All things reality with Trump, maybe not so beautiful now!

[Roussette]

Here we are!

Yes, I agree Lweji. One piece of press reported it as a slap in the face for the womens marches... rushed through on the first day of working... a sort of "So there.. take that you women!!"

I think it has always been one of the first things done though I'm supposed to be working so can't hit Google to see when George W did it but it was certainly part of his first bunch of executive orders.

First day though - after such a clear message from women around the world that they want their voices heard. Plus... all those fucking rich white men!

It was 2 days in... so technically even quicker than Emperor Trump as he obviously had the weekend off!

Because the best way to reduce immigration is to make things even more shit for people in developing countries....

pbs.twimg.com/media/C27ksyNUcAApPPs.jpg
Worth a thousand words

Oh god yes, I completely agree that some of the Trumpettes "took part in the life of the site" for cover.

It's purely a personal guess that not all Trump supporters were organised Trumpettes. Based on what ought to be true on a site this size - and also I suppose on recognising posters whose longterm behaviour was very different from the Trumpettes (but I'm not going to give an Astroturfer's Guide!)

That's very interesting if you were able to generate a list of names from posters' behaviour - and then found that most of those on your list did indeed disappear.

formerpig Oh yes. I also saw a side by side moving comparison of Obama arriving for his inauguration and Trumps with regard to Michelle and Melania. Each time for Obama the car drew up outside and he waited for Michelle and guided her up the steps, held her hand etc (anyone would've been nervous). Trumper left Melania to get out the car and he strode on ahead leaving her to go up the steps on her own carrying the present.

I don't think all the Trumpettes were astroturfers, but I am pretty sure which of them were. And I think a couple were genuine in the beliefs, but not as mumsnetters iyswim - they weren't "professionals", but trip trapped over to mumsnet from other parts of the internet, a bit like when MRA types invade the feminist boards.

That's very interesting if you were able to generate a list of names from posters' behaviour - and then found that most of those on your list did indeed disappear

It's quite interesting when people DON'T post on threads you'd expect them to post on, given their views but are all other other threads.

There must be algorithms that analyze forum posts and behaviour, presumably any parties seeking to orchestrate or achieve some overarching aim would be using pretty sophisticated tools??

We're not on our own with how we feel on this thread!

The depressing thing is, for them to spend all that money and resources on social media trolling, it must work. Replying to the Trumpettes on those threads felt like a huge waste of time, but the idea of letting blatant lies stand unchallenged was worse.

Only 45% of Americans approve of Trump's job performance over the first three days of his presidency, according to a Gallup survey released Monday

I'll try to spin that.

56% of Americans approve of Trump's job performance. (that's 56% of white people)

90% of Americans approve. (Republican voters)

Only 45% of Americans disapprove of Trump's performance

They need the Express. They ask their own readers

Replying to the Trumpettes on those threads felt like a huge waste of time, but the idea of letting blatant lies stand unchallenged was worse.

This.

There must be algorithms that analyze forum posts and behaviour, presumably any parties seeking to orchestrate or achieve some overarching aim would be using pretty sophisticated tools??

They were. That's what Cambridge Analytica were for. They had the best tools! The greatest! And by the way, everybody else's tools were FAKE!

I imagine Misswatch of the why aren't feminists picking up guns like those brave women in Iraq has toddled off to Reddit.
Others...

cambridgeanalytica.org/news/blog/1403

"Cambridge Analytica’s data analysis informed the campaign on how to communicate with voters, and it was the firm’s Digital Team that planned and executed the digital advertising strategy that won over undecided voters. Online ads placed by the firm were viewed a staggering 1.5 billion times by millions of Americans, after the company ran 4,000 individual digital ad campaigns backing the Republican candidate. Its messaging and testing was continually tested and refined by using the firm’s polling and data. Through the digital team, the campaign was the first to leverage many of the emerging trends in the advertising industry, such as native advertising."

Rousette I saw that too. Also their first dances. Obama, At Last. Trump I Did it my Way. Says it all.

Does that mean that Oxbridge was actually pro-Trump?

Ahh, but that was the good Oxbridge - like Jacob Rees Mogg, who is for teh common people becuause he is against political correctness. Trump is against political correctness too, which is why he won in the glorious people's revolution.

Bad Oxbridge is all Spads and computer whizzkids and spin...

Everything we do online just serves to create a massive database which can be mined by those with the most powerful tools so as to better manipulate us

We are all just sheep being herded about and fleeced

Everything we do online just serves to create a massive database which can be mined by those with the most powerful tools so as to better manipulate us

I use Facebook to advertise. It's amazing how I can get my adverts to appear on the news feeds of people most likely to buy my services.

Clearly Hillary and her campaign need IT and new technology training, then.
They couldn't even recognise a phishing email.

Does anyone know what happened to Claig...?

Sacked probably ... ?