Posted on 07/13/2017 8:04:52 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Criticism of Hillary Clinton over documents posted by WikiLeaks played a key role in her failed US presidential campaign and successful election of Donald Trump, a study of viral tweets has found. Twitter posts during the final two months of the 2016 election race shows that Ms Clinton was heavily criticised on social media compared to her rival Donald Trump.
Posts relating to WikiLeaks were the most common form of attack on social media for the Democratic candidate, who was also heavily criticised on Twitter over an FBI investigation into her use of a private email server, researchers said.
Researchers from the University of Edinburgh in the UK used computer analysis to study the top viral tweets each day between September 1 and November 8 last year. They found that there were three times as many posts attacking Ms Clinton than posts that were in her favour.
By contrast, viral tweets relating to Mr Trump were split equally in favour of and against his campaign.
Posts from Donald Trump’s social media campaign and his supporters had a more positive tone than that of his rival, with effective reach for slogans, policy promises and campaigning for swing states.
Tweets backing Ms Clinton tended to compare her with her rival, and to attack Mr Trump rather than praise Ms Clinton.
Mr Trump was criticised for his performance in election debates more than his links to scandals such as the Access Hollywood tape.
Donald Trump supporters were more likely to share news reports from less credible sources, the study found.
In all researchers analysed almost 3,500 posts, which together were retweeted more than 25 million times.
Tweets were labelled as being favourable to Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, or neither. They used data from TweetElect.com, which collates the most retweeted posts related to the US election.
The truth getting out hurt Hillary.
Highly doubt that.
ARREST THEM! (Foaming at the mouth sarcasm) LOL
Collusion!
In other news, a televised debate in 1960 helped Jack Kennedy win.
What? No analysis as to why posts from Hillary Clinton’s campaign and her supporters had any affect on her campaign? You fargin lying jack-wagons. Tissue?
Thou shalt not tell the truth about Democrats....
actually bottom line, Hillary helped trump get elected
I found through out the campaign that a lot of people were not aware of just how rotten the Clintons are and what they did in their lives, even before they got into politics...
By Wiki Leaks and some of us on here that lived through the Clinton years had information that backed up the Wiki Leak files...
That is why the people didn’t trust rotten Clinton, she is an evil, vile, filth that is the slime that snakes crawl upon, she is a killer, and wouldn’t blink an eye to have someone kill you if she thought you were in her way...she lies, she steals, she is way past what people in the Mob are...
The Lord was listening to all of us Patriots that elected President Trump and the truth is coming out about years of corruption in D.C. and the people that work there, the House, the Senate and those lobbyists and super pacs that take money from us and give to blackmailers, foreign countries that don’t have our interests at heart...
Yes she lost because of pure out right evil...and she will pay for it all, if not here on earth, when the Lord looks her in the eyes...
Thank you Lord for hearing our prayers and helping us elect a man that loves this country and her people and wants to bring God back into people’s lives. Amen.
I like to think that people just had enough of the progressive agenda.
Yes...the truth...via there own leaked documents....hurt ILLary.
*their own
What percentage of tweets were critical of Hillary before September 2016?
John Podesta, you glorious bastard, you did it!
From my reading, Hillary Clinton got all her votes, and then some, out of most target urban areas. Detroit was lower than for Obama. Cleveland and Milwaukee may have come in lighter than for Obama. None of those are the principal reasons Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton. She lost because she alienated working class white men while she targeted all the latest Democrat identity groups at ther expense, while he was the change agent who motivated huge numbers in Republican districts to turn out and vote for change.
Exactly, and this should be the blanket response to the Russia bs. The talking points should be:
1. Wikileaks exposed the deceit within the Clinton campaign and the DNC. No one has questioned the accuracy of what was exposed, or the authenticity of the emails.
2. Wikileaks made Hillary look bad because it exposed who she really is. Nothing was made up.
3. Assange has stated many times, emphatically, that Wikileaks did not get its hacked emails from the Russians. Even if it did, this doesn't change the authenticity of the leaked emails.
4. There is zero evidence that anyone, Russians or others, were able to hack into voting machines and change the actual vote. Any Russian or other foreign involvement in our election was therefore restricted to any, if any, involvement in the release of actual emails that exposed what the democrats had been hiding about who they really are. Irrespective of who did it, Hillary and the Democrats were done in by the exposure of their own deceit and cynicism.
5. The only way the election was affected by any stealth influence, internal or foreign, was by exposing to the public who Hillary actually is, and how deceitful the DNC is. The public was swayed by the truth.
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.