Posted on 12/12/2016 8:48:07 PM PST by goldstategop
The victory of Donald Trump at US presidential election demonstrates the weakness of "classical" sociology in the face of the Internet because Hillary Clinton was leading in most sociological polls ahead of the vote, Russian presidential advisor for developing Internet German Klimenko told Life Zvuk radio station.
"No one on the Internet asked or looked at what people answer. No one monitored how many people like Trump’s messages on Twitter. That’s how we saw for the first time that old sociology turned out to be weaker that the internet, and Clinton lost," Klimenko said.
Clinton’s defeat was due to the fact that her team underestimated the Internet factor and was "disoriented by old sociology," he added. "The problem is probably not in Trump winning but in Clinton losing," the advisor noted.
Klimenko also said that the US election strengthened the internet factor in politics. "We have our own election cycles, and people across the world are starting to pay attention to it now. The factor of attitude toward the internet has shifted from economic to political. Now we can say for sure that the internet affects politics. Internet has become part of politics," he concluded.
He thought Clinton lost because she ignored the impact the online world had on the way people saw the general election campaign and how it addressed issues important to them. In other words, it was not so much Trump won as Hillary lost.
Two polls I read about that were accurate:
1. I followed the LA Times poll. They tracked a number of voters week after week for responses and were the most accurate of the bunch.
2. Another poll that nailed it got around the bias (not wanting to tell a stranger Trump was their pick) by asking “Who are your family members or neighbors supporting?” That poll was also extremely accurate.
Hillary campaigned like it was still the 1990s. I didn’t get online until 1997.
The first Internet presidential election was in 2000.
Dornsife/IBD-TPP/PPD were online polls and all were accurate.
That’s where the future of polling is at.
Every one else ignored, dismissed and overlooked the Trump trend.
You could see it on the Internet.
LOL - it’s a sad state of affairs when the Russians understand American politics better than American liberals. . .but that is the real reason that Hillary lost. However, they were mistaken in that Donald won. The tea parties have been working toward this objective for 8 years and Donald Trump was the only person willing to take up the mantle. Kudos to him and to the American people for recognizing a leader of people over a tyrant.
The MSM ironically gave Team Clinton a false sense of confidence. The MSM lies completely backfired on the Left.
Russians have been studying America for a long time.
In the Soviet period, Georgi Arbatov of the America Institute advised Soviet leaders.
Americans have never made a genuine attempt to understand Russia but Russians are well-acquainted with Americans.
One problem in his analysis, the fact the polls were not objective in nature. As it was proven at least one polling company leaned torwads Clinton. Polls were over sampled to lean in one way and the sample population was not even to alleviate bias. She ignored this aspect because she felt she was entitled to the office due whatever reason du jour was. Her lackeys felt this way to.
But that does not mean Trump didn't win. Trump absolutely did win. He is the only candidate with reality show experience, and he turned the campaign into a season long reality show. No one could compete with him inside his reality show, because they were so far behind the curve they didn't even know the rules of the game they were playing.
AND helped Team Clinton collect much money from donors as they were so sure that the lying polls were right.
Heard a comedy bit about your last point. When you visit a European country, they all have opinions about America. Oh America is this or America is that. But if the European asks, so what do you Americans think about Sweden ? Ah, um, nice bikini team. And, er, go Vikings.
The other candidates — Democrat and Republican — ran typical political campaigns. Clinton even tried to run her campaign like BJ did in the 1990s.
Trump run a completely different, personable campaign, especially prior to October. In his rallies and commentaries, he spoke TO the people, whereas the politicians spoke AT the people.
Even now, most of the ‘insiders’ cannot comprehend how Trump ran his campaign and how he won the presidency.
The old politicial campaign playbook just did not work.
Especially leading up to the Dem convention and afterward, Clinton did try to coast to the election by only campaigning one or two times a week and let the sycophant media do the major campaigning for her.
It almost worked. Those who were going to vote for her were going to regardless of how much or little she campaigned.
Well said. Thank you for acknowledging that Trump’s effort was decisive and that it wasn’t just a case of Hillary losing.
It was a masterful win that pitted him against every form of Establishment — press, GOP, Dems, gimmedat, academia, our allies. But We the People recognized the honor and leadership of the man... and we prevailed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
