, is to stoke anger among conservative voters and to undermine trust in the American electoral system. This time, it also appears intended to undermine the Biden administration’s extensive military assistance to Ukraine.

Russia Reactivates Its Trolls and Bots Ahead of Tuesday’s Midterms (Published 2022)

Researchers have identified a series of Russian information operations to influence American elections and, perhaps, erode support for Ukraine.

www.nytimes.com

With all the Trumpleton's out there, US citizens who have been duped in to posting one lie after another on all manner of political topics, I wonder why Vlad feels further interference by Russia in support of the Party of Trump is even necessary.

So?

 

[pknopp]

Softball.

How many people were influenced by the recent Snocers ad campaign? Gard to say exactly, but they can count market share every week and measure it.

Now, how many were influenced by a political ad? We don't have an accurate way to measure such a thing. Only the evidence that informaioncampagns do have a non zero effect, using the other tools in other areas.

Argued.

The "solid facts" that information campaigns gave a nonzero effect are numerous. That's why you see advertisements. No need to rehash that.

So, how many people were and still are affected by Russian information campaigns?

Unknowable. But anyone who says "zero" is delusional or lying.

You can ask and ask and ask people what influenced their minds and not a one will note a stupid Facebook post.

Now a reliance, or maybe it's more correct to note an addiction to Fox News or MSNBC.......................

 

[Auld Phart]

Thas like asking g how we know there is nothing g to mention about the existence of Bigfoot. Only a fool would ask, "why, because Bigfoot said so?"

and you again go out of your way to prove you're a fool.

 

[pknopp]

How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?

One of my least favorite questions is: “Did Russian interference cost Hillary Clinton the 2016 election?” The question is newly relevant because of special coun…

fivethirtyeight.com

Five Thirty Eight.........they said the chance of Trump winning in 2016 was near zero. Silver admitted he allowed his biases affect his research so........................

 

[berg80]

Everyone knows social media slants liberal

Is the media biased against conservatives? Although a dominant majority of journalists identify as liberals/Democrats and many Americans and public officials frequently decry supposedly high and increasing levels of media bias, little compelling evidence exists as to (i) the ideological or partisan leanings of the many journalists who fail to answer surveys and/or identify as independents and (ii) whether journalists’ political leanings bleed into the choice of which stories to cover that Americans ultimately consume. Using a unique combination of a large-scale survey of political journalists, data from journalists’ Twitter networks, election returns, a large-scale correspondence experiment, and a conjoint survey experiment, we show definitively that the media exhibits no bias against conservatives (or liberals for that matter) in what news that they choose to cover. This shows that journalists’ individual ideological leanings have unexpectedly little effect on the vitally important, but, up to this point, unexplored, early stage of political news generation.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aay9344

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

With all the Trumpleton's out there, US citizens who have been duped in to posting one lie after another on all manner of political topics, I wonder why Vlad feels further interference by Russia in support of the Party of Trump is even necessary.

True.

And in many cases – perhaps most – conservatives who spread Russian misinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies know that they’re spreading lies and don’t care; it’s all part of the effort by conservatives to hobble the political process and undermine our democratic institutions.

 

[berg80]

Five Thirty Eight.........they said the chance of Trump winning in 2016 was near zero. Silver admitted he allowed his biases affect his research so........................

When?

 

[pknopp]

When?

How I Acted Like A Pundit And Screwed Up On Donald Trump