nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off Topic Thread 5.0

[Deleted User]

Thread continued from here https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057835955&page=250

The usual rules apply. Non-rugby talk here. Consider this a social place, but like a pub, things like religion and politics can be divisive, so don't say things here you wouldn't say to someone's face in the pub. Sober

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dog Botherer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Lincoln project has pivoted to some astonishing manipulation tactics to help sway Georgia after the decision:

Study conducted by Democratic Party PAC finds Lincoln Project ads incredibly ineffective at turning people off Trump.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-hottest-campaign-ads-on-twitter-didnt-really-work-study?ref=scroll

it’s a scam designed to make the “good conservatives” seem more appealing and valuable to bog standard Dem voters in order to push the Overton window even further rightward, and i wish otherwise intelligent people would stop falling for it.

[Deleted User]

Dog Botherer wrote: »

Study conducted by Democratic Party PAC finds Lincoln Project ads incredibly ineffective at turning people off Trump.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-hottest-campaign-ads-on-twitter-didnt-really-work-study?ref=scroll

it’s a scam designed to make the “good conservatives” seem more appealing and valuable to bog standard Dem voters in order to push the Overton window even further rightward, and i wish otherwise intelligent people would stop falling for it.

I think their primary goal was to drive a schism between Trump republicans and generational republicans and this ad very much furthers that given it actually sides with Trump technically speaking.

If the Democrats pick up both Georgia seats then Republicans will be free to turn on Trump. If they hold onto them they will have more options in how they manage the Trump faction moving forward.

Neil3030

Dog Botherer wrote: »

Study conducted by Democratic Party PAC finds Lincoln Project ads incredibly ineffective at turning people off Trump.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-hottest-campaign-ads-on-twitter-didnt-really-work-study?ref=scroll

Did you mean to link something else?

That's not what this article concludes.

Dog Botherer

Neil3030 wrote: »

Did you mean to link something else?

That's not what this article concludes.

was loose in my wording. to clarify, all of the snappy ads “owning” Trump by comparing him to other Republican politicians and their perceived values was not effective. it did nothing but build the brand of the LP amongst liberals desperate to be rid of Trump. if Biden wins, great, they’re now a major media figure in orbit around his administration. if Trump wins, great, they are pretty much ideologically indistinguishable, they just wish he’d knock off the tweeting. if they actually sincerely believed all the nonsense they spout they’d have stuck to making conventional attack ads, which, as they themselves admit in that article, were far more effective.

handy cash grab too.

thomond2006

Limerick win after a very comfortable final. Waterford not at their level today.

Neil3030

Dog Botherer wrote: »

was loose in my wording. to clarify, all of the snappy ads “owning” Trump by comparing him to other Republican politicians and their perceived values was not effective. it did nothing but build the brand of the LP amongst liberals desperate to be rid of Trump. if Biden wins, great, they’re now a major media figure in orbit around his administration. if Trump wins, great, they are pretty much ideologically indistinguishable, they just wish he’d knock off the tweeting. if they actually sincerely believed all the nonsense they spout they’d have stuck to making conventional attack ads, which, as they themselves admit in that article, were far more effective.

handy cash grab too.

The study is informative. But it specifically tested whether you could predict an attack ad's effectiveness with swing voters, based on its social media numbers. Turns out, you can't. This finding is actually not surprising, as I can't imagine too many swing voters are active on political Twitter etc. So don't get your hopes up if you see trending content owning your opponent. May not mean anything. Important to know.

But it's a leap of inference to conclude (from this specific finding) that groups had no effect outside of the points of self-interest you impute. They create a broad spectrum of ads which will be tuned to specific regions and issues. And while the more potent ads may trend on Twitter, the more conventional ones may have been getting all the air time where it mattered. Measuring a group's overall effectiveness will be a complex process, and Twitter data likely isn't where we should be looking for predictor variables.

aloooof

thomond2006 wrote: »

Limerick win after a very comfortable final. Waterford not at their level today.

Imperious stuff, some of the passing and scoring was unreal.

[Deleted User]

Dog Botherer wrote: »

was loose in my wording. to clarify, all of the snappy ads “owning” Trump by comparing him to other Republican politicians and their perceived values was not effective. it did nothing but build the brand of the LP amongst liberals desperate to be rid of Trump. if Biden wins, great, they’re now a major media figure in orbit around his administration. if Trump wins, great, they are pretty much ideologically indistinguishable, they just wish he’d knock off the tweeting. if they actually sincerely believed all the nonsense they spout they’d have stuck to making conventional attack ads, which, as they themselves admit in that article, were far more effective.

handy cash grab too.

They attacked across the republican spectrum including 20+ senators along with Trump, his cabinet and family (those utilised by the administration). I don't doubt their messaging found greatest cathartic appeal amongst liberal or democratic voters but the rhetoric, style and messaging was obviously targeted at republican and low information voters and there is plenty of data which suggests it was effective - particularly in swing states.

It was undeniably a cash grab by conservative activists that found the window of debate too far right to appeal to Trump republicans, and no doubt this is the beginning of what a return to mainstream conservatism is likely to look like - but it also contributed to the Biden win and as such can't be ignored as a useful deradicalisation tool by those who understand Trumps base the best.

I listen to Steve Schmidt a good deal as he is the type of conservative ideologue that you could actually have a reasonable fact based debate with. It's pretty clear and he's been open about the fact that bringing in Palin (he was John McCain's campaign manager) provided the hard right of the GOP with a eureka moment. It proved that the message is more important than the truth and whilst Trump wasn't the chosen conclusion of this - he was absolutely the inevitable one.

The biggest problem for politics in the social media world is how personality profiling has allowed large groups of people to be completely and utterly misled as to the nature of the world around them. A new type of voluntary serfdom is at risk of being produced out of the hyper partisanship becoming evident in the US / UK and no doubt elsewhere in due course. The Lincoln project is some of the most vicious and targeted campaign material against this and the emergent hard right that I've seen. These tactics don't work across the voter spectrum but they've filled an interesting void in that they've largely been financed by non republicans but will have the largest impact on the voting intentions of republicans.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

there is plenty of data which suggests it was effective - particularly in swing states.

The Lincoln Project?

[Deleted User]

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The Lincoln Project?

Yeah there was an interesting piece in the Washington post about it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/12/did-republicans-vote-against-trump/

Democrats maintain that Trump won a greater proportion of the Republican vote in the states targeted by the Lincoln project but the 67 million they spent specifically targeting moderate Republicans in swing states has to have had an impact on the 7% of Trump voters and 8% of Republican voters from 2016.

In a nutshell - more people voted full stop, but more historical republican voters flipped and they specifically were the target of the Lincoln project.

Stheno

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah there was an interesting piece in the Washington post about it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/12/did-republicans-vote-against-trump/

Democrats maintain that Trump won a greater proportion of the Republican vote in the states targeted by the Lincoln project but the 67 million they spent specifically targeting moderate Republicans in swing states has to have had an impact on the 7% of Trump voters and 8% of Republican voters from 2016.

In a nutshell - more people voted full stop, but more historical republican voters flipped and they specifically were the target of the Lincoln project.

Isn't the Lincoln project run by Kelly Anne Conway husband?

[Deleted User]

Stheno wrote: »

Isn't the Lincoln project run by Kelly Anne Conway husband?

It's run by a bunch of former republican activists and communication experts.

irishbucsfan

Ah so the Lincoln projects own numbers show they were effective. Because the states they targeted are where Trump underperformed. Which also happened to be the states targeted by literally every other organisation trying to influence the election.

The whole thing is just an excercise in guilt shedding from the people who let it happen in the first place, and of course they’re going to tell everyone it worked. Why anyone would give money to the people who built the machine that enabled the administration in the first place is beyond me.

[Deleted User]

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ah so the Lincoln projects own numbers show they were effective. Because the states they targeted are where Trump underperformed. Which also happened to be the states targeted by literally every other organisation trying to influence the election.

The whole thing is just an excercise in guilt shedding from the people who let it happen in the first place, and of course they’re going to tell everyone it worked. Why anyone would give money to the people who built the machine that enabled the administration in the first place is beyond me.

I don't think you can dismiss them that easily and whilst I agree that (and the question has been asked) there is an element of guilt here - the data they are using isn't in question, merely the impact they specifically had on the trends.

That data is being harvested as we speak and no doubt their efficacy will be more assessable in due course. Perhaps they had less of an impact than their expenditure and targeting would indicate on the final result but they may also have had more. Time will tell.

Dog Botherer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's run by a bunch of former republican activists and communication experts.

mostly blood drenched George W Bush acolytes

[Deleted User]

I think the Lincoln project is just another part of the **** slinging that is tearing the US apart

irishbucsfan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't think you can dismiss them that easily and whilst I agree that (and the question has been asked) there is an element of guilt here - the data they are using isn't in question, merely the impact they specifically had on the trends.

That data is being harvested as we speak and no doubt their efficacy will be more assessable in due course. Perhaps they had less of an impact than their expenditure and targeting would indicate on the final result but they may also have had more. Time will tell.

Well you said it was effective. That is absolutely still in question, it’s really not supported by any data I’ve seen except by the general election results in those states, which obviously they can’t take credit for alone.

I’d love to know what data is being harvested and why it takes 1-2 months to ingest and analyse in 2020!

I would love to know exactly where they targeted their online spend and what their real intentions for that were and what their real success metrics are. I don’t think we’ll ever know.

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well you said it was effective. That is absolutely still in question, it’s really not supported by any data I’ve seen except by the general election results in those states, which obviously they can’t take credit for alone.

I’d love to know what data is being harvested and why it takes 1-2 months to ingest and analyse in 2020!

I would love to know exactly where they targeted their online spend and what their real intentions for that were and what their real success metrics are. I don’t think we’ll ever know.

Were they all online, or did they also buy TV time?

If they were just online I'd say swing voters barely saw them.

Neil3030

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Venjur is buying whiskey for everyone!! I'll take a Pappy van Winkle thanks.

Wait, what did I miss here?

Do I get whiskey too?

irishbucsfan

Neil3030 wrote: »

Were they all online, or did they also buy TV time?

If they were just online I'd say swing voters barely saw them.

Pretty sure they bought a fair whack of TV time on Fox, the idea being it’d be on the shows he was clearly watching the whole time

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Pretty sure they bought a fair whack of TV time on Fox, the idea being it’d be on the shows he was clearly watching the whole time

That's true actually, didn't his rage tweet about one of their earlier ads really kick things off for them?

Dave_The_Sheep

Side note, plenty of former Fox disciples in the US have turned on them. Know a few Trump supporters in the US that a part of a group I game with semi-regularly and now apparently Fox is fake news. Newsmax is the new bastion of truth.

I get it's a long term brainwashing problem of Fox's own making but it's really surreal watching them turn on Fox as soon as they called the election.

Dog Botherer

they’re onto OANN too, that’s Trump’s network of choice. the FOX thing is interesting because it’s the propaganda arm of the Republican party losing control of it’s audience. they’ve been pushing them further and further into reactionary insanity and now that they’re trying to pull back a little it’s far too late.

you reap what you sow etc. welcome to the Q zone.

Yeah_Right

Neil3030 wrote: »

Wait, what did I miss here?

Do I get whiskey too?

Yes you do. Venjur is buying whiskey for everyone for Xmas because he is the whiskey Santa.
Except for Buer. No whiskey for Buer.

Stheno

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Yes you do. Venjur is buying whiskey for everyone for Xmas because he is the whiskey Santa.
Except for Buer. No whiskey for Buer.

Ah poor Buer

Buer

.... how about a whisky?!

Podge_irl

shopping?q=tbn:ANd9GcTx3y0wzpFDuKVMp-K_Up4M3iSXuTkwEYLwW57MkLzOuAlFF_GOBg&usqp=CAc

Have polished off one of these while quarantining. So could do with another, cheers Venj.

Neil3030

ALL HAIL THE WHISKEY SANTA

FACECUTTR

I picked up a bottle of Jameson that was aged in stout barrels in tesco at the weekend. Quite sweet but very nice. €25 if anyone is thinking of trying.

Paul Smeenus

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Yes you do. Venjur is buying whiskey for everyone for Xmas because he is the whiskey Santa.
Except for Buer. No whiskey for Buer.

Laphroaig / Ardbeg / Highland Park / Redbreast / Woodford Reserve cheers.