Oh, wow! There is a noun opine:



But I'm pretty sure this isn't what you meant.

 

"Sometimes life is like a box of chocolates"

I tend to think about my own vote while standing in a real voter "box, station, whatever" and I think who the "Hell" would do better? another 8 years of HRC OR AKA Obama dripping with that Agenda?

Um, this guy from New York business guy, not a politician resonated with me in ways that made me say, they've had their 8 plus years screwing with the country, how much worse could this get.

Hmn, well we've seen it now and know. The plot that the Russians are behind it played out in the media, and continues only because we have people who simply can't believe their popular vote didn't count. So thus, disenfranchising to them, they must create an illusion. Sorry dear, hate to burst your bubble but, the Electoral College votes made a difference in this election not people walking on the street, change that and you'll have another 100 years of blissful allusion that life is not like a box of chocolates.

"Life truly can be like a box of chocolates"

kv

 

Hi all,

Warning, I don't want this to be political at all ....

People say that Russia interfered with the US election to try and sway the vote but how can this be? At the end of the day, individual people go into a booth and vote, no one sits in the booth and forces their hand.

How can you affect an election?

Frankly, it is a bit difficult to take your question at face value, but I will. This missive is a lengthy one, I know, but it is less than even an introduction on the topic.

We do not come into the world with our opinions, attitudes, perceptions and beliefs (OAPB) fixed. They can be fluid throughout our lifetime. How our OAPB are changed has been the subject of scientific studies for many years. Psychologists and many other social scientists have long studied the issue. So too has the business and financial communities, especially the advertising communities. As you can imagine, political scientists are in this pot as well.

A vote in an election is considered an expression of your OAPB. In a laboratory study, there can be much more control, however, over both the metric and the manipulation.

For example, there has been a tremendous amount of research on attraction. One can arrange a study where male subjects rate the attraction of a female, for example. That rating is a metric. The manipulation can be as simple as having other males in the setting (confederates) exhorting high, low, or neutral, attraction opinions of the female during the rating period. Such manipulations will change the attraction expressed by the subject and the impact can be measured.

Outside the laboratory, the principle can be stated as a factor for determining attraction. That is, we tend to find an individual more attractive if we perceive that others find them very attractive (this is not gender-based). I present this as an example of a principle, for which there is well-established scientific evidence. It is not the end-all and be-all of attraction; it is a principle…a factor, if you will, and a simplification at that.

Another principle involves what is generally termed, cognitive dissonance, which can be defined as having simultaneously inconsistent OAPB and particularly around some issue. Such dissonance is unpleasant and an individual will work (i.e. change) to reduce the dissonance.

You may be considering purchasing a Toyota or a Honda. You are evaluating them and there are pros and cons for each. After you make the decision, let’s say Honda, you are likely to pay more attention to pro-Honda data and less attention to con-Honda data. The reverse is true for Toyota. We will “work” to reduce cognitive dissonance and that work will have an effect on our OADP. This too has been demonstrated in the laboratory many times.

As a corollary, the more you have invested, the greater the resistance to the dissonant OAPD. If you have purchase a hat, a T-shirt, attended a march or a rally, display a lawn sign and so on…those are all commitments that are analogous to purchasing the Honda or the Toyota. The tendency is one that reinforces the current OAPB.

The previous principles are only two of many that have been studied and for which we actually know a great deal. To influence an election, therefore, we would want to implement a strategy that employs such principles. Like any characteristic, it exists along a continuum among people. I add that while intelligence, wisdom, worldliness, “critical thinking skills” and the like are all legitimate factors, they do not make one immune from the principles. I view them as only needing tuning knobs on the oscilloscope to visualize that waveform. These are principles that go beyond Freedom and Dignity [subtle book plug].

So, how does one implement such a strategy? Let me get personal to illustrate. Let’s say I want to change your “vote” on which embedded controller to purchase and use for development. Now, I have never met you and I don’t really know you at all – or do I? I have read articles that you have written and along the way the review proceedings of those articles. Let’s also say that I have read all of your posts on the board -~866. Add to that your AAC blog.

[note: the following is not intended to be terribly accurate but only to illustrate a point]

From programmed analysis of these data, I conclude that you are thinking about changing your focus to a PIC-16, but have not decided. I want to influence your “vote” toward a PIC-32. So, I start “furnishing” you with pro PIC-32 data and anti PIC-16 data. But, I don’t just mean simply targeted advertising and I don’t just mean the information on this board. I mean all the information that I can get, legally or not, ethically or not. I scour, gather and steal from all of the social engineering accounts, all records and data associated with you, Robin Mitchell. Some folks have no concerns with the inconveniences of PPI and HIPAA.

It is not just advertising I deliver to you, it is a great deal of "information", and I am not troubled by the validity of those data at all. I might create 1000s of fake identities on AAC and all other “communities” in which you operate. Each one of the fake identities is geared toward promoting the OAPB designed to influence your vote.

Hmmm, let’s see…ahh you are happy about manufacturing your own boards, how can I use that? Oh, I see, they are with plated through holes – let’s make use of that. Here’s one on the “problem with millennials”…here is another on how old the computers you use are….all of this can be utilized to craft the message. Get the idea?

I want to reinforce the OAPB that I want to make stronger. Conversely, I want to do the opposite toward OAPB that are not in the direction of getting you to vote PIC-32. I will use a strategy that is based on solid principles that come out of the laboratory.

Let’s not forget the power of repetition, so I will want to provide the OAPB data to you over and over again. My friends and I developed a word game where, using a stop watch, you would wager on how long it would take a “guest” being interviewed on a news show to use the word “email” – regardless of the question. We needed the stopwatch. Now, the game is changing and the word is “impeachment” and so on and so forth it goes.

We have all heard about the oldest profession, I suggest that "manipulator" is truly the oldest profession.

Finally, I already see the back and forth about the impact of the interference. I have no need to engage in that debate. I know the manipulations had an impact. I also know that I cannot ascertain how much of an impact. I also know that I do not want to believe that the impact was enough to sway an election (remember that cognitive dissonance).

So, that is a not-so-brief, highly-opinionated, but introductory, explanation of why you don’t need to be inside the voting booth at all.

Edited to correct a few typos and a couple of word choices for accuracy, like the OPs name.

 

Our constitution does not give the people a right to vote for the president. We vote for congress....i.e.representatives. We are a (suppose to be) republic.

Our founders did not believe in democracy. They were well read and knew that all democracies fail.

 

Frankly, it is a bit difficult to take your question at face value, but I will. This missive is a lengthy one, I know, but it is less than even an introduction on the topic.
...
Finally, I already see the back and forth about the impact of the interference. I have no need to engage in that debate. I know the manipulations had an impact. I also know that I cannot ascertain how much of an impact. I also know that I do not want to believe that the impact was enough to sway an election (remember that cognitive dissonance).

So, that is a not-so-brief, highly-opinionated, but introductory, explanation of why you don’t need to be inside the voting booth at all.

I've studied Skinner too, the concept of "free will" “motivation” was simply an illusion. We are deterministic robots like a simple micro-controller when all the layers of our public human mask are removed. Skinner argued that humans don't really think, we simply react to environmental factors. Every totalitarian society and social media CEO would love that to be true.
"The consequences of behavior determine the probability that the behavior will occur again" -B. F. Skinner


I would say that the Russian election manipulations changed the nature of the campaign but Domestic election information (correctly and properly) greatly affected the character of the final electoral voting by setting up a slight movement around the center of gravity that tilted the election. The deciding fraction of people who actually vote in important electoral states were not fooled into voting for the 'wrong' candidate by the social media buzz, manipulations, woo and remained mainly silent during polling. Many voters kept their intentions to themselves and refused to cooperate with the pollsters and manipulators. Political and physical momentum is not always clear and obvious in large massive objects or groups. Simply because it looks sure to fall one way weeks or days before the drop (vote) it's not a sure thing even in total absence of external factors or forces if things break just the right way, at just the right points during the drop. (vote)

 

@joeyd999 isn't politics more like an organic compound of bull and shit .... so I guess opine "could" be used.

Voter turnout is one area both sides try their best. Did you ever notice that in the "off" elections, not a presidential election, like run-off elections, is where the local politics place their favorite change? Turnout is the reason. You could get 12000 turnout in a presidential election, yet maybe 200 in an off year, run-off election. You can do some serious damage because you don't need to rally many like minded individuals.

My recommendation is to stay engaged, and vote in every election. If you don't vote, then the problem is the person you see is in the mirror.

Ever wonder on how many people vote based on the polling reported by the news?

I remember in the 2000 election, there was a math major trying to explain that statistically the Dem won the county to the judge. The dimpled chad, an invalid vote according to the FL law at the time as three corners of the chad had to be broken for the vote to be counted as valid, yet, they violated the law by counting them. Strike one against the rule of law.

So states upgraded their voting machines and viola, a new fight based on a laboratory hack of a voting machine, demonstrating the possibility it "could" happen.

No evidence exists that there was actual voting interference. Plenty of evidence that attempted voter intimidation, I mean, free speech, was used by all sides. Every voter must discriminate the data they are receiving, from any source.

Around facebook there is a meme about Do you care if DJT slept with a porn star when he was a not president? Share if NO. I thought it should have said ... Share if your jealous.

We are about to embark on a new election, the mid-term where all of the house and one third of the senate is running to "save" us. Yeah, they want to save us for them to abuse with stupid laws.

 

@joeyd999 isn't politics more like an organic compound of bull and shit .... so I guess opine "could" be used.

Assuming there are tumors in the plants the bovine in question was eating, then I concur.

 

Yeah, this has nothing to do with politics such as "who is a republican, democrat, conservative, labour" etc. This was about the idea of election manipulation anyway and how it is achieved or if it is even real anyway.

Dude! Not to diss! It looks every bit a political topic to me? Can we open a thread on oceanography that denies water? Credibly? Really? Would it make sense? Well I'm the new kid in town.. You tell me

Thanks!

 

Joe, sorry for being pedantic (and a grammar Nazi), but I've seen you do this before and it makes me cringe when I read it.

Opine is a verb. Opinion is a noun.

Bad grammar, yeah.. But good archaism.

Thanks!

 

I thought it was a drug.

 

I thought it was a drug.

Assumption.. Is a bad habit

Thanks!

 

Basically its because collectively people are stupid and easily led.

 

@theodoravain
Ok let me rephrase.

I dont want this to go down the path of "who is the better part" or "is this party wrong" or "I believe that leader x is doing a good / bad job". I wanted to get some ideas on election manipulation regardless of the party(s) involved

 

@theodoravain
Ok let me rephrase.

I dont want this to go down the path of "who is the better part" or "is this party wrong" or "I believe that leader x is doing a good / bad job". I wanted to get some ideas on election manipulation regardless of the party(s) involved

In this case it's not the actual effects of election manipulation that some believe were more powerful than warships or tanks or bombers in affecting our response to world and domestic affairs. The overblown and hyperactive reports have created a Russophobia that is counter-production to a realistic assessment of what happened in context with other factors. We are stupidly and unwittingly doing the Russians’ work for them: validating the notion that our democracy is a sham while promoting some magical Russian comic-book superpower that can easily and cheaply manipulate the decision-making capacities of the American public with Facebook posts. Anyone who opposes this hysteria is branded as a Kremlin apologist who wants to stop unfolding a conspiracy so immense it dwarfs the commie plan to dilute our purity of essence by the fluoridation of water.

Yes, there was election manipulation, this time, last time and there will be in the future with the primary objective: “undermine faith in the U.S. democratic process.” What I see in response are restrictions on speech that mainly affect US voters, not Russian bots from half a world away while maintaining a blatant double standard on what US Intel operators do in other countries to influence elections. If foreign election manipulation is an act of war against the United States, then the U.S. has committed acts of war against an astonishingly long list of countries. We need to protect our election process but we can do it without placing ourselves unconvincingly on the moral high ground of truth and justice in response to the weak Russian multitude of lies operation here.

 

Basically its because collectively people are stupid and easily led.

To expand on that...

Within the past 6 months, there was a poll conducted that showed that 2/3 of the people (in USA) couldn't recognize fake news when they read it.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brette...ake-news-studies-show-they-cant/#77a32cb44022

https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Poll-Americans-Believe-Fake-News/2016/12/07/id/762651/

 

To expand on that...

Within the past 6 months, there was a poll conducted that showed that 2/3 of the people (in USA) couldn't recognize fake news when they read it.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brette...ake-news-studies-show-they-cant/#77a32cb44022

https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Poll-Americans-Believe-Fake-News/2016/12/07/id/762651/

Not surprising if your primary news source is Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites designed to make money from attraction not truth.

 

@theodoravain
Ok let me rephrase.

I dont want this to go down the path of "who is the better part" or "is this party wrong" or "I believe that leader x is doing a good / bad job". I wanted to get some ideas on election manipulation regardless of the party(s) involved

Robin Mitchell so here's my $.02. I also say this is totally political thread cuz when you think on it saying something like: _tampering happened and it matters_ is siding with Liberals and saying: __tampering didn't happen or it's not important_ is siding with conservatives! So no offense but I say this is political thread vry thinly guised in rhetorical clothing, Just sayin'!

 

@theodoravain
Ok let me rephrase.

I dont want this to go down the path of "who is the better part" or "is this party wrong" or "I believe that leader x is doing a good / bad job". I wanted to get some ideas on election manipulation regardless of the party(s) involved

You probably should have said you didn't want the thread to become partisan, because it's already political by default.

 

Tampering happened and it matters but it wasn't even close to an important factor in who won the final electoral election vote. The alternative is to believe a vast collusive conspiracy of Russian puppet masters and tricksters overcame a huge polling and media advantage to mastermind the illegitimate victory of a Manchurian candidate using Troll farms and 'fake news' instead of actual bullets, bombs and invasions that have failed more than succeeded in the past by our CIA in a long list of countries.

 

there was a poll conducted that showed that 2/3 of the people (in USA) couldn't recognize fake news when they read it.

I say who needs a poll when that's proven like a million times over every April 1 and first Tuesday in November