"No Devilishly Effective Plot" - Clinton Chief Strategist Admits "You Can't Buy The Presidency For $100,000"

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Mark Penn, former chief strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign; via The Wall Street Journal,

Russia didn’t win Trump the White House any more than China re-elected Bill Clinton in 1996.

The fake news about fake news is practically endless. Americans worried about Russia’s influence in the 2016 election have seized on a handful of Facebook ads—as though there weren’t also three 90-minute debates, two televised party conventions, and $2.4 billion spent on last year’s campaign. The danger is that bending facts to fit the Russia story line may nudge Washington into needlessly and recklessly regulating the internet and curtailing basic freedoms.

After an extensive review, Facebook has identified $100,000 of ads that came from accounts associated with Russia. Assume for the sake of argument that Vladimir Putin personally authorized this expenditure. Given its divisive nature, the campaign could be dubbed “From Russia, With Hate”—except it would make for a disappointing James Bond movie.

Analyzing the pattern of expenditures, and doing some back-of-the-envelope math, it’s clear this was no devilishly effective plot. Facebook says 56% of the ads ran after the election, reducing the tally that could have influenced the result to about $44,000. It also turns out the ads were not confined to swing states but also shown in places like New York, California and Texas. Supposing half the ads went to swing states brings the total down to $22,000.

Facebook also counted ads as early as June 2015. Assuming they were evenly spread and we want only those that ran the year of the election, that knocks it down to $13,000. Most of the ads did not solicit support for a candidate and carried messages on issues like racism, immigration and guns. The actual electioneering then amounts to about $6,500.

Now look at the bigger picture.

Every day, Americans see hundreds of ads on TV and radio, in newspapers and magazines, on billboards and smartphones. North Americans post to Facebook something like a billion times a day, and during the election many of those messages were about politics. Facebook typically runs about $40 million worth of advertising a day in North America.

Then consider the scale of American presidential elections.

Hillary Clinton’s total campaign budget, including associated committees, was $1.4 billion. Mr. Trump and his allies had about $1 billion. Even a full $100,000 of Russian ads would have erased just 0.025% of Hillary’s financial advantage. In the last week of the campaign alone, Mrs. Clinton’s super PAC dumped $6 million in ads into Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

I have 40 years of experience in politics, and this Russian ad buy, mostly after the election anyway, simply does not add up to a carefully targeted campaign to move voters. It takes tens of millions of dollars to deliver meaningful messages to the contested portion of the electorate. Converting someone who voted for the other party last time is an enormously difficult task. Swing voters in states like Ohio or Florida are typically barraged with 50% or more of a campaign’s budget. Try watching TV in those states the week before an election and you will see how jammed the airwaves are.

No one wants foreign governments meddling in American elections.

In 1996, the Chinese government had the “China plan” and pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign. There were congressional investigations, and several fundraisers were prosecuted, but Attorney General Janet Reno rejected calls for an independent counsel. Campaigns tightened up their donor-validation procedures, and life moved on. The same is called for here. Internet companies should improve their screening of electioneering ads, impose clearer standards on all ads, and do a better job weeding out phony accounts.

Millions of taxpayer dollars have probably been spent already poring over that $100,000 of Facebook ads.

Better to keep it all in perspective, as everyone did in 1996.

The only way Russia will get its money’s worth is if Washington overreacts and narrows the very freedoms that make America different in the first place.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
E.F. Mutton's picture

He should hire someone to start his car from now on.

bamawatson's picture

jesus campos is looking for work

LetThemEatRand's picture

Pretty good article here about the missing and dead witnesses (ones who were not shot):  http://globalpoliticsnow.com/4-key-witnesses-las-vegas-shooting-now-dead...

 

LetThemEatRand's picture

My money is on this guy being a spook.  Probably a gun runner.  Speculation, but it adds up.  No one makes $5M/year gambling unless they started with $10M/year and didn't mind washing the losses.  He was a pilot with a plane.  He had multiple houses he didn't live in.  And Vegas has more cameras than DC, yet not a single video has surfaced other than from phones.  We'll never know the truth, but it sure isn't what we're being told.

Occident Mortal's picture

As if Vladimir Putin himself would sign off on $100,000 of Facebook ads.

FFS, doubt he gets out of bed to read anything less worthy than $1bn contract.

Michael Musashi's picture

Written by an empty box that says "admin."

LOL!

I got a gold mine to sell you in Florida.

dumluk's picture

He might well be awaiting re incarnation......

nmewn's picture

"Hillary Clinton’s total campaign budget, including associated committees, was $1.4 billion. Mr. Trump and his allies had about $1 billion. Even a full $100,000 of Russian ads would have erased just 0.025% of Hillary’s financial advantage. In the last week of the campaign alone, Mrs. Clinton’s super PAC dumped $6 million in ads into Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin."

Not to mention, Obama apparently had "wiretaps" on everybody in Trumps campaign and the Alinskyite media whores were in the tank for her waiting for the next email/text/fax from Clapper, Brennan, Rice & Mrs.Sunstein...errr, ummm, Samantha Powers...and...SHE STILL LOST!

lol...I mean, what kind of worthless POS do you have to be to blow something like that?!

Hillary!...WHAT HAPPENED?!...THATS HISTORIC!!!...LMMFAO!!!!!!!!!

Archibald Buttle's picture

"Converting someone who voted for the other party last time is an enormously difficult task." 

not really. just have to run hitlary and watch people vote for the other team.

Big Creek Rising's picture

Yes, but it is admirably clear reasoning, which is quite rare for Clintonian libtards

LetThemEatRand's picture

"The only way Russia will get its money’s worth is if Washington overreacts and narrows the very freedoms that make America different in the first place."

One thing our government is good at is creating a problem and offering a solution that involves taking away the freedoms we are supposedly defending via the solution.  Think 9/11.  I'd say it's only a matter of time before they say they found Putin's passport somewhere near a ballot station.

curbjob's picture

"One thing our government is good at is creating a problem and offering a solution that involves taking away the freedoms we are supposedly defending via the solution. "

 

Just try protest that .. then you'll see what our government really shines at.

espirit's picture

What I find truly exhausting is the faux morality overreaching some of the horrific recent events.

First I was angry, now I'm numb and dumbfounded.

Are we being conditioned for something worse?

shankster's picture

No shit Sherlock.

Zorba's idea's picture

My 7 year old grandson figured this out...and he can account for Pokemon's whereabouts too

samsara's picture

We charge a Fuck more than that buddy !

dumluk's picture

Howz about a $100 million? Is that enuff in todays world? Or is it closer to a billion fiat $?

yellowsub's picture

There's no plot, she screwed herself...  

Health issue aside, if she hid the war mongering tendency better she'd probably have win.

earleflorida's picture

for god's sake?

the Jews [zionist?] have put in office every potus since the civil war ended!

[and], it was all done from england's 'Money Masters', the jews!!!

right under our noses!

Milton Keynes's picture

Or Putin's media people are 3000X better then Hillary's media people.

I think that may well be the case.

earleflorida's picture

note: The East India Company was pettering out and north america was ripe for investment

Ps. civil war's are very expensive and our 'DEBT'?

so i should ask all, who do you supposed paid our debt...  

money, money and moar money sways elections and creates war when peace is not a desirable dividend 

homiegot's picture

Liberals think you can.

Sudden Debt's picture

If you can buy a presidency for 100K, WHY DOES IT COST BILLIONS NOW????

 

FIRE ALL THOSE PR FIRMS WHO BLOW AWAY ALL THAT MONEY!!!

 

I spend about 20K a year on facebook and believe me, with 100K you can't do that much.

And that Russian connection?

You can buy LIKES on russian sites! They're worthless and destroy your entire promotion settings.

And we all know that Hillary did that. Trump got them by his own and was mostly on TWITTER! NOT FACEBOOK!


Sudden Debt's picture

Ban sponsoring of candidates.

Offer a specific amount of funds from the government for each candidate.

And let's go crazy: THEY CAN ONLY SPEND 20 MILLION PER PERSON!!!

Now they're spending billions of dollars! All by lobbyists who want their money back by a factor of 100!

 

Ban lobbyists.

Candidates can't work for contractors for 10 years if they're elected (and that's should be for every government worker in any branch)

And if a politician takes money from a company: loss of civil rights for 20 years, a fine of at least 100 million for both sides and the companies involved can't work for the government for another 100 years!

 

And suddenly, you would have democracy. But I don't think that could work in the US.

earleflorida's picture

that's what they do in great britain.

earleflorida's picture

that's what they do in great britain.

my new username's picture

So this is all about clearing the Clintons?
We know that they were owned by China. Terry McAuliffe was/is their Chinese bagman.
China pumped millions into the Clinton and Obama Presidential campaigns.

JailBanksters's picture

I didn't even know it was up for sale,

so I won't ask how he knows how much it really costs.

East Indian's picture

Whose accounts are those?

How are they "related" to Russia and its govt?

And what are the advts. shown? Let me see for myself if they promote Trump. 

How many eyeballs saw it in the US before the election date? 

 

Funny how no "media person" is asking these questions.

 

edit: it is not about Trump winning or Hillary losing; it is the frustration of the Super PACs that they are losing the narrative that "money alone wins elections". They have to establish Trump's victory is also due to money spent on campaigns. If some politician gets into his head that Super PACs may not win everytime, then the super-rich lose their leash on the politicians...

oncemore's picture

Dear Amerikans, what does the moron write about in his last sentence?
.....freedoms that make America different in the first place.....