The Verge was the first search hit on Google, calls the movie a spin of privacy policies and conspiracy theories, blah blah blah. Ping to all lists, plus previous posts in this topic.
Posted on 09/23/2018 7:04:26 PM PDT by EdnaMode
When Donald Trump surprised the world by winning the 2016 election, liberals clung to the idea that his victory was illegitimate because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. According to a psychologist who supported Clinton in 2016, however, Google's bias in Clinton's favor may remove even that symbolic victory from her.
Almost all of Clinton's popular vote margin could be attributed to Google bias, making her win "negligible." Dr. Robert Epstein, a psychologist who earned his Ph.D. at Harvard, actually reported this finding last year, but he explains how it works in the upcoming film "The Creepy Line."
Epstein made a stir in 2015 by reporting in Politico that Google could "rig" the 2016 election. This story discussed the results of his study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). That study found that "biased search ranking can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters from 20% or more — up to 80% in some demographic groups."
In a white paper published by the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in June 2017, Epstein followed up on this PNAS study, suggesting that Clinton's popular vote margin was almost entirely attributable to pro-Clinton bias at Google.
"Extrapolating from the mathematics introduced in this report ... the lead author of the PNAS study [Epstein himself] predicted that a pro-Clinton bias in Google's search results would, over time, shift at least 2.6 million votes to Clinton. She won the popular vote in the November election by 2,864,974 votes," Epstein wrote with his co-author Ronald E. Robertson.
"Without the pro-Clinton bias in Google's search results, her win margin in the popular vote would have been negligible," Epstein wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Scary. And Google plans on doing it again this fall. Or even right now, I don’t use nor will use Google, so I cannot say for sure.
“There’s a sucker born every minute...”
Doesn’t matter, really.
If the election were popular vote the campaigns would be focused differently and greater numbers for Trump would be available in states like California where voting for President is meaningless.
The campaign would also have focused on running up totals in red states as opposed to squeezing by in other states to gain electoral votes.
Etc...
Illegal Aliens providing Calif. with too many Congressional Districts/EC votes....
Having the Ministry of Propaganda is always worth 5-10 points for Democrats.
Not true just look at the huge over voting in the ten largest sanctuary locations. Next pile of bull!
The Democrats use the popular vote to attack whether Trump exercising the powers of the office is legitimate. I think they’ve raised that with respect to Kavanaugh.
And obviously it also matters going forward.
Yes, a large percentage of democrats will believe whatever mass media tells them. They make no effort past hearing and believing. Many swing voters are the same way. They just blow in the msm wind. It takes too much effort for them to think critically. Mostly because they heve been programmed to not think, thanks to the liberals taking over our public education and universities.
yes. 2.6 million is nothing considering half the country still voted for “crooked Hillary” even with all of the truth about her out there.
If the voters would have voted for Trump rather than Swillery
then it would not be likely that she actually won the popular vote in the election.
That would mean that every negative vote taken from Swillery would also be a Positive vote for Trump. This would make a two vote swing for each vote. For Trump the same story.
Hillary Clinton did NOT win the popular vote.
Fake News. Every election. Big Lie.
May this be your homework to learn why.
I get tired of debating liberal lies, because endless lies follow their prior lies.
Hillary Clinton LOST the Popular Vote.
Dr. Robert Epstein, a psychologist who earned his Ph.D. at Harvard, actually reported this finding last year, but he explains how it works in the upcoming film "The Creepy Line." ... his study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)... found that "biased search ranking can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters from 20% or more — up to 80% in some demographic groups." ...in June 2017, Epstein followed up on this PNAS study, suggesting that Clinton's popular vote margin was almost entirely attributable to pro-Clinton bias at Google. "Extrapolating from the mathematics introduced in this report ... the lead author of the PNAS study [Epstein himself] predicted that a pro-Clinton bias in Google's search results would, over time, shift at least 2.6 million votes to Clinton. She won the popular vote in the November election by 2,864,974 votes," Epstein wrote with his co-author Ronald E. Robertson.
And just to be on the safe side, the Demagogic Party made sure another 2 million votes of illegals were cast for Hitlery. Thanks EdnaMode.
Hey Hitlery; obama called and said you didn’t build that!
Bwaaahaaahaaa!
The Verge was the first search hit on Google, calls the movie a spin of privacy policies and conspiracy theories, blah blah blah. Ping to all lists, plus previous posts in this topic.
Whoops, that was supposed to be a text link at the top, showing the YouTube title “The Creepy Link” trailer. [blush]
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.
