(January 25, 2018 at 2:12 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2...sed-public(January 24, 2018 at 7:42 pm)FFaith Wrote: I didn't post anything about Hillary's behaviour. Just that she had more money to spend, so it's laughable to make the argument that Trump had some kind of advertising advantage because Russia spent a small amount on troll ads.
I'm thinking you might not understand how bot accounts on Facebook might work ... they're free.
Also, I'm curious how you know Russia only spent a "small amount" on troll ads. Do you have some data you might wish to share?
I personally haven't made any argument that Trump had any advertising advantage.
(January 24, 2018 at 10:50 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Because if Hillary, Obama and Democrats, with the help of a complicit leftist media and partisan intelligence agents, have been engineering the whole Red Scare with a fake dossier to get a FISA warrant to spy of their political opponent, Trump, then it is clear Trump isn't the problem here.
And you have what to go on, exactly? A memo you haven't even read?
In the meantime, we have documented meetings between Trump campaign officials and Russian operatives, meetings attested to by the principals involved.
Forgive my pointing out your selective vision. Show me evidence of your charge, and I'll give it due consideration. Until then, I've read of a couple of Republicans claiming it's a deusie ... I'm sure they aren't biased -- aren't you?
Facebook announced that Russia spent $100,000 on 3000 ads. Those are the ads I'm talking about.