Haley to announce presidential run

Well, she did fall in line immediately....she has that going for her.

 

I would like to know who you consider is a "decent Conservative Republican".

 

Unlike the '50s, '60s and '70s when they were using ABC, NBC and CBS to recruit.

 

You may both be right, but I think at least in a presidential race, women have a steeper climb all things considered. This is an interesting analysis.

Americans Say They Would Vote For A Woman, But …

 

Yet, after years of investigation and evaluation, there is still no evidence that any foreign interference in any form or fashion had any impact on the 2016 election. So ... perhaps foreign entities attempted to impact the 2016 election, but there is no evidence those attempts had any impact.

 

Yeah, I don't think you'd take Trump out of the race that easily.

 

My concern is it may actually have the opposite effect. It's as though Republicans didn't learn from their mistakes in 2016.

A crowded primary field where Trump is the odd man out = Trump wins the Republican primary. Trump's formula has always been have a strong coalition that will show up for you no matter what in the primary while the rest of your primary opponents divide the rest amongst themselves, and win in the key areas in the general election. It's a brilliant strategy, but if people are fooled twice by it, that's on them at that point.

 

Not to quibble, but isn’t that consistent with what I wrote?

For ease of reference, I wrote in relevant part: “While the question of whether they influenced the election is sure to be debated forever…”

 

So you figure running ads and spreading misinformation about one's opponent has no impact on elections? If so, politicians sure are wasting a lot of money.

 

Why would you unsubscribe? Someone is looking out for you.

 

Nah, "someone" just wants his $$$.

 

What would evidence that it had an impact look like? How would you prove such influence changed votes or motivated voters?

 

Any objective substantive data that would support the accuracy of the assertion ...... that the outcome of the 2016 election was influenced by foreign entities disseminating disinformation via social media or any other means.

 

Again, what would that evidence look like? It is probably impossible to measure.

As far as I know nobody is saying it definitively or even probably changed the result. There is no way to know. But between social media operations and DNC hacking we know for a fact they did attempt to change the results.

 

I'm not making a claim that foreign entity disinformation influenced the 2016 election. It is quite reasonable to expect those that do make this assertion in fact have evidence to support their claim. I'm still awaiting ........

"Any objective substantive data that would support the accuracy of the assertion ...... that the outcome of the 2016 election was influenced by foreign entities disseminating disinformation via social media or any other means."

It's easy to say it's immeasurable ... but why is it immeasurable? How can one assert a claim as factual if they have no evidence to support that claim?

 

I don’t know. But why is political disinformation posted to social media with the intention of influencing elections an issue if there is no evidence such acts …. whether by foreign or domestic entities ….. has/had an impact on any election? It seems efforts to identity this sort of disinformation and resulting misinformation may have led to the suppression of speech by the US government ie on Twitter and Facebook.

Further, there is the question re the MSM and whether it’s over emphasis of an issue (Clinton emails) or lack of coverage of an issue (Biden laptop) …. and inaccuracies in the coverage of issues ….. may influence voters and election outcomes. Lots of focus on “the Russians” when domestic entities may also attempt to influence the outcome of an election via misinformation.

 

Additionally, with the absence of evidence that foreign entities posting disinformation on social media did influence voters and outcome of an election …… to assert it did is in and of itself disinformation.

 

Unless you had a discreet event and frequent polling around it. There is some evidence that Comey’s announcement that they were investigating emails again 2 weeks before the Election Day did have a noticeable blip in he polls. But even then you can’t prove that particular event was what changed things a week or two later.