Slashdot Mirror
Hillary Clinton's Campaign Creates Way To Make Money From Donald Trump's Tweets (adweek.com)
Hillary Clinton's campaign has created a new fundraising tool called Troll Trump that lets supporters sign up to automatically donate money to the campaign when Donald Trump tweets. Adweek reports: The tool's landing page populates a new Trump tweet each time the site is refreshed to offer a sampling of the candidate's social media style. "Show Donald that his unhinged rhetoric comes at a cost," according to the Clinton campaign's website. "Sign up to donate to Hillary's campaign every time Donald tweets!" The idea was apparently inspired by a tweet by Matt Bellassai, a former BuzzFeed editor and social media star, who made a joke on Twitter threatening to donate to the campaign every time Trump tweets. (When the tool went live, Teddy Goff, a digital strategist with the Clinton campaign, tweeted Bellassai a thank-you.)
Trump should just flood post and waste the money of every person who participates.
I hate Trump, but I hate Hillary even more.
Now the Queen of Fraud has found another way to bilk taxpayers out of their hard-earned money. Just remember that your Clinton Presidential Campaign donations fund her warmongering plans which will trigger World War 3!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-19/hillary-clinton-linked-mysterious-front-associated-julian-assange-pedophile-smear
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Not sure what she's going to do with a few bucks from a few random Twitter followers who let her charge their credit cards on demand when they can get million dollar birthday gifts from the wonderful country of Qatar:
Source
Related News:
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton...
Notes:
WJC = William Jefferson Clinton, better known as Bill Clinton
Wow, that's a real eye opener, I am glad you brought that up Igor. That Clinton Foundation is obviously using charity work as cover for evil crook bad business. You have wokened my eyes with your amazing exposes of the Clinton and her evil deeds.
From:adesai@clintonfoundation.org
To: blindsey@clintonfoundation.org, lgraham@clintonfoundation.org, doug@presidentclinton.com, justin@presidentclinton.com
Date: 2012-04-16 18:56
Subject: Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, Rwanda
Last Thursday, April 12, I met individually with the Ambassadors from Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, and Rwanda, in Washington, DC. Below is a summary of key points from each meeting, and we are following-up on each point. I'd welcome your feedback. Sincerely, Ami
QATAR
- Would like to see WJC "for five minutes" in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC's birthday in 2011.
- Qatar would welcome our suggestions for investments in Haiti - particularly on education and health. They have allocated most of their $20 million but are happy to consider projects we suggest. I'm collecting input from CF Haiti team.
BRAZIL
- President Rousseff may come to NYC for UN in September; I pitched CGI, again, and will continue to do so.
- We agreed to try to arrange a WJC-Rousseff meeting whenever she and he are next in the same city.
- With regard to Rio climate conference, Ambassador's team is going to think about any sites that WJC could visit to highlight Brazil's leadership on climate issues. [I made clear WJC visit to Rio is undecided.] They said they'd be happy for WJC to come.
- I committed to send them details on CCI in Brazil.
- Ambassador mentioned Lula receiving an award in Iowa and how much Lula enjoyed Iowa. I suggested Lula come to Little Rock when WJC convenes meeting of former heads of state (Club of Madrid). Also discussed Ambassador going to Little Rock to speak with Clinton School students - he said he'd like to. I'll work with Stephanie on this.\
- We discussed Lula's health - Ambassador said he's recovering and still committed to agriculture work in Africa. We agreed it would be good for WJC and Lula to do something together on agriculture in Africa.
PERU
- Per CGSGI, I asked for Ambassador's ideas on which sectors/parts of Peru to focus on in order to create jobs. He suggested we speak with his son, an alderman in Lima, about jobs projects for young men who otherwise could be recruited by gangs. Ambassador also suggested speaking with Minister for Women and Vulnerable Populations, Ms. Ana Jara, for jobs projects for women.
MALAWI
- Ambassador told story of Mutharika's death (said he collapsed with no prior symptoms during a morning meeting, was taken to hospital, then flown to South Africa but passed away en route); and emphasized significance of smooth transition to successor, within their constitutional framework. Sounds like new President is laying low until the memorial service for Mutharika, and then plans to announce her new government.
- Ambassador again urged that CDI consider dairy/cattle projects; I reminded him we'd be happy to speak with minister of agriculture or whoever Ambassador suggests in the industry; he said he'd let us know.
RWANDA
- Kagame is organizing an event in June to commemorate closing of Gacaca process for the genocide. They asked if WJC could go. I said Africa trip is probably in July and we haven't decided countries yet but if there's anything they'd want WJC to do in Rwanda in July, to let us know. I also said to let us know if they'd want a message from WJC for the June event; they'll let us know.
- Ambassador asked if WJC/CF/CGI could do anything to help on education/universities in Rwanda. I explained we are constrained by funding but if they have specific ideas, to let us know. He said they'll put together some ideas for us.
- Ambassador asked about attracting more investments/businesses to Rwanda, including mining/natural
According to who?
Trump just nailed yet another debate. The polls are all being done by the same media that's biased against Trump. People don't want to admit to supporting Trump because Hillary supporters are prone to acts of violence against Trump supporters. Don't forget that Clinton's campaign sent thugs to pretend to be Bernie supporters to cause riots at Trump rallies.
Wikileaks isn't done leaking material yet. Ecuador (at John Kerry's request) may be trying to delay them, but there are contingencies in place. The information will be released. October isn't over and the October Surprise hasn't been released yet.
538 shows Hillary having around an 85% chance of winning - which is high, but that means Trump has a 15% chance, which is the same as rolling a 18, 19, or 20 on a 20-sided die. It's easily possible.
Just wait and see. November 8th is still three weeks away, there's still time to finally break through the mainstream media's pro-Clinton firewall.
The campaign for the highest political office in the land is based on cheap shots, empty hyperbole, and crass corruption. Talk about bread and circuses! The presidential race IS a circus; not even a classy one like Cirque du Soleil, but rather a seedy low-rent carnival sideshow. There are disquieting similarities between this election and any given episode of Jerry Springer or Maury Povich. I suppose that's fitting, given that one of the 'contestants' really is a reality show star, and now the other one is taking her cues from him. When I think about the situation I'm torn between sadness and disgust, and end up feeling both. Yuck. Is this really how things are done now, in what arguably used to be the greatest nation in the world?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
So when Trump's campaign sets up the same tool, so that every time HRC twats, Trump gets $?
Is that just as neat?
-Styopa
Wall Street billionaires back her.
Millionaire tech titans back her.
Rich celebrities back her.
Wealthy media members back her.
Well paid millionaire athletes back her.
Abusive government leaders back her.
Yeah, she's for the common working American...? No F'n way.
If you don't fall into one of those categories and you're still voting for her, FU. You get what you deserve. You have blood on your hands with everything from Syria to riots in Chicago. You are part of the ongoing problem in America.
Am I the only one who feels like the stories regarding the election that filter onto slashdot have been pretty seriously biased and generally uncalled for?
Preferably I wouldn't see any campaign news here unless it's extremely specifically about tech, but it seems like anything with a hint of tech and related to the election is getting pasted to the front page regardless of the relevancy.
From the technology-but-really-election stories, to the pretty-much-clickbait stories; I'm getting sick of this site. I've been getting more and better tech related news from the fucking technology board on 4chan for christ's sake.
I can't trust these news sites anymore - I've even been hearing of shadowbans on slashdot in discussions outside this site - if I ever see proof of that, I'm done with this place. What the fuck is happening to our online media?
Congrats.
Is it interesting that the Clinton Foundation has no measurable results?
Most charities can say "we received $x amount of money, and spent $y on cancer research" or similar. The dollars can be traced to studies or hospitals or doctors' salaries or aid workers in conflict areas.
Not so with the Clinton Foundation. Their purpose is to "lobby" for good causes.
Totally unmeasurable, there is no way to judge whether a donation to the Clinton Foundation is more or less effective than a donation to the "Save the Children Foundation".
With "Save The Children", you know that 1 child is helped, you know how they are helped, and you see whether the help does any good over time.
But with the "Clinton Foundation"... ?
Be grateful for the bread and circus, because it's not actually killing people.
Unless you live in the Middle East, or Africa, or Europe.
Trump just nailed yet another debate.
Strange, it looks like he admitted defeat to me. Why else not agree to accept the result? That's what a child does when they know they are going to lose.
there's still time to finally break through the mainstream media's pro-Clinton firewall.
The mainstream media, especially Fox and other right leaning "news" outlets, have been attacking Clinton for decades. They gave extensive coverage of the email scandal, Benghazi, her husband's actions and the allegations against him... You can't honestly say that they have been easy on her, or given her a free pass because they don't report outlandish conspiracy theories about the number of people she has had murdered (although Fox mentioned it).
The simple fact is that she got her dirty laundry out years back and people have lost interest now, not that it was ever as bad as some make out. But Trump doesn't have a history in politics so there is more dirt left to unearth. The fact that a lot of the stuff he says is clearly off the cuff on issues any serious politician would have nailed down a position on just invites scandal and ridicule too.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Strange, it looks like he admitted defeat to me. Why else not agree to accept the result? That's what a child does when they know they are going to lose.
I took it as a warning to the Democrats. The Dems have a long, long history of voter fraud and Trump is putting them on notice that he's wise to their schemes, and we're not taking it this time.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Politi-"fact" is a useless leftist partisan hack site. Compare statements made by Ron Paul (R) and Jim Webb (D). They are saying almost exactly the same thing. Paul's statement gets "half-true", but Webb's gets "mostly-true".
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Scientific polling that makes voting feel meaningless
My problem with the polling is it's not really scientific. The pollster picks the demographics for the poll, but never justifies why those demographics are reasonable. Frequently they're very unreasonable. If I made a poll for California but made my sample 80% Republicans and said "Trump will win California," would you trust it? But I could do that, say it's a "scientific poll" (because it uses numbers?) and then people would bandy it around for propaganda purposes.
The polls aren't falsifiable right now because nobody really knows what the electorate thinks right now. An awful lot of these polls comes from what are essentially advertising agencies, they're used to shape public opinion ("9 out of 10 dentists prefer anal"), going for bandwagon effect to gain support or demoralization against the other side, when no one can check their results they shape the results to whatever the people paying for the poll want, and then a week before the election they try to actually get it right so they can say "see, we're accurate, trust us next cycle!"
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.