I'm sure it wasn't you who did it, but cropping the example to remove some of the salient information is misleading, and it seems you were taken in. From the DOJ press release (duplicating the criminal complaint):
[...] The ad stated: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home,” “Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925,” and “Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the deceptive image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by Hillary For President 2016.” The tweet included the typed hashtag “#ImWithHer,” a slogan frequently used by Hillary Clinton. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which had been used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by Mackey and his co-conspirators.
Certainly, this was amusing to those involved in it, and the basic idea is defensible as a joke. But if you keep adding layer upon layer of detail to make your joke more plausible, while also demonstrating intent by making an electronic record of your conversations where you say that your goal is to get fewer people to vote, the excuse starts to wear thin.
Admittedly, the people who fell for this and were deceived into 'voting' by text or thinking that they were signing up for campaign messages may have been a bit stupid. But the whole point of putting advisories and disclaimers in the fine print is to provide people with a credible channel of information that's independent of the exhortation in an advertisement. It's like the difference between teasing someone for being naive and actively exploiting them.