We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

Then last week we got news that “Russians” had placed adverts on Facebook during the presidential election, paying in the region of $50k-$100k for them. As Streetwise Professor points out, Hillary spent $400 million on adverts. And she still lost. Whatever the causes of her loss, a hundred grand on Facebook adverts wasn’t it.

Tim Newman

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Share on VKEmail this to someone

11 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • CaptDMO

    And let’s be a bit realistic before reports from global interests, of the (#It’s Her turn), and (#Pleasedon’t extort/ boycot us!!!!!) folks are “taken at their word”, not to mention those inconvenienced by Mr. Trump’s growing popularity as actual facts are trampling the
    increasingly non sequitur “investigation depths”, and see his reelection as the coup de grace of their careers in Orwellian “service to the people”.
    Let’s make note of who’s consistantly been chanting the innuendo on line, and on the legislative “floor”, because..even useful idiots know in their eternally sour stomachs,
    1.Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS lie.
    2.Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS double down.
    3.Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS project.

  • Dom

    The story is even sillier when you find that most — maybe all — of the ads supported Obama’s talking points, and were not pro trump. Mr. Newman makes this points too.

  • Jacob

    Since when is it wrong or illegal to buy and publish ads in the media?
    This obsession with Russian interference in the election is totally and absolutely insane. Nothing to do with SJWs, it’s pure insanity (not ideology).

    Of course the Russians intervened, or tried to. That’s what they do. So what? I’m sure the Hungarians, Chinese and Israelis did too… Maybe even the French…Or aliens… Or a kid from Bangladesh.

    Insanity reigns in Washington DC.

  • Jacob (October 1, 2017 at 2:12 pm) is right that this buying of ads also has the inconvenience (to the narrative) of not being illegal, and Dom October 1, 2017 at 1:48 pm) appears to be right that they are not obviously Trump-oriented, but the pitiful scale of the sum involved will mock the narrative far more than either of those points. Even for SJWs, making yourself believe that 250k of Russian ads decided the outcome is likely harder than not noticing their legality or their insufficiently-Trumpish focus. 🙂

  • Ferox

    If (1) you accept an an axiom that Clinton should have won the election (’cause reasons), and if (2) you follow Holmes’ dictum about eliminating the impossible, then (3) you will end up believing some pretty outlandish theories for her loss in the election – secret cabals and Russian spies and so forth.

    It just stands to reason.

  • bobby b

    “As Streetwise Professor points out, Hillary spent $400 million on adverts.”

    But it was advertising Hillary. You can spend a billion dollars advertising Hillary, and it’s still going to seem like a commercial for leukemia. More money might have been worse for her. (It did seem that, every time she visited some contested spot shortly before the election, her ratings dropped there. That’s why they curtailed her travel right before we voted.)

    How narcissistic she was – “I’m with her!” was her main slogan. Just imagine of she could have made it “she’s with me!” She probably would have won.

  • Paul Marks

    Those handful of “Russian” adverts were often not pro Trump – for example there were anti Fracking ads (Donald Trump was in favour of Fracking – Mrs Clinton opposed) and stuff about the “racist” police in the United States (again someone who believed that sort of ad was NOT going to vote for Donald Trump).

    The permanent government in the United States, the bureaucracy and the media – and their pet companies such as Facebook, are scrapping the bottom of the barrel now. They are desperate to hit President Trump with anything – no matter how absurd.

    I am not, and I have never been, a fan of Donald Trump (quite the opposite), but I dislike his enemies the “Deep State” (and media and silicon valley allies) even more.

  • Watchman

    Discussion at Tim’s blog has pointed out the Russian ads were seeking to find fractures in US society to force open (wierd idea, as inevitably these fractures will appear in Russia as superpowers export trends, and Russia has a lot of fractures), so they were not for particular candidates at all.

    Still, it is nice to know Vladimir Putin cares about the plight of black Americans. Maybe this should be broadcast to Russia to be appreciated by his emphathetic and caring support base.

  • mhjhnsn

    I hope that as a matter of degree what we are seeing now is far less, but this is beginning to remind me of how all patriotic Germans knew that Germany was “stabbed in the back” in 1918.

    Suddenly losing when all the “smart” and “trustworthy” people assured you that you would win, then cope with the cognitive dissonance by ignoring most facts and elevating a few facts and factoids into religious verities?

    That did not end well.

  • Nicholas (Unlicenced Joker) Gray

    I can’t read Russian, so they didn’t influence me!

  • Mr Ed

    I can’t read Russian, so they didn’t influence me!

    But it’s subliminal. Did you wear a tin hat to stop them beaming in thoughts?

    And even if you’re not American, it still might have made a difference.

    Or have the Dems got to me?

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>