Twitter admits during 2016 election Trump used platform half as much as Clinton but had twice as much success.  Additionally, Twitter legal counsel admits to hiding up to 48% of negative Clinton twitter content (hashtag tweets surrounding DNC and Podesta emails), yet suppressed nothing negative about candidate Donald Trump…

During testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sean J. Edgett Acting General Counsel for Twitter, Inc. delivered a 20 page opening statement (full pdf below).  Within the statement attorney Edgett shared the protocol for Twitter hiding hashtags they deemed troubling in the lead-up to the 2016 election.

The volume of activity on our system is enormous: Our users generate thousands of Tweets per second, hundreds of thousands of Tweets per minute, hundreds of millions of Tweets per day. ~ Sean J Edgett, Twitter General Counsel

However, amid all the examples cited, Twitter did not “hide” any material that was negative toward candidate Donald Trump.  In every example cited Twitter only took action to hide user content that was negative toward candidate Hillary Clinton.  A remarkable ‘coincidence‘.

[Page #6 of Testimony ] Before the election, we also detected and took action on activity relating to hashtags that have since been reported as manifestations of efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. For example, our automated spam detection systems helped mitigate the impact of automated Tweets promoting the #PodestaEmails hashtag, which originated with Wikileaks’ publication of thousands of emails from the Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s Gmail account.

The core of the hashtag was propagated by Wikileaks, whose account sent out a series of 118 original Tweets containing variants on the hashtag #PodestaEmails referencing the daily installments of the emails released on the Wikileaks website.

In the two months preceding the election, around 57,000 users posted approximately 426,000 unique Tweets containing variations of the #PodestaEmails hashtag. Approximately one quarter (25%) of those Tweets received internal tags from our automation detection systems that hid them from searches.

As described in greater detail below, our systems detected and hid just under half (48%) of the Tweets relating to variants of another notable hashtag, #DNCLeak, which concerned the disclosure of leaked emails from the Democratic National Committee. (pdf link)

Additionally, according to the Twitter analysis (Page #11) their review found a negligible amount of overall activity (within the Hashtags they forcibly hid from view) came from any account with “potential” linkage to Russia:

“Slightly under 4% of Tweets containing #PodestaEmails came from accounts with potential links to Russia. […] With respect to #DNCLeak, approximately 23,000 users posted around 140,000 unique Tweets with that hashtag in the relevant period. Of those Tweets, roughly 2% were from potentially Russian-linked accounts.”

…which begs the question.  This analysis was, by their own admission, “in retrospect”, meaning after the fact.  There’s no way they could identify the user affiliation as it was happening.  So why did they “hide” the trending hashtag?

Further, and in relationship to that question, if slightly under 4% of tweets containing #PodestaEmails came from concerning accounts, then why take the action to hide 25% of total user content including that hashtag?  Similarly, if “roughly 2%” of #DNCLeak use was from concerning users, then why did they hide 48% of the trending hashtag content?

See the problem?

Essentially Twitter legal counsel is admitting here, through twisted analytic hindsight obfuscation, they censor Twitter based on their internal opinion of the content within trending hashtags.

Hilariously, the page #11 testimony also shows that Hillary Clinton used Twitter twice as much as Donald Trump – yet had half as much engagement (re-tweets).

Our data showed that, during the relevant time period, a total of 1,625 @HillaryClinton Tweets were Retweeted approximately 8.3 million times.

The 851 Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account during this period were Retweeted more than 11 million times.

.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/363258194/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-2HFd4vNj7NpML2e4rFh2

.

The U.S. Conference Board is an economic think tank in partnership with Nielsen surveys which provides predictive economic analysis based on consumer and economic surveys within the larger U.S. economy.  The latest monthly report from the board shows a stratospheric level of consumer confidence, 125.9 the highest level since 2000.

Accordingly, “consumers were even more optimistic in October than economists polled by Reuters expected.”  The media and economic teams who thrill at the possibility of being able to talk-down the U.S. economy are apoplectic…

(Reuters) U.S. consumer confidence jumped to a near 17-year high in October, with households upbeat about the labor market and business conditions, which could underpin consumer spending and boost the economy in the final three months of the year.

The economy’s prospects were further bolstered by other reports on Tuesday showing an acceleration in wage growth in the third quarter and sustained increases in house prices in August.  (read more)

.

The only ‘unexpected‘ part is actually the speed of Trump’s MAGAnomics taking hold within the larger Main Street economy; specifically regarding wage increases.   CTH forecast the American labor market seeing the year-over-year comparative wage rate increases around 3 to 5% happening in the second full year of applied MAGAnomic policy. However, there are signs the blue and white collar wage growth is six to eight months ahead of schedule.

American wages and salaries, which account for 70 percent of U.S. employment costs, rose 0.7% in quarter three (July-Sept).  Those same wage rates increased 0.5% in the second quarter (April – June).   This means the year-over-year comparisons for wages and salaries are now trending up 2.5 percent in the 12 months through September (’16 -vs- ’17) after gaining 2.3 percent in the Q2 comparison through June.

With inflation on highly-consumable products, food, fuel, energy holding steady at near zero, the increases in wages mean actual disposable income increases.  This lowered cost of living dynamic is allowing growth in consumer spending for the middle class.

Trump’s MAGAnomics is now entering a phase of self-fulfillment.  Drive down energy prices;… which keep costs down for high consumables;… while simultaneously increasing  overall middle America economic development;… which drives up wages; ….which facilitates the American worker’s ability to spend;… which drives GDP growth.

If President Trump’s economic policies can keep the momentum (note, tax help from congress would be nice), then after approximately two more quarters of this level of GDP growth the economic engine will be running on auto pilot; and once again the common sense free market Main Street (transactional) economy will be operational.

On the housing front you’ll note another dynamic at play which is directly related to growth in the Blue-Collar economy.  Remember, the housing sector is directly related to the regions of the U.S. with the largest expansion of economic growth.  A third report on Tuesday showed the S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller composite home price index of 20 U.S. metropolitan areas rose 5.9 percent in August from a year ago after increasing 5.8 percent in July.

In the aggregate housing prices are being driven by a limited number of properties available for sale in the areas of the U.S. with the strongest economic growth.

Record-breaking increases in consumer confidence, combined with rising wages and strong house prices should keep consumer spending very strong for the rest of the year.

Yes, Mr. President, we will be saying “Merry Christmas” again…

Stop me when you see the parallels:

The time was November and December 2009, right about this time of year in the larger political calendar of things…. One party was completely locked out from influence in Washington DC, as the opposing party held the White House, and majorities in both houses of congress…

The 2009 political opposition groups didn’t like what was happening.  There was very large and significant legislation being debated.  Frustrated common sense citizens stopped looking to ineffective congressional representatives to stop the daily usurpation.

Loosely connected but engaged grassroots political types were looking for routes to stop the White House and congress.

There was also a Senate seat up for grabs, and a necessary special election.  The former seat-holder was considered a stalwart by the party in power; and the seat was considered a “gimme” by the state party apparatus.  No-one was contemplating the possibility of the majority party in power ever losing that seat….. EVER.

The candidate appointed to hold the seat for the party in power was arrogant, condescending, and generally didn’t feel they needed to work for the seat.  After all, the seat was held by one party for decades and generally no-one could fathom losing it.

The election outcome was considered so much a forgone conclusion no-one was even polling the state throughout November or December 2009.   It was also because of that herd mindset the next-in-line candidate just spent time on the cocktail circuit meeting with donors, taking their requests and then a few trips to DC for parties, drape-measuring, and generally snobbing around with the upper-minded ‘betters’.

About a month prior to the actual voting the election outcome was so widely anticipated to be a lopsided victory for the party in power the candidate actually took three weeks off, and jetted away to the caribbean for a Christmas/New Year holiday vacation.

However, under the radar, and entirely missed by everyone -including media- small bands of grassroots political peeps discovered the other parties strength was also their weakness.  There was an invisible path to victory, and, more importantly, a hard working candidate who had quietly put in a stunning amount of groundwork.

Around the same time the overly confident political types were obliviously comparing Christmas decor…. tens, then dozens, then hundreds, eventually thousands of very focused volunteers began to assemble when everyone else was busy with the holiday and not paying attention.

Many, including many I got to know personally, gave up their 2009 holidays to drive half-way across the country and help the quiet assembly.  [“Meet at the Old Mill, we ride at midnight”…]

By the time the party in power woke up from their New Years celebrations and looked to the formality of the upcoming election/coronation, well, it was too late.

The rebel alliance had positioned in every town, village, street corner, venue and simultaneously began overwhelming a completely unprepared political apparatus by drawing attention to their goal: Take the seat from the hands of power, and give it back to the people….

Our strategic advantage was their collective arrogance.

Because they fully expected to win the election, they didn’t even have signs, bumper stickers, advertising contracts, or operational infrastructure or volunteers planned for a campaign.  They were completely caught off-guard.

We had thousands of people with home-made signs in the streets daily.  The momentum was on our side and the candidate messaging so focused that by the time the DC apparatus woke up mid-January it was far too late.   The election day was January 19th 2010.

Yes, in Dec. 2009/Jan 2010 the grassroots movement in Massachusetts to elect Scott Brown caught the Democrats completely off-guard.  Martha Coakley lost, Scott Brown won, the political world was stunned; and yes, Democrats lost the Kennedy seat.

Why does this matter now?

Alabama Republicans, and the group planning to help Roy Moore win the Alabama primary, would be wise to pay attention to that historic reminder because republican candidate Roy Moore is acting just like democrat candidate Martha Coakley in November and December 2009.

• One party in power.
• A special election in a deeply one-sided state everyone takes for granted.
• A seat formerly held by a stalwart of the party in power. (Kennedy / Sessions)
• A disgruntled opposition party whose grassroots strategy is under the radar.
• No-one in the media paying attention. (A strategy that benefits from stealth)
• A generally ‘unlikable candidate‘, who spent more time in DC than campaigning in the state where it mattered.  (see below)

See the parallels?

2017: No Democrat can ever win a senate seat in Alabama they say….

2009: No Republican can ever win a senate seat in Massachusetts they said…

Any questions?