Either the Russians have vastly superior propaganda and probably in control of global politics or their influence in the US election is overstated.
It serves two purposes:
1) Face-saving from out of touch with the population DNC/Clinton team that still can't fathom how they lost to an orange-utang
2) Keeping the lead orange-utang in a pro-war, pro-military expenses course against Russia, that everybody in the establishment loves
Maybe also as an experiment about how far BS can go if promoted by all the pundits...
The Twitter influence is certainly overstated, but Twitter wasn't the only source of influence (still isn't).
They overlap heavily with people who think everything is a conspiracy, probably perpetuated by Jewish people. No, I'm not kidding. You can go to voat.co and watch them in action.
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure they are mentally ill.
Hearing that Clinton ate babies, was nearly dead, was going to take away arms, and was going to force me to install a transgender person in my bathroom didn't actually make me vote for Trump. In fact, I'm pretty sure nothing they said could have made me vote for him.
Again, I'm absolutely sure there is selection bias - but I do live in the State that elected LePage, twice. We sent an electoral vote for Trump and one for Clinton. The Trump voters that I know were probably going to vote for Trump, even if he set fire to a nativity scene while cursing baby Jesus.
I wish there were some way to truly quantify how much impact it had.
Who are these people? Where are they?
It's not confusing. They published some trash. It takes a few moments to verify that it is untrue. If you wait long enough, someone will come along and post a rebuttal and provide citations.
Maybe I give too much credit to my fellow humans, but I know some less than brilliant people and they happily voted D or R much like they have always done. They then went back to work and will bitch about it for a couple of years until they forget and do it again with the next political season.
Meh... Maybe I'm missing something, but that's what I see.
I'll trust you. I doubt you have any motive to be dishonest. It just seems pretty different from what I see - both by the published results and by my experiences talking with people.
Also, I am guessing CPI ton is Clinton and autocorrected?
Didn't she call Trump supporters a 'basket of deplorables?'
I don't think incitement of hate against different groups of people was off limits for either side? There was a whole lot of hate going around.
Or maybe the nature of propaganda versus "factual news" is just that much more effective. It's not out of the realm of possibilities considering propaganda has been used effectively in all sorts of mediums for centuries now.