Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Guest MattP

FT General Election Poll 2019

FT General Election 2019  

501 members have voted

  1. 1. Which party will be getting your vote?

    • Conservative
      155
    • Labour
      188
    • Liberal Democrats
      93
    • Brexit Party
      17
    • Green Party
      26
    • Other
      22


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Wasn't there a difference between this and say Cambridge Analytica in that the users Obama's administration targeted were aware that they were handing their information over to a political campaign, whereas Cambridge Analytica just used personality tests and the like?


Comparable yes, but not identical. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MattP said:

No I meant any evidence that people were ok about it.

 

Although you're probably right, it's natural people will be less concerned by it being used to further their own political beliefs. I believe that the rise of Trump and Brexit are potentially quite dangerous to the West, so, yes, I will be more concerned about data being used to further those movements than politicians I think are relatively benign. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bovril said:

No I meant any evidence that people were ok about it.

 

Although you're probably right, it's natural people will be less concerned by it being used to further their own political beliefs. I believe that the rise of Trump and Brexit, and figures like Bolsanaro and Erdogan are potentially quite dangerous to the environmental future of the planet and human civilisation as a whole, so, yes, I will be more concerned about data being used to further those movements than politicians I think are relatively benign. 

Just added a little something there - hope you don't mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Guiza said:

Wasn't there a difference between this and say Cambridge Analytica in that the users Obama's administration targeted were aware that they were handing their information over to a political campaign, whereas Cambridge Analytica just used personality tests and the like?


Comparable yes, but not identical. 

They both harvested data from people using Facebook under the pretense of it being for something else, very little difference. 

 

Just now, bovril said:

No I meant any evidence that people were ok about it.

 

Although you're probably right, it's natural people will be less concerned by it being used to further their own political beliefs. I believe that the rise of Trump and Brexit are potentially quite dangerous to the West, so, yes, I will be more concerned about data being used to further those movements than politicians I think are relatively benign. 

Just the evidence that no one in the media raised it, there was no interest. It was only a problem when the wrong people won.

 

Had Clinton and Remain won we still wouldn't have heard of Cambridge analytica now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

The people willingly and knowingly give their information.  If smart politicians use it then good luck to them.

...to Cambridge Analytica themselves, with their obvious and not dubious consent? Are you sure?

 

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

Which is pretty much what every party and candidate does through leafleting at every election isn't it?

 

I don't know why people find this so offensive just because it's on social media.

With those, you know or at least have a good idea who is feeding the misinformation. With social media, it can be rather murkier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

Wasn't there a difference between this and say Cambridge Analytica in that the users Obama's administration targeted were aware that they were handing their information over to a political campaign, whereas Cambridge Analytica just used personality tests and the like?


Comparable yes, but not identical. 

 

 

Says exactly that in the link you quoted. It's not the same, but the result is. It's targeting people that you know can be swayed to your side. 

 

Targeting campaigning has been going on since campaigning began, the only reason people are using semantics to slaughter one but ignore the other is because the "wrong" side won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MattP said:

They both harvested data from people using Facebook under the pretense of it being for something else, very little difference. 

 

Just the evidence that no one in the media raised it, there was no interest. It was only a problem when the wrong people won.

 

Had Clinton and Remain won we still wouldn't have heard of Cambridge analytica now.

 

2 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Says exactly that in the link you quoted. It's not the same, but the result is. It's targeting people that you know can be swayed to your side. 

 

Targeting campaigning has been going on since campaigning began, the only reason people are using semantics to slaughter one but ignore the other is because the "wrong" side won.

But had remain won using these techniques, people on the leave side would be in the same boat.

The main issue is with foreign powers interfering with domestic politics, does it not make you question their motives? What does Russia have to gain here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Says exactly that in the link you quoted. It's not the same, but the result is. It's targeting people that you know can be swayed to your side. 

 

Targeting campaigning has been going on since campaigning began, the only reason people are using semantics to slaughter one but ignore the other is because the "wrong" side won.

 

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

They both harvested data from people using Facebook under the pretense of it being for something else, very little difference. 

 

 

Oh yeah, of course it's been going on for decades. I was just pointing out that, in my eyes, there is a clear distinction between knowingly giving away information for political purposes and having your information obtained without knowledge of said political cause.

 

I don't really agree with it on either account. You are correct though in that people will always be influenced by numerous things, be it consciously or not. 

 

What I'm certainly not comfortable with is Facebook and co knowingly allowing 'fake news' to be circulated. I lose my mind at least once a day at somebody sharing information that is blindingly obvious false. Happens on both sides too, but it does seem that, particularly in America, the right have more control over it.

 

There was an expert on 5Live when I was driving to 6aside last night talking about how the information about Jo Swinson's husband's company/employer receiving funds from the EU turned into Jo Swinson receives £30m from the EU and how false information about the Tories getting rid of the ivory ban and fox hunting gathers traction. 

 

It seems almost impossible to run a reasonable clear campaign now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

The people willingly and knowingly give their information.  If smart politicians use it then good luck to them.

Do you think the Tories have done nothing wrong and are totally innocent, involving the Russians in our affairs? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

 

Oh yeah, of course it's been going on for decades. I was just pointing out that, in my eyes, there is a clear distinction between knowingly giving away information for political purposes and having your information obtained without knowledge of said political cause.

 

I don't really agree with it on either account. You are correct though in that people will always be influenced by numerous things, be it consciously or not. 

 

What I'm certainly not comfortable with is Facebook and co knowingly allowing 'fake news' to be circulated. I lose my mind at least once a day at somebody sharing information that is blindingly obvious false. Happens on both sides too, but it does seem that, particularly in America, the right have more control over it.

 

There was an expert on 5Live when I was driving to 6aside last night talking about how the information about Jo Swinson's husband's company/employer receiving funds from the EU turned into Jo Swinson receives £30m from the EU and how false information about the Tories getting rid of the ivory ban and fox hunting gathers traction. 

 

It seems almost impossible to run a reasonable clear campaign now. 

YZqOQYitZZIZmMFdFgT84F6L6TzAvN3ao8jGP6_p

 

....not entirely truth, but the third/fourth paragraph from the end sums up the current information and misinformation society pretty well IMO, considering it's from a work that was released over 15 years ago.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

 

But had remain won using these techniques, people on the leave side would be in the same boat.

The main issue is with foreign powers interfering with domestic politics, does it not make you question their motives? What does Russia have to gain here? 

My life doesn't revolve around Russia. Who gives a hoot about them? I don't get this almost paranoia like obsession with them, I really don't. Obama was on TV before the referendum, scaring people to vote remain, I'm sure he had his motives, why isn't this focused on as much as Russia? Trump supports brexit, so he also gets focused on, not the multitude of European country leaders that have spoken out wanting us to remain. 

 

It's stupid. It's baffling and quite frankly it's utterly ridiculous. If we danced to everyone else's motives, we'd be heading in 4 million different directions. 

 

The people of the UK are the ones who vote, and imo, they are the only ones that actually matter. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

It seems almost impossible to run a reasonable clear campaign now. 

Of course it is. Facebook is a shitshow and I've never had an account on it. The only way you stop all this though is to ban the Internet completely. Or firewall it to approved levels china-like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

But had remain won using these techniques, people on the leave side would be in the same boat.

The main issue is with foreign powers interfering with domestic politics, does it not make you question their motives? What does Russia have to gain here? 

I always question the motives of foreign interference in our elections, we had the disgraceful sight of Barack Obama standing on a stage doing that in the EU referendum campaign telling us we were going to the back of the queue. 

 

Does Russian have something to gain from us leaving the EU? Yes if done in an irresponsible way. Should that effect the way you vote? Absolutely not.

 

10 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Do you think the Tories have done nothing wrong and are totally innocent, involving the Russians in our affairs? 

How have the Tories involved the Russians in our affairs?

 

Given the response to Salisbury I'm pretty sure the Kremlin would prefer a Labour government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

My life doesn't revolve around Russia. Who gives a hoot about them? I don't get this almost paranoia like obsession with them, I really don't. Obama was on TV before the referendum, scaring people to vote remain, I'm sure he had his motives, why isn't this focused on as much as Russia? Trump supports brexit, so he also gets focused on, not the multitude of European country leaders that have spoken out wanting us to remain. 

 

It's stupid. It's baffling and quite frankly it's utterly ridiculous. If we danced to everyone else's motives, we'd be heading in 4 million different directions. 

 

The people of the UK are the ones who vote, and imo, they are the only ones that actually matter. 

I didn't claim it did. But surely you can discern the difference between advocating for staying in the EU and actually funding the tory party, along with the mass misinformation campaigns run by Russian troll farms.

The fact of the matter is, if there is nothing to hide, then why hasn't Boris released the report?

 

Like it or not, social media usage is massive, a lot of people get their opinions and 'news' from social media, I'm not advocating a China style system but liability needs to be put on parties to fact check whatever they post.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

My life doesn't revolve around Russia. Who gives a hoot about them? I don't get this almost paranoia like obsession with them, I really don't. Obama was on TV before the referendum, scaring people to vote remain, I'm sure he had his motives, why isn't this focused on as much as Russia? Trump supports brexit, so he also gets focused on, not the multitude of European country leaders that have spoken out wanting us to remain. 

 

It's stupid. It's baffling and quite frankly it's utterly ridiculous. If we danced to everyone else's motives, we'd be heading in 4 million different directions. 

 

The people of the UK are the ones who vote, and imo, they are the only ones that actually matter. 

Right, and given that the single and defining m.o. of the guy and his administration is self-interest, he's not going to be doing it because he wants to do the UK a favour.

 

But I guess that and the wider discussion about influence being peddled, sold and utilised is just all realpolitik.

 

That being said, I'm stringently opposed to any kind of Internet censorship as a whole so I'm not really sure how that particular circle can be squared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

I didn't claim it did. But surely you can discern the difference between advocating for staying in the EU and actually funding the tory party, along with the mass misinformation campaigns run by Russian troll farms.

The fact of the matter is, if there is nothing to hide, then why hasn't Boris released the report?

 

Like it or not, social media usage is massive, a lot of people get their opinions and 'news' from social media, I'm not advocating a China style system but liability needs to be put on parties to fact check whatever they post.

 

Not really, no. Didn't the tory party campaign for remain in the original referendum? Or did I bang my head and imagine it? 

 

Again, don't give a monkey about Russians or whatever memes they post on social media. 

 

And you'll have to ask Boris. I imagine because it will say something about Russians, which apparently instantly turns people hysterical. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50335257

whilst one of the reasons to Brexit was played down, perhaps a European army is actually a possibility in the minds of some European leaders. The USA's reluctance to subsidise Europe in its defence from Russia etc. Are we as a nation prepared to be the only member major financial contributor to European security if NATO falls apart, whilst the US are by far the largest contributor  we contribute  more than Poland, Netherland, Norway, Greece, Belgium, Denmark, Romania, Portugal, Czech republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Slovenia, Luxemburg, Albania and Montenegro put together and tbh the USA spend twice as much as all the rest of us in NATO do. Many site one of the reasons for the stability in Europe was the EU it was a common enemy. this would be a dangerous move by the French, I know the USA is a bully but we are friends of the bully who offers us protection what happens when we aren't friends I am not suggesting the USA will bully us but with out protection we definitely need a bigger stick and we all know Corbyn wants to trade our old stick (trident)for some shiny beads.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Right, and given that the single and defining m.o. of the guy and his administration is self-interest, he's not going to be doing it because he wants to do the UK a favour.

 

But I guess that and the wider discussion about influence being peddled, sold and utilised is just all realpolitik.

 

That being said, I'm stringently opposed to any kind of Internet censorship as a whole so I'm not really sure how that particular circle can be squared.

So all of that post and trump is the focus again. It's better than the Russians I guess. 

 

I'm sure the eu country leaders were advocating remain simply because it would be best for the UK. Definitely nothing to do with our trade/contributions/security etc etc. 

 

Everyone has their own interests at heart. Time to smell the daisies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Not really, no. Didn't the tory party campaign for remain in the original referendum? Or did I bang my head and imagine it? 

 

Again, don't give a monkey about Russians or whatever memes they post on social media. 

 

And you'll have to ask Boris. I imagine because it will say something about Russians, which apparently instantly turns people hysterical. 

They did, but look who's at the helm now -

Boris from (the electoral law breaking) Leave EU.

Gove - Who has failed to give evidence to the DCMS committee about his knowledge of breaking electoral law during the ref campaign .

and Dominic Cummings who is literally in contempt of parliament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

They did, but look who's at the helm now -

Boris from (the electoral law breaking) Leave EU.

Gove - Who has failed to give evidence to the DCMS committee about his knowledge of breaking electoral law during the ref campaign .

and Dominic Cummings who is literally in contempt of parliament.

Yep, and we had over 2 years of remain-supporting May at the helm, to little avail. Now we get an election to choose again. Don't like them? Don't vote for them.

 

Oh, and don't listen to those pesky Russian memes, they'll have you voting tory in no time. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

So all of that post and trump is the focus again. It's better than the Russians I guess. 

 

I'm sure the eu country leaders were advocating remain simply because it would be best for the UK. Definitely nothing to do with our trade/contributions/security etc etc. 

 

Everyone has their own interests at heart. Time to smell the daisies. 

Nah, accept that and civilisation may as well be on a jaded and cynical slide into oblivion just like every other species that has practised self-interest as a guiding star for too long.

 

Some people? Absolutely.

Do they have power and abuse it? Absolutely.

Everyone? Nope.

Guaranteed to be the case for all time? Not that, either.

 

The day I accept mankind is driven by such base ideas solely and inescapably is the day they can put me to bed with a shovel, with the fervent desire that our species will have earned the same in short order...because without some kind of decency down in the muck, some kind of sign that we're more than apes in sharper suits, what's the point?

 

NB. I didn't mention Trump and make him the focus first and there were other elements to my post, Inno. :P

Edited by leicsmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattP said:

How have the Tories involved the Russians in our affairs?

 

Given the response to Salisbury I'm pretty sure the Kremlin would prefer a Labour government. 

All the funding accepted from mega-rich Russians? The alleged Russians conspiring and meddling with the government, specifically the referendum? 

 

Why would a Tory government decide to block publication of a report by intelligence agencies shortly before an election? At least if you are going to block it, would it not be fair to explain the reasons for doing so? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Yep, and we had over 2 years of remain-supporting May at the helm, to little avail. Now we get an election to choose again. Don't like them? Don't vote for them.

 

Oh, and don't listen to those pesky Russian memes, they'll have you voting tory in no time. :rolleyes:

They influence suggestible dimwits, they can't perform lobotomies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, StanSP said:

All the funding accepted from mega-rich Russians? The alleged Russians conspiring and meddling with the government, specifically the referendum? 

 

Why would a Tory government decide to block publication of a report by intelligence agencies shortly before an election? At least if you are going to block it, would it not be fair to explain the reasons for doing so? 

Most of the Russian funding the Tories get isn't exactly from the Putin friendly oligarchs - as for the alleged interference, that's exactly what it is - alleged. I still don't for one minute seriously think a single vote was changed because of a Russian bot and again, if you are so concerned about foreign interference why don't you make a song about Obama who did it openly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...