Am I the only one who doesn’t care about Russia/Facebook?

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,373
Congress & special council can investigate as long as they want but there is absolutely no way to prove Russian interference in the 2016 election influenced how someone voted. There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else. What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
 

fitshaced

macrumors 68000
Jul 2, 2011
1,729
3,035
Maybe to learn from the past? If elections are won on fake news, surely you don’t want that happening in the next election? I get that you don’t care so much right now as your guy won. But would you feel the same way if Clinton had won and it looked by fake news?
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
Maybe to learn from the past? If elections are won on fake news, surely you don’t want that happening in the next election? I get that you don’t care so much right now as your guy won. But would you feel the same way if Clinton had won and it looked by fake news?
dude, she CHEATED along with the help from the DNC, glad Karma stepped in there.
anyways we do it to other countries and we got a little taste of what we dish out.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,373
Maybe to learn from the past? If elections are won on fake news, surely you don’t want that happening in the next election? I get that you don’t care so much right now as your guy won. But would you feel the same way if Clinton had won and it looked by fake news?
My guy? Loooooool I can’t stand Trump and didn’t vote for him. Anyway like I said there’s no way to prove Trump won the election due to fake news? You don’t know why someone voted the way they did and even if they told you how do you know they’re not lying?
 

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,741
11,031
New England
Congress & special council can investigate as long as they want but there is absolutely no way to prove Russian interference in the 2016 election influenced how someone voted. There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else. What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
It's not about any single ad or fake news story, or even facebook. It's about a foreign power meddling in our election and sowing division, in a broad way. Look at Eukraine (good podcast about it: http://www.npr.org/2017/08/21/544952989/rough-translation-what-americans-can-learn-from-fake-news-in-ukraine) to see how over time this can be quite destructive.

We know advertising works - just ask Coca Cola. Not just one ad, but entire ad campaigns. We also know that a good number of people believe what they read online, as there is no way to easily weed out lies and misinformation. Even if there were no rules broken, isn't it a bit troubling that some foreign enemy used such tools to influence our internal election process?

The goal is to set policy, at least a minimal level, that would hopefully prevent foreign influence from happening at this rate again.
 

Populism

macrumors regular
Jun 11, 2014
185
2,970
Am I the only one who doesn't care about Russia/Facebook?
I'm there with you, for so many reasons.

(1) These people barking about their concerns about the integrity of our election being undermined by Russia wouldn't give two shizzles if the same allegations of interference existed yet it was Clinton who was elected. (And no, Trump is not "my guy". Trump is an idiot - have said so before the election and continue to now.)
(2) Last I checked Russia wasn't at the polls pointing a gun at voters on election day to vote a certain way.
(3) The US interferes with elections the world over, always has and always will, as does all of the leading countries. It's asinine to suggest alleged election interference is somehow new, or suddenly oh so important.
(4) We're a month shy of the one-year anniversary of election night. Time to put up or shut up the exact details (1) of how Russia meddled, and (2) exactly how it swayed which voters.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
It's not about any single ad or fake news story, or even facebook. It's about a foreign power meddling in our election and sowing division, in a broad way. Look at Eukraine (good podcast about it: http://www.npr.org/2017/08/21/544952989/rough-translation-what-americans-can-learn-from-fake-news-in-ukraine) to see how over time this can be quite destructive.

We know advertising works - just ask Coca Cola. Not just one ad, but entire ad campaigns. We also know that a good number of people believe what they read online, as there is no way to easily weed out lies and misinformation. Even if there were no rules broken, isn't it a bit troubling that some foreign enemy used such tools to influence our internal election process?

The goal is to set policy, at least a minimal level, that would hopefully prevent foreign influence from happening at this rate again.
ours? or theirs? we reap what we sow
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
I’m not a Democrat, but I tend to lean towards them. I’m hoping that we can find out what happened and hopefully find out ways to prevent it from happening in the future. I would also like to know if our president or any members of his campaign engaged in illegal activities. If they didn’t then fine, but if they did they should be held accountable.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
I’m not a Democrat, but I tend to lean towards them. I’m hoping that we can find out what happened and hopefully find out ways to prevent it from happening in the future. I would also like to know if our president or any members of his campaign engaged in illegal activities. If they didn’t then fine, but if they did they should be held accountable.
that I can agree with .
 

Tech198

macrumors G5
Mar 21, 2011
13,976
1,643
Australia, Perth
Congress & special council can investigate as long as they want but there is absolutely no way to prove Russian interference in the 2016 election influenced how someone voted. There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else. What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
You can prove it given the money, resources, time etc... but no government will spend that time. They rather say the obvious, because its sound better. even with VPN co-operation, Tor or whatever,,, problem is, its a big ask, and no one will go that far.

Trump is a douche anyway in my book.
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
(4) We're a month shy of election night. Time to put up or shut up the exact details (1) of how Russia meddled, and (2) exactly how it swayed which voters.
The Watergate break in happened in June of 1972. Nixon didn’t resign until August of 1974, over two years later. This isn’t TV, investigations take time, the only way it would be over this fast is if there was clear proof that there was nothing there.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,066
16,582
The Misty Mountains
Congress & special council can investigate as long as they want but there is absolutely no way to prove Russian interference in the 2016 election influenced how someone voted. There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else. What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
You’ve missed the point, a foreign power meddled in our election which is against our laws. It won’t change the outcome, unless something specific triggers an impeachment, but you should should really care about it for the next election, unless you just don’t give a damn about such things, such as who is manipulating our election outcomes.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
You’ve missed the point, a foreign power meddled in our election which is against our laws. It won’t change the outcome, unless something specific triggers an impeachment, but you should should really care about it for the next election, unless you just don’t give a damn about such things, such as who is manipulating our election outcomes.
exposing hillary & the DNC = meddled , please.
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
exposing hillary & the DNC = meddled , please.
Like the Republicans were doing anything different... selectively leaking documents that make one side look bad, while not releasing ones that make the other side look bad is meddling. Even worse if it was done in coordination with someone on Trump’s campaign. It’s the same reason why Wikileaks has lost credibility, they never release any data on corrupt governments like the one in Russia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe

fitshaced

macrumors 68000
Jul 2, 2011
1,729
3,035
dude, she CHEATED along with the help from the DNC, glad Karma stepped in there.
anyways we do it to other countries and we got a little taste of what we dish out.
Yeah she probably did and Trump probably did too. Isn’t it important to find out how elections are actually won? Won’t you have a better understanding on the value of your vote then?
[doublepost=1507157897][/doublepost]
My guy? Loooooool I can’t stand Trump and didn’t vote for him. Anyway like I said there’s no way to prove Trump won the election due to fake news? You don’t know why someone voted the way they did and even if they told you how do you know they’re not lying?
Fake news is very influential. It’s just about finding out how much of it gets out there via uncontrollable means and how it can be avoided. If people are basing their decisions on the fake headlines the read on social media (and you’d be a fool to think people don’t do that) then elections are corrupted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

duffman9000

macrumors 68000
Sep 7, 2003
1,887
5,363
Deep in the Depths of CA
Congress & special council can investigate as long as they want but there is absolutely no way to prove Russian interference in the 2016 election influenced how someone voted. There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else. What are Democrats hoping to get out of these investigations?
Advertising works. Don’t pretend it doesn’t. Furthermore, dirty politics work. Both sides are good at it.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
Yeah she probably did and Trump probably did too. Isn’t it important to find out how elections are actually won? Won’t you have a better understanding on the value of your vote then?
[doublepost=1507157897][/doublepost]
Fake news is very influential. It’s just about finding out how much of it gets out there via uncontrollable means and how it can be avoided. If people are basing their decisions on the fake headlines the read on social media (and you’d be a fool to think people don’t do that) then elections are corrupted.
The RNC hated Trump what are you talking about? The DNC ****ed Sanders, the RNC tried to **** Trump.
 

mac_in_tosh

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2016
352
4,553
Earth
There is no way to prove that a certain fake news story or ad targeted to a specific set of eligible voters made them vote for Trump over Hillary or anyone else.

You don’t know why someone voted the way they did and even if they told you how do you know they’re not lying?
I find these to be odd statements. You could say our whole justice system is a waste of time as there's no way to definitely prove, in a rigorous mathematical sense, that someone is guilty or innocent of a crime. Even if someone admits to a crime, they could be lying. If nothing were done absent definitive proof, our society would grind to a halt.

In the case of political ads, it's known that they are influential or else why would campaigns spend millions of dollars on them. So it's reasonable to assume statistically that they had their intended effect. The margins of victory in several swing states was very small, about 1% of the voters there, so the ads could have swung the election. And furthermore, it's important to know if anyone in the Trump campaigned colluded with the Russians by giving them info on where to target the ads.
 

Zenithal

macrumors G3
Sep 10, 2009
9,027
10,111
Advertising influences people. We've witnessed people believing fake imagery over the years. It doesn't take much to rile up your average person. If the investigation is just a witch hunt, Trump should simple relieve Mueller and his team of their duties. I mean, if the guy can walk the walk and talk the talk, and loves boasting about how invincible he is, he should just do it. No reason to pussyfoot around if you think you're untouchable.
 
Last edited:

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,661
22,373
You’ve missed the point, a foreign power meddled in our election which is against our laws. It won’t change the outcome, unless something specific triggers an impeachment, but you should should really care about it for the next election, unless you just don’t give a damn about such things, such as who is manipulating our election outcomes.
Democrats wouldn’t give a crap about this had Hillary won the election. It’s not Russia’s fault she ran a crap campaign and took certain states for granted.
[doublepost=1507201936][/doublepost]
Advertising influences people. We've witnessed people believing fake imagery over the years. It doesn't take much to rile up your average person. If the investigation is just a witch hunt, Trump should simple relieve Mueller and his team of their duties. I mean, if the guy can walk the walk and talk the talk, and loves boasting about how invincible he is, he should just do it. No reason to pussyfoot around if you think you're untouchable.
OK but where’s the investigation of the ineptitude of the Clinton campaign? It’s not because of Russia that she chose to ignore states like Wisconsin. I mean she almost lost Minnesota. You know how many times she campaigned here? Zero. Russia had nothing to do with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Populism