8 ms·

So let me get this straight... Facebook is the reason that Trump got elected?? This is possibly the most asinine thing I've heard in a very long time. Trump g

by cubano 5y ago

So let me get this straight... Facebook is the reason that Trump got elected?? This is possibly the most asinine thing I've heard in a very long time. Trump got elected for several reasons, and Facebook had nothing to do with it. 1. H. Clinton was perhaps the worse presidential candidate in the history of the Republic. She rarely if ever campaigned in the all important Rust Belt states, she could not even articulate a reason, when asked, about why she wanted to be President. 2. She and her husband were sitting on a very suspect war chest of like $168mil US...remember, these were the same people who complained 15 years earlier when Bill left the Presidential digs that they were like totally broke with little or no savings. So this couple had earned WELL over $160mil (not counting their quite significant expenses) in 15 years since Bill left office? Why? Why in the world were so many people just giving them millions of dollars? To many a hard-working US voters who have struggled their entire lives to save a small amount for retirement, this smelled of "pay to play" on-the-come corruption...and she didn't even try to hide it! For these reasons, and several more but I don't have the time to post them, H. Clinton did not get elected President in 2016, Just to keep the record straight.

joezydeco 5y ago
On top of all of that, the Obama recovery from the 2008 meltdown started the K-shaped split. People came back from the recession, but not everyone got back to where they were. Many were just plain left behind. It was very fertile ground for Trump to come along and address the anger of the lower middle class and promise them that they could get their share again.
notanzaiiswear 5y ago
My takeaway from the article is that at last there is study showing Facebook had little effect on the election.
IAmEveryone 5y ago
Yeah, well… It’d be child’s play to write a list like that about Trump. Using a foundation’s money to buy a second-rate portrait of himself comes to mind, and that was found illegal in an actual court. Or, if you are speculating about respective finances of the candidates, that HC’s tax returns for the last 20 years were public, while your squeaky-clean candidate is litigating to this day to keep them secret. But the article isn’t about re-litigation of that election, or the next one. It starts from the premise that the result of the election was unprecedented, and that someone like Trump would not have had a chance in earlier times. In a way, the article indeed doesn’t so much speak to you, but about you, wondering what cultural factors are needed to support the sort of emotional state that would lead people to glorify a half-bit wannabe gangster.
- cubano 5y ago
  > But the article isn’t about re-litigation of that election, or the next one. It starts from the premise that the result of the election was unprecedented, and that someone like Trump would not have had a chance in earlier times. I'm supposed to blindly believe everything I read in highly pollical magazine like that one? Millions of people loved Trump because of the way he spoke so directly to them, and not like a typical politician. There is nothing at all "unprecedented" in that election...inferior candidates have been losing elections since the beginning of the US. That article was so full of FUD and wrong-headed nonsense I had to refute its assertions.

by cubano 5y ago

joezydeco 5y ago

On top of all of that, the Obama recovery from the 2008 meltdown started the K-shaped split. People came back from the recession, but not everyone got back to where they were. Many were just plain left behind. It was very fertile ground for Trump to come along and address the anger of the lower middle class and promise them that they could get their share again.

notanzaiiswear 5y ago

My takeaway from the article is that at last there is study showing Facebook had little effect on the election.

IAmEveryone 5y ago

Yeah, well… It’d be child’s play to write a list like that about Trump. Using a foundation’s money to buy a second-rate portrait of himself comes to mind, and that was found illegal in an actual court. Or, if you are speculating about respective finances of the candidates, that HC’s tax returns for the last 20 years were public, while your squeaky-clean candidate is litigating to this day to keep them secret. But the article isn’t about re-litigation of that election, or the next one. It starts from the premise that the result of the election was unprecedented, and that someone like Trump would not have had a chance in earlier times. In a way, the article indeed doesn’t so much speak to you, but about you, wondering what cultural factors are needed to support the sort of emotional state that would lead people to glorify a half-bit wannabe gangster.

cubano 5y ago
> But the article isn’t about re-litigation of that election, or the next one. It starts from the premise that the result of the election was unprecedented, and that someone like Trump would not have had a chance in earlier times. I'm supposed to blindly believe everything I read in highly pollical magazine like that one? Millions of people loved Trump because of the way he spoke so directly to them, and not like a typical politician. There is nothing at all "unprecedented" in that election...inferior candidates have been losing elections since the beginning of the US. That article was so full of FUD and wrong-headed nonsense I had to refute its assertions.