pErvinalia wrote:Well regular sort of stuff that you'd expect of major political parties (i.e. stuff the Dems would undoubtedly do as well) - either do voter analysis and then target questionable advertising to swing them, or pay someone else to do it. That in itself, while not illegal, IMO doesn't really gel with the principles of honest and open democracy. But the real problem seems to have been the Super PACs, who it appears have been directed by Trump's campaign team (Cambridge Analytica), and the law apparently prohibits politicians having anything to do with the actions of the Super PACs. That might not be an accurate summary, as I don't know the specifics of your system, so I might be misquoting or misinterpreting something there. You'd be best to watch it yourself.Forty Two wrote:What is it that the video says is done by whom? I wasn't going to bother with it. Can you tell me what understanding it gave you?pErvinalia wrote:By the way, we all know how 42 is going to respond to this video don't we? "Yebbut, the Democrats do it too..". What I call his "tu quoque by proxy".
After I was resoundingly called to task for posting videos without providing a summary, complete with notations of minute/second locations where specific information can be found, I don't find it necessary to watch such videos.
If the video is about the use of social media data by campaigns, well, in 2012 it was a game changer and a proper, transformative use of new campaign technology. When Trump campaign folks do it, then it's wrong. As usual.
I'm sure there will be some justification -- I'm sure the way the 2012 candidates used the data was proper and just, and never an overreach, and something in the way the Trump folks did it makes it wrong. That's typically how these things go.