It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Discrepancies in Social Media Followers of Politicians with Votes.

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Look at this little piece of left wing fake news propaganda:

We Analyzed Every Twitter Account Following Donald Trump: 61% Are Bots, Spam, Inactive, or Propaganda

Dumb methodology:

72% have been inactive for 120+ days (i.e. the account did not send any tweets or RTs during that time)
3% have been inactive for between 90-120 days
3% created their account in the last 90 days
36% use Twitter’s default profile image
39% use display names that include spam words+patterns
92% either don’t use a URL in their profile or employ a URL with spam patterns
60% don’t use a recognized location
27% have set their language to something other than English
54% have gone more than a year without sending more than a handful of tweets
3% send an abnormally large number of tweets per day
96% have been placed on very few (or zero) lists
79% have an unusually small number of followers
76% follow an unusual number of accounts
74% employ spam-correlated keywords in their profile description


edit on 30-7-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Again, that is debunked by the fact that Twitter has labeled many accounts of conservatives/Republicans/leaning right in politics as bots. Twitter has deleted many accounts of actual people, and those people have had to start brand new. You are ignoring facts that have been known for a long time. Twitter is biased against people who lean right in politics.

For a very long time Twitter, and twitter Liberals, kept claiming i was a bot. Twitter kept demanding that I verify myself, which I did dozens of times. Even then I have been shadow banned as have been the large majority of conservatives/republicans who are not "celebrities." But even some "right-wing" celebrities have had to deal with the shadow ban of Twitter on conservatives/lean right in politics. My account is not the only one that Twitter has labeled as "bots." Literally there are an untold number of Twitter users who have at one time or another been labeled as "possible bots."

Not only that, but Twitter regularly drops followers for people who lean right. Several known conservatives have had been deleted automatically by Twitter from members lists.



In the past, Twitter has been known to censor conservative voices. Now, it appears that the social media website has targeted conservative accounts in what is being labeled as the #TwitterLockout.

According to conservatives on Twitter, they've been drastically losing followers and some accounts have been completely removed from the website. Twitter, on the other hand, says they're purging the website of all bots, especially after claims of Russian bots meddling in U.S. elections.
...

Con servative Twitter Upset Over So-Called 'Bot Purge' That Leads to Shadow Banning

I personally know some people who gave up trying to verify themselves to Twitter and deleted their accounts because of the bias/harassment from Twitter and liberals.



edit on 30-7-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment and correct link.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Are you saying the criteria they used is relevant or not relevant to the discussion?

If you apply the percentages to the counts you end up with 22 million which is pretty much in line with polls on people calling themselves conservative Republicans.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Never have, and never will, use Twitter.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Just a thought on OP, and I don't really intend to follow this to its logical conclusion...

The average age in USA is something like 38 years old, with a disproportionate number of them on the older side.
While you can't vote until you're 18, many people these days are on social media when they're 5.

Schools (have you been to one lately? Yuck!) are basically indoctrination camps where teachers tell their kids what to think.
I'd be willing to bet that by the age of 13, most students these days have an opinion on politics, even if it was made in an uninformed echo chamber.
That would mean that something like 10% of the social media accounts that are plausibly paying attention to politics are not only unable to vote, but overwhelmingly supporting democrats.

Then add in how many non-citizens are also on social media. Guess who they support.
Then, there's the welfare junkies. 100% democrat, otherwise they'd lose their free ride.... And they've got the most time to sit around and argue on the internet.

Seems to me I don't know one single hard working american middle age guy who has ever posted on twitter, let alone made an account. And that includes myself.
Although I don't vote for major party candidates because I'd like to see third party get a voice... but that's just me I guess.

I could see 80% of the US population as a whole being on social media- but I can't see 80% of the working class citizens doing it. Most of us just don't have the time or interest. We don't all have time to argue on the internet



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: Breakthestreak

What if the trolls werent russian? Would that alter your thought on the impact?

You highlight the mainstream media. You say leftist control.

Looking from the outside in, seems to be americans trolling each other is the biggest ingredient of the OP


Exactly

And people from the whole world over

Whatever minuscule amount of “Russian” tweets had less than zero impact on the election

But the plebs need something to blame. They can’t stand that the people voted Trump because the people wanted Trump

Out of all the groups and all the people who attempted to influence the election, ‘the Russians’ were the very least and had the very least impact.

In fact, they had ZERO impact
edit on 30 7 2019 by Breakthestreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

And there's a billion other tweets but nothing showing how people got influenced to vote for Trump.

Mueller couldn't find any proof 😃



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

And there's a billion other tweets but nothing showing how people got influenced to vote for Trump.

Mueller couldn't find any proof 😃


then you didn't read the report, so you are ignorant of what he found



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

All that is guess work and speculation based off their own criteria.

It's a third party tool meant to make sense but of things, but not take seriously as a means of facts.

Even their own analysis and criterias spooked them as cited,


Over the summer, Twitter removed a large number of spam accounts, but clearly, there are tens of millions (or more) still remaining on the platform. The singer @KatyPerry supposedly “lost” 2.8 million spam accounts in Twitter’s cleanup, while @RealDonaldTrump lost an estimated 300,000. Those numbers are surprising, given that Perry’s account appears to have far fewer obviously detectable spam followers (40.6%).



In other words, that 60% is not different than that 40% from Perry based off fewer detectable spam followers.

The source isn't to be taken seriously other than its primary takeaway, that many larger accounts do have fake accounts under various lables such as Bots/Spam and other things.

Good call on that leftwing BS.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

And there's a billion other tweets but nothing showing how people got influenced to vote for Trump.

Mueller couldn't find any proof 😃


then you didn't read the report, so you are ignorant of what he found
Such ignorance that Mueller couldn't find a crime and prosecute?

Because that's his role and nothing else, no personal comments or exoneration, just PROSECUTE.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

And there's a billion other tweets but nothing showing how people got influenced to vote for Trump.

Mueller couldn't find any proof 😃


then you didn't read the report, so you are ignorant of what he found
Such ignorance that Mueller couldn't find a crime and prosecute?

Because that's his role and nothing else, no personal comments or exoneration, just PROSECUTE.



he could prosecute everyone else BUT THE PRESIDENT....he couldn't prosecute the president...the president needs to be impeached first. you would know that if you had paid attention.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I follow Trump on twitter and many people I know do too but all of them loath Trump.
Many people subscribe to Trumps Twitter because it's comedy gold sometimes .
Following Trump on twitter does not mean that one agrees with him politically.


edit on 30-7-2019 by XCrycek because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: XCrycek

You wouldn't know it from the media, but Trump commands an approval rating around 50%. That's pretty damn good.
I don't see anything wrong with those numbers. The only odd one to me is that Joe Biden's number seems a bit low.
Perhaps he's not really as popular as the media would have you believe?



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Are you saying the criteria they used is relevant or not relevant to the discussion?

If you apply the percentages to the counts you end up with 22 million which is pretty much in line with polls on people calling themselves conservative Republicans.


I am saying their claims of bots is mostly BS, and a narrative to delete accounts of actual people simply because we lean right in politics. For example, there is a David Hogg, not the idiot who wants to ban firearms, and this David Hogg had explained in his profile that he is not the other Hogg, yet enough Liberals complained about him claiming he doesn't exist because he is pro-2nd amendment and Twitter deleted his account. Only now, months later, has twitter finally allowed him to recover his account. But there are people whose accounts are banned and labeled as "bots" and they haven't been able to recover their accounts and instead had to start over. That is what Twitter does to conservatives/people who lean to the right in politics. The claims of "Russian bots" is mostly BS, just like the claims of "Russia collusion" and "Trump is a puppet of Putin..."

BTW, ATS also has a ton of people whom read posts but many of them don't post anything, they are lurkers... Many lurkers have been just reading threads without posting anything for years in ATS. Does that mean they don't exist, or that they are fake? No... Same with Twitter, or other social media.






edit on 30-7-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Heck, we also have the ratings for news sites like CNN, MSNBC, Fox News etc. The left-wing media would have people believe that the majority of people in the U.S. are left-wing, but Fox News is always in the lead, which paints a different picture from the fake left-wing narrative.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: XCrycek
I follow Trump on twitter and many people I know do too but all of them loath Trump.
Many people subscribe to Trumps Twitter because it's comedy gold sometimes .
Following Trump on twitter does not mean that one agrees with him politically.



Many people do the same for Pelosi, Hillary, Obama, etc, etc... Following them doesn't mean all followers are supporters which lowers their ratings on whom approve of these democrats/liberals. Obama is the only exception, and that is because black people from all over the world follow him for simply being the first black POTUS.

As for Trump, the large majority of people who follow him back him up. The majority of the liberals/democrats/socialists whom respond to Trump's tweets I have seen follow someone else like Pelosi, and when she posts her responses her band of useful idiots then respond to her and POTUS Trump's tweets. The large majority of the people whom follow Trump are his supporters. Trump doesn't have a huge following outside the U.S. like Obama does for his skin color.

And again, I am not basing my argument simply on the followers he has in social media, but also the amount of people whom attend his rallies which have always been bigger than Hillary's or any other politician except for Obama. That plus the fact that Fox News is also always leading in ratings show that a large majority of people in the U.S. support Trump more than any of the 2020 candidates or politicians.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

And there's a billion other tweets but nothing showing how people got influenced to vote for Trump.

Mueller couldn't find any proof 😃

From the Mueller Report, Introduction to Volume 1, page 1 paragraph 6 and continued on to page 2:

As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel's investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents. The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

edit on 30/7/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2019 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

And all of that is debunked by the FACT that Steele used two, there were other Russian sources as well, Russian officials for the lies in his dossier. Those two principal sources are Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov, both of which Steele admitted as his sources. Even former Obama State Dept. official Kathleen Kavalec had in her notes that those two were the Russian officials that Steele used for the false information in his dossier.


...
Steele started the dossier with a report dated June 20, 2016. He claimed that his sources included a “senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” (Source A) and a “former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin” (Source B). This top intelligence officer was the source for the claim that Putin was personally directing the pro-Trump effort.
...
On October 11, 2016, Steele was interviewed in Washington by State Department official Kathleen Kavalec. In that interview, he identified two of his insider Kremlin sources as Vladislov Surkov and Vyasheslov Trubnikov.
...

Was Brennan’s ‘Intelligence Bombshell’ the Steele Dossier?

The problem is that those sources are still part of the Russian government, and Vladislov Surkov happens to be Putin's top Russian advisor. These people are loyal to Putin, so why would they give any factual evidence ousting what you left-wingers call "Putin's stooge"? It makes no sense, unless the Russians were knowingly passing false information about Trump, which is why Comey/McCabe etc couldn't corroborate the claims in the Steele dossier. The Steele dossier is Russia's attempt at interfering in our elections. Not to mention the FACT that Russia's officials also backed in the U.S. both pro-Trump and anti-Trump protests. The claim by these bozos that Putin wanted Trump as POTUS is a lie, if he did none of these Russian officials would have been making lies about Trump if there was any truth in the claims that he worked/works for them...

Here, directly from Surkov's twitter account.


The latest Tweets from Vladislav Surkov (@therealsurkov). Personal adviser of Vladimir Putin. Political technologist, stage manager, surrealist poet & aspiring ventriloquist. aka Nathan Dubovitsky, aka surkovnotsurkov...

twitter.com...

You can also see the anti-Trump statements that Surkov makes in his tweets...

For example, this one...


twitter.com...

The FAKE claims that POTUS Trump has been working for the Russians is a LIE the Russians themselves used to try to interfere in our elections...

As for who is Vyacheslav Trubnikov, the other main Russian source Steele used for his dossier...


Vyacheslav Trubnikov
Vyacheslav Ivanovich Trubnikov is a Russian journalist, political scientist, spy and a diplomat. He has worked as the Director of Foreign Intelligence Service and currently is a First Deputy of Foreign Minister of Russia.
...

Vyacheslav Trubnikov

These Russian officials STILL WORK FOR THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT... If it was true that they ousted their "manchurian candidate" in the U.S. they would have been fired a long time ago and assassinated... Which proves the Steele Dossier is full of Russian LIES...







edit on 31-7-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Aug, 1 2019 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Humm, for some reason part of my response above was repeated twice, I must have copied my response and re-posted it when I only wanted to post it once.
edit on 1-8-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join