GOP using deception in fake political ads

[CrusaderFrank]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Here's the currency that's accepted at the fake websites

 

[Yurt]

So you lied saying I to admitted something that I did not even address? You are a fool.

So you lied yet again, Yurt.

My point was that all parties do it.

I am glad you admitted that you lied.

^^^^ Yurt, you can't hide.

Please, please, please, let him keep hiding

still no link

why am i not surprised a lefty and jakey have teamed up to provide no link

 

[FA_Q2]

Vote for Republicans

let's see....we have liberals claiming republicans are putting up fake sites....yet no liberal can actually give a link to the site.

see, in the other two threads about this same subject, there was a link to the actual site and it was clear as day it was not fake or fraudulent. in fact, after copying the information, a lliberal admitted it did not rise to fraud.

i believe this thread is bullshit and that is why no liberals will link to this supposed site.

Here is another link to an article explaining the problem:
Republicans set up decoy websites to divert donations from Democratic candidates

See, the problem is not whether or not you think it easy to understand, whether you think it is clearly stated as to what the site is saying, it is whether anyone finds the site misleading, whether they give money under false perceptions, and whether the site was designed with that specific goal in mind. I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious but I am not a legal expert. We have plenty of legal experts however to examine the issue and it is a dereliction of duty if they do not.

Oh, how fucking rich. Complain about a ‘fraudulent’ website that CLEARLY IN THE TITLE states it is for defeating the democrat candidate and then link to a ‘report’ that purposefully edits out the statement in the title.

How rich, LOL.

One of the reasons I feel so strongly about this matter is I have designed and built a website or two in my day. I realize how easy it is to think a user will know how to use a site only to see a very computer literate individual stare at the screen not knowing which items are links or just pictures. Colors, patterns, fonts, use of white space, placement of relevant information and extra information all need to be thoughtful considered. I really doubt these sites were built without any consideration to the presentation of information. If one person goes to site to see why it is fake they will instantly see the reasons it is. If they go to the site thinking they have gone to a legitimate site they will see what they are looking for, do what they came to do, and get back to whatever they were doing. If someone came to the site because they just heard something that really pissed them off but they are in the middle of something they will Google the candidate, go to the site of the candidate, give $50, and go back to what they were doing. If a website was specifically designed to pervert that process it is fraud and is a criminal offense.

And it would be fraud if anything you just stated was true. Unfortunately, none of it is. In BOLD LETTERS in the title it states:
‘Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her’
The entire site is putting negative information out there about Sink. There is no possible way for anyone to not realze what the site is if they read a single sentence on the site itself. ZERO FUCKING FRAUD.

You have not utilized anything from the site itself specifically because of this. Either you are completely ignorant and unwilling to see the truth by going there yourself or you are outright lying about what is presented there. Either way – YOU are being far more fraudulent than this site ever was.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

let's see....we have liberals claiming republicans are putting up fake sites....yet no liberal can actually give a link to the site.

see, in the other two threads about this same subject, there was a link to the actual site and it was clear as day it was not fake or fraudulent. in fact, after copying the information, a lliberal admitted it did not rise to fraud.

i believe this thread is bullshit and that is why no liberals will link to this supposed site.

Here is another link to an article explaining the problem:
Republicans set up decoy websites to divert donations from Democratic candidates

See, the problem is not whether or not you think it easy to understand, whether you think it is clearly stated as to what the site is saying, it is whether anyone finds the site misleading, whether they give money under false perceptions, and whether the site was designed with that specific goal in mind. I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious but I am not a legal expert. We have plenty of legal experts however to examine the issue and it is a dereliction of duty if they do not.

Oh, how fucking rich. Complain about a ‘fraudulent’ website that CLEARLY IN THE TITLE states it is for defeating the democrat candidate and then link to a ‘report’ that purposefully edits out the statement in the title.

How rich, LOL.

One of the reasons I feel so strongly about this matter is I have designed and built a website or two in my day. I realize how easy it is to think a user will know how to use a site only to see a very computer literate individual stare at the screen not knowing which items are links or just pictures. Colors, patterns, fonts, use of white space, placement of relevant information and extra information all need to be thoughtful considered. I really doubt these sites were built without any consideration to the presentation of information. If one person goes to site to see why it is fake they will instantly see the reasons it is. If they go to the site thinking they have gone to a legitimate site they will see what they are looking for, do what they came to do, and get back to whatever they were doing. If someone came to the site because they just heard something that really pissed them off but they are in the middle of something they will Google the candidate, go to the site of the candidate, give $50, and go back to what they were doing. If a website was specifically designed to pervert that process it is fraud and is a criminal offense.

And it would be fraud if anything you just stated was true. Unfortunately, none of it is. In BOLD LETTERS in the title it states:
‘Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her’
The entire site is putting negative information out there about Sink. There is no possible way for anyone to not realze what the site is if they read a single sentence on the site itself. ZERO FUCKING FRAUD.

You have not utilized anything from the site itself specifically because of this. Either you are completely ignorant and unwilling to see the truth by going there yourself or you are outright lying about what is presented there. Either way – YOU are being far more fraudulent than this site ever was.

That really puts a fine point of the Low Information nature of the typical Democrat Voter

 

[hangover]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

 

[JakeStarkey]

^^^^ Yurt, you can't hide.

Please, please, please, let him keep hiding

still no link

why am i not surprised a lefty and jakey have teamed up to provide no link

Yurt, quit obfuscating. You fucked up. That's why you will not post the entire thread (it's #80 on the previous page).

(1) I quoted the OP, not the link

(2) My comment in response to the OP was that all parties have done it.

Then you lied.

 

[RandomVariable]

Here is another link to an article explaining the problem:
Republicans set up decoy websites to divert donations from Democratic candidates

See, the problem is not whether or not you think it easy to understand, whether you think it is clearly stated as to what the site is saying, it is whether anyone finds the site misleading, whether they give money under false perceptions, and whether the site was designed with that specific goal in mind. I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious but I am not a legal expert. We have plenty of legal experts however to examine the issue and it is a dereliction of duty if they do not.

Oh, how fucking rich. Complain about a ‘fraudulent’ website that CLEARLY IN THE TITLE states it is for defeating the democrat candidate and then link to a ‘report’ that purposefully edits out the statement in the title.

How rich, LOL.

One of the reasons I feel so strongly about this matter is I have designed and built a website or two in my day. I realize how easy it is to think a user will know how to use a site only to see a very computer literate individual stare at the screen not knowing which items are links or just pictures. Colors, patterns, fonts, use of white space, placement of relevant information and extra information all need to be thoughtful considered. I really doubt these sites were built without any consideration to the presentation of information. If one person goes to site to see why it is fake they will instantly see the reasons it is. If they go to the site thinking they have gone to a legitimate site they will see what they are looking for, do what they came to do, and get back to whatever they were doing. If someone came to the site because they just heard something that really pissed them off but they are in the middle of something they will Google the candidate, go to the site of the candidate, give $50, and go back to what they were doing. If a website was specifically designed to pervert that process it is fraud and is a criminal offense.

And it would be fraud if anything you just stated was true. Unfortunately, none of it is. In BOLD LETTERS in the title it states:
‘Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her’
The entire site is putting negative information out there about Sink. There is no possible way for anyone to not realze what the site is if they read a single sentence on the site itself. ZERO FUCKING FRAUD.

You have not utilized anything from the site itself specifically because of this. Either you are completely ignorant and unwilling to see the truth by going there yourself or you are outright lying about what is presented there. Either way – YOU are being far more fraudulent than this site ever was.

That really puts a fine point of the Low Information nature of the typical Democrat Voter

What the heck does this have to do with an overly sugary drink that is bad for you? Unless you understand the industry, stfu.

 

[Darkwind]

This is just 'glitchless'....

 

[Immanuel]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

Proud?

For the record, I despise Republicans as much as I do Democrats.

However, just because you read a biased blog that coincides with your biased beliefs does not make the blog correct in what it states. It took about 1 second to notice that the donation box says "help defeat Alex Sink" and then about a second and a half to notice it was a Republican site. The idiot simply did not read what he was donating to. He is lucky to have received a refund.

 

[hangover]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

Proud?

For the record, I despise Republicans as much as I do Democrats.

However, just because you read a biased blog that coincides with your biased beliefs does not make the blog correct in what it states. It took about 1 second to notice that the donation box says "help defeat Alex Sink" and then about a second and a half to notice it was a Republican site. The idiot simply did not read what he was donating to. He is lucky to have received a refund.

All your double talk doesn't change the fact that the cons are using slimy politics. When the liberals do it, then we'll rag on them. BTW, I'm a registered INDEPENDENT since 1996.

 

[R.D.]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

There was no deception ..... just an idiot old man who didn't bother reading what was as clear as the nose on his face. Typical stupid democrat then goes on to blame the site and even dumber dems are fooled by reporting that knows you're too stupid to see the simple facts so you're led around like a bunch of dumbass jackasses.

 

[hangover]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

There was no deception ..... just an idiot old man who didn't bother reading what was as clear as the nose on his face. Typical stupid democrat then goes on to blame the site and even dumber dems are fooled by reporting that knows you're too stupid to see the simple facts so you're led around like a bunch of dumbass jackasses.

Read the OP, moron. The story was reported by FORBES, a con rag.

 

[RKMBrown]

how many threads are we going to have on this? it has been debunked so many times. are democrats this stupid?

Stupid is, as stupid does. So, yes.

 

[RKMBrown]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

There was no deception ..... just an idiot old man who didn't bother reading what was as clear as the nose on his face. Typical stupid democrat then goes on to blame the site and even dumber dems are fooled by reporting that knows you're too stupid to see the simple facts so you're led around like a bunch of dumbass jackasses.

Read the OP, moron. The story was reported by FORBES, a con rag.

I bet YOU were confused by the irony of the forbes article. ROFL

 

[R.D.]

Notice that all the con responses are in defense of the deception. None even try to have any dignity. They're proud of their parties sliminess. That should give everyone an idea of the kind of government they envision.

There was no deception ..... just an idiot old man who didn't bother reading what was as clear as the nose on his face. Typical stupid democrat then goes on to blame the site and even dumber dems are fooled by reporting that knows you're too stupid to see the simple facts so you're led around like a bunch of dumbass jackasses.

Read the OP, moron. The story was reported by FORBES, a con rag.

So what, idiot? Try thinking for yourself....sobering up first would help.

 

[dannyboys]

Here's hoping the LIB moron 'Doctor' isn't a medical doctor responsible for helping anyone with an illness/injury. He'd probably cut off your right hand by mistakingly reading the medical report.
God some people are idiots!

 

[RKMBrown]

I suppose one could argue that the web site address itself, is fraudulent. I suppose one could also argue that the large banner advertising the opposition, was more prominent than the large bold font explaining what you are paying for. If someone was on a lap top and had bad eye sight and the sun was reflecting on it... yeah he might make a mistake.

Yeah ok just from the web site address and that pic, I'd say it's arguable that this site is attempting to perpetrate a fraud.

 

[hangover]

There was no deception ..... just an idiot old man who didn't bother reading what was as clear as the nose on his face. Typical stupid democrat then goes on to blame the site and even dumber dems are fooled by reporting that knows you're too stupid to see the simple facts so you're led around like a bunch of dumbass jackasses.

Read the OP, moron. The story was reported by FORBES, a con rag.

So what, idiot? Try thinking for yourself....sobering up first would help.

So R.D. must stand for retarded dipshit.

 

[Freewill]

I suppose one could argue that the web site address itself, is fraudulent. I suppose one could also argue that the large banner advertising the opposition, was more prominent than the large bold font explaining what you are paying for. If someone was on a lap top and had bad eye sight and the sun was reflecting on it... yeah he might make a mistake.

Yeah ok just from the web site address and that pic, I'd say it's arguable that this site is attempting to perpetrate a fraud.

Since this is the age of the Internet one would think people would be on the look out for things not being what they appear to be. In this case it is fairly obvious it is what it appears to be. I think it is a smart idea the web site address. It gets people to look at stuff they would ordinarily not even give a second of thought. Who is going to search for a web site named, don't elect Lewis, or whomever? Certainly one could argue by naming the site lewisforcongress is not deceptive because that is all it really says and Lewis is running for congress. Just because people assume it is a pro-Lewis site doesn't in itself make it deceptive. Of course that is my opinion.