Bots May Have Boosted Trump's Votes 3.23%

[ExpandMyMind]

57 minutes ago, CrimsonKing said:

 that's good too hear...you seem to have taken much more time off the past week than you have in awhile from random Trumping,figured you were healing up from those "attacks!" 

Always take a wee break from time to time. Gets a bit tiring when you're outnumbered 15-1 in a right-wing echo chamber.

[CrimsonKing]

4 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Always take a wee break from time to time. Gets a bit tiring when you're outnumbered 15-1 in a right-wing echo chamber.

I hear ya,and then when all the Euro's start dropping in it's 15-15 winged nonsense ringing from both sides... 

[Paranormal Panther]

22 hours ago, Merc14 said:

EMM has proven innumerable times that he has absolutely no clue what the reality is here in the states and his obsession with a year and a half old election is worrisome to say the least.  Bots changed nothing and anyone who is silly enough to blame bots for Hillary losing is either desperate to escape the reality of what really happened or simply, ignorant.  Someone claimed 3% of the votes changed which I found LOL funny and profoundly sad at the same time.  The worst damage this entire, corrupt scam has caused is a general distrust of elections and our federal law enforcement and justice system and I hope the democrats are punished brutally in November, especially Schuff who has been lying the entire time. 

It's beyond predictable and repetitive at this point. If Trump won by 7%, the bots would be blamed for that 7%. Some people act like the two choices weren't as polarizing as they were. They act like they were moderate, popular candidates who were quite similar in their views. I say this because that's the kind of scenario that could be vulnerable to bots and trolls to a certain extent. The real election was exactly the opposite. It wasn't like Jeb Bush ran against Jim Webb. Of course, as we all know, they would be fine with the exact same circumstances if you replaced Trump with Clinton.

[Farmer77]

8 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

They act like they were moderate, popular candidates who were quite similar in their views. I say this because that's the kind of scenario that could be vulnerable to bots and trolls to a certain extent. The real election was exactly the opposite.

I think to a certain extent that the environment was just like you described. Only instead of people being on the fence because they were likeable and moderate,  the same percentage of people were on the fence because both were so horrid. 

 

[Paranormal Panther]

9 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I think to a certain extent that the environment was just like you described. Only instead of people being on the fence because they were likeable and moderate,  the same percentage of people were on the fence because both were so horrid. 

 

You have a valid point. I thought about that while I typed my post. It was like arsenic and cyanide, a copperhead and a rattlesnake, a Blood and a Crip, or a homicide and a suicide. I get that, but I think that there were ideological differences that tipped the scales with most voters.