I'm convinced 99% of T_D users who spent 12 months posting Pepe memes were actual people inspired by a paid 1%. You can probably save a lot of money if so many will "work" for free.

From the article, "But Trump’s FB campaigns were more complex than Clinton’s and better leveraged Facebook’s ability to optimize for outcomes."

Also, "The data scientist says 84 percent of Trump’s budget asked people on Facebook to take an action, like donating, compared with 56 percent of Clinton’s."

She outspent Obama too early on.

Trump is a guy who does whatever he can to get attention. Given the pathetic state of the GOP slate and the less than inspirational Hillary campaign... people just needed a little push.

The most critical thing you need to consider when evaluating talent is value over replacement.[0] While Hillary Clinton certainly had fantastic credentials (Secretary of State, Senator) her track record for accomplishments[1] while in those positions is IMO indistinguishable from a fictitious replacement level politician. She was the presumptive nominee in 2008 and lost, but you could chalk that up to Barack Obama being highly competent. There isn't much proof that she was an extraordinary politician, in fact there is a large body of evidence to the contrary.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_over_replacement_player

[1] https://www.thebalance.com/hillary-clinton-s-accomplishments...

It's not. It's a rhetorical Q for Bloomberg, junk news sources make money by interpreting primary sources for others instead of providing the data and adding value.