Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Democrats Twitter Communications Network Republicans Social Networks Software The Almighty Buck The Internet News Politics Technology

Hillary Clinton's Campaign Creates Way To Make Money From Donald Trump's Tweets (adweek.com) 331

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.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hillary Clinton's Campaign Creates Way To Make Money From Donald Trump's Tweets

Comments Filter:
  • Red headline (with no responses) during the debate...
    • 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 [wikipedia.org]:

      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

      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @09:39PM (#53112371)

        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

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          I guess it's a morality question you have to answer for yourself. Is donating blood money a net moral good?

          Are 2 children helped in Africa helped by the Clinton Foundation worth the homosexual that was hung by some Saudis?

          • by Gussington ( 4512999 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @10:24PM (#53112567)

            I guess it's a morality question you have to answer for yourself. Is donating blood money a net moral good?

            Are 2 children helped in Africa helped by the Clinton Foundation worth the homosexual that was hung by some Saudis?

            You do realise that Qatar and Saudi Arabia are two different countries yeah?

          • by squiggleslash ( 241428 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @10:50PM (#53112665) Homepage Journal

            Leaving aside the fact that you're confusing two entirely different countries, and that if the {Insert actual human rights abusing country} do not donate money, the human rights atrocities continue (it's not an either/or), I would totally take money from someone evil and spend it on something good. Why wouldn't you? Hell, I'd even steal it from them if I could get away from it.

            Why would you do differently? Osama Bin Laden appears in your bedroom tonight. He says "Hoho, I'm not dead, I'm actually the October surprise, Clinton is going to be so screwed when it gets out I'm alive. Yeah, yeah, the Russians have been hiding me. Anywho, I just popped in because I heard you're great at picking charitable causes. Here's FIVE MILLION DOLLARS."

            Do you say "Uh, thanks, but I'd rather you spend it on fertilizer, pressure cookers and airline tickets. Here, have your five million back", or do you say "I think I might just spend it on HIV prevention for Gay and Lesbian Jews?"

            Pretty easy decision for me to make at any rate, but maybe I'm just not as moral as you.

          • I guess it's a morality question you have to answer for yourself. Is donating blood money a net moral good?

            Are 2 children helped in Africa helped by the Clinton Foundation worth the homosexual that was hung by some Saudis?

            Do you seriously want to go there?

        • 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.

          Yup. For all of the anticipation of the killer revelations, there is precious little beef in all of this stuff.

          Some have noted that these leaks serve more as boring day to day workstuff that ends up either boring for us or even helping Clinton.

          And that's the problem - even the server debacle pales in comparison to the bankruptcies, the grab her pussy crap, the (alleged) rape and (alleged)sexual assaults and fascinating allies and inciting to violence of the other party in this sad silly season electi

  • by Anonymous Coward

    bankrupt clinton donors by doing what he does best.. being a raging lunatic that can't shut up.

  • oops (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-19/hillary-clinton-linked-mysterious-front-associated-julian-assange-pedophile-smear

    • Just to note, it looks like that may be the address of a registered agent, so the connection is less strong than it looks, though it's still an odd coincidence.

      The rest of the story is just nuts, though and hard to make sense of. How many other shady porn sites that are UN partners and just what kind of cam girl leaves their 8 year old sister alone with the camera!?

  • Proverbial (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dontbemad ( 2683011 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @09:26PM (#53112319)
    A fool and his money are soon parted.
  • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @09:55PM (#53112429)

    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?

    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      What it looks just exactly like a corporate advertising campaign for junk food, the news coke/pepsi wars (so why is it coke taste like crap after you have drunk pepsi for a while). They both are really in line for a massive mocking and trolling campaign, unless they start behaving themselves. Why not give the USPS some work and write those candidates a snail mail (they have to be collected, sorted, opened, read and filed, ohh the masses of paperwork, remind them who is the boss and who is the servant, who i

    • by raind ( 174356 )
      Great summary, I suspect there are many cynics among us, well it is what it is.
    • Election of 1968 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @11:28PM (#53112817) Homepage Journal

      During the election of 1968, Johnson was trying to bring an end to the Vietnam war. Nixon feared a breakthrough at the Paris Peace talks designed to find a negotiated settlement to the Vietnam war, and he knew this would derail his campaign, so he contacted Hanoi [smithsonianmag.com] and told them, essentially, "if you delay the peace talks, you'll get a better deal once I'm elected".

      This was known to Johnson and the FBI at the time, who chose to do nothing.

      From the article: “Once in office he escalated the war into Laos and Cambodia, with the loss of an additional 22,000 American lives, before finally settling for a peace agreement in 1973 that was within grasp in 1968,”

      You probably aren't old enough to remember that era, but a lot of us are. The peace talks were constantly delayed by demands that, for instance, the table be round or square. This seemed odd at the time, but now we know why.

      Nixon committed treason in the literal sense of the word, interfered with the US operations of state, and extended a war for 5 years just to get elected.

      We only recently found this out because the records were sealed for 50 years, and recently unsealed.

      I'm told that other, previous elections were worse. This one is just more heavily televised.

      Be grateful for the bread and circus, because it's not actually killing people.

      • by johannesg ( 664142 ) on Thursday October 20, 2016 @01:43AM (#53113177)

        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.

      • Nixon committed treason in the literal sense of the word

        I come to bury Nixon, not to praise him.

        That being said, while you may think he committed treason in the literal sense, he did not in the legal sense.

        Treason is defined in the US Constitution as aiding or giving comfort to an enemy at a time of war declared by Congress. Congress did not declare war officially on Vietnam. In fact, Congress has not declared war officially on any nation since 1942.

      • It's almost as if the worst of your country represent you.

        You should be ashamed that your whole country is so horribly corrupt that these monsters can get away with this and everyone goes passively along for the ride.

        It's a disgrace to humanity as a whole.

        • by chihowa ( 366380 )

          It's almost as if the worst of your country represent you.

          You must be new here (Earth). The top tiers of every government in every country are the worst of us, because the worst of us are attracted to the power and wealth that can be extracted from such positions and have no qualms about doing whatever it takes to get these positions. Where do you live where your politicians are angels (or even decent people)? Looking back through history, how many kings, emperors, presidents, and prime ministers can you name who were not monsters in one way or another?

      • by swb ( 14022 )

        Once in office he escalated the war into Laos and Cambodia, with the loss of an additional 22,000 American lives, before finally settling for a peace agreement in 1973 that was within grasp in 1968

        1968, the year of the Tet Offensive and the siege at Khe Sanh, which Johnson insisted the US win? The same Johnson who decided not to run for re-election in 1968?

        I just don't see a peace agreement in 1968 as being something that would have actually happened, especially after Johnson had stopped the bombing in the north as well.

        Maybe if Johnson had *increased* bombing in the north to Linebacker II levels and allowed Westmoreland to go after the Ho Chi Minh trail and NVA bases in Cambodia and Laos he could h

    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

      This.
      Jerry Springer should moderate the final debate.
      Mike Judge should direct the movie adaptation.

      • Jerry Springer should moderate the final debate.

        Only if they do a paternity test for Chelsea so Jerry can say to Bill "You are.......not the father! It's Webb Hubbell!!!"

    • That's unfair: sideshows are way more fun, even the seedy ones. This is more like monkeys at the zoo, flinging poo at each other. Even the campaigners' lingo fits the analogy: "find some dirt", "can we make it stick", etc.

      I'm just glad my country hasn't sunk to this level.
  • by ooshna ( 1654125 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @09:58PM (#53112437)

    Oh god I hope Trump trolls them back by instead of tweeting out a sentences he tweets one word at a time.

    Hillary
    Clinton's
    tax
    plan
    is
    the
    worst
    thing
    since
    N
    A
    F
    T
    A
    !

  • Just to be clear (Score:2, Insightful)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 )

    So when Trump's campaign sets up the same tool, so that every time HRC twats, Trump gets $?

    Is that just as neat?

  • by shanen ( 462549 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @10:40PM (#53112621) Homepage Journal

    Of course the amazing thing is that Trump probably thinks the tweeting is helping his campaign. He doesn't even want to stop, though Hillary would be helping him greatly if this gimmick discouraged him from tweeting. Like Sun Tzu says, you shouldn't interfere when your enemy is punching himself in the face. (Actually, I'm still entertaining the hypothesis that Twitter actually brainwashed Trump with Alt-Right links.)

    I still think it's kind of unfair for Hillary to exploit his weaknesses, but then again, I think Trump is asking for it. Near as I can tell, no one forced him into this ritual humiliation. Kind of a shame he didn't have any good friends who could persuade him not to, and if he thought Bill Clinton was being a good friend when he encouraged him to run against Bill's very own wife... Well, there goes any claim to high intelligence, as if the Donald's campaign hadn't been proof enough.

    If there were some similar comments already, I would have appended mine. Nothing showed up yet, and the participation in Slashdot these days is so low that I'm not expecting much before the article dies. The moderation is not helping (as usual), but I have a new question about some discouraging "award" I recently received. Couldn't find out anything about it, so I guess I should care even less, eh?

    • Of course the amazing thing is that Trump probably thinks the tweeting is helping his campaign. He doesn't even want to stop, though Hillary would be helping him greatly if this gimmick discouraged him from tweeting.

      Trump is too narcissistic to change his ways. If he had toned it down a bit and stayed on message about the economy & national security instead of pursuing every petty comment made about him, ranging from gold-star families to beauty pageant contestants, he'd probably be in the lead right now. Heck, if the GOP had nominated Kasich, Paul or Rubio, this election would be lopsided in the other direction. Instead, they decided to go for the stooge who would make Hillary a shoo-in. Unless Trump wins, there's

  • Am I the only one (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sibko ( 1036168 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @10:58PM (#53112701)

    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?

    • by bongey ( 974911 )

      Scott Adams calls Hillary Clinton supporters brainwashed. That includes /. editors.
      http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1... [dilbert.com]

      • As proof, please see your same link.

        • [Scott Adams is a world class fucking idiot] As proof, please see your same link.

          And this is why Slashdot seems to be pro-Trump.

          Scott Adams is a trained hypnotist, and has had many insights into this election from that point of view. When he says people are brainwashed, he's speaking professionally with some background. And the posted article uses analogy and example to explain his point.

          If you think he's wrong, just pasting a random insult ain't 'gonna do it.

          Anyone can show pro-Clinton articles and posts on Slashdot, it only takes insight and background, which anyone could do.

          Raw, unsu

          • [Scott Adams is a world class fucking idiot] As proof, please see your same link.

            And this is why Slashdot seems to be pro-Trump.

            Scott Adams is a trained hypnotist, and has had many insights into this election from that point of view. When he says people are brainwashed, he's speaking professionally with some background. And the posted article uses analogy and example to explain his point.

            If you think he's wrong, just pasting a random insult ain't 'gonna do it.

            Anyone can show pro-Clinton articles and posts on Slashdot, it only takes insight and background, which anyone could do.

            Raw, unsupported insults simply aren't good enough.

            In the linked post, Adams never argues why the illusion is an illusion. He simply asserts it is (in an exceptionally patronizing way, incidentally). The furthest he goes in explaining that Trump is not a racist/sexist clown with a dangerous temperament is simply to say that "a guy who uses provocative language (as New Yorkers do) while succeeding across several different fields. And he knows risk-management." So basically, we should not take Trump at his word on anything because he's from New York and just

      • So getting somewhat off-topic, Scott Adams' argument appears to be:
        Some people call Trump Hitler - when he's not (which I 100% agree with Scott on that one)
        The DNC have spent a lot of effort spinning opinion against Trump.
        Because of that, clearly the arguments against Trump are an illusion that's shared with most anti-trumpers

        My counter argument would be:
        Comparing him to Hitler isn't the only argument against Trump. There are many others which I believe are valid.
        GOP have been smearing her for her p
        • "Some people call Trump Hitler - when he's not (which I 100% agree with Scott on that one)"

          _When_ is he not Hitler, when he sleeps? Or did you mean 'while'?

          "The DNC have spent a lot of effort spinning opinion against Trump."

          That's is sorta their job, isn't it?

          • He's not Hitler. He's a lightweight Mussolini. Scapegoats minorities, smears and dehumanizes same, promotes violence against his opponents, has a contempt for the democratic process, wants to jail his political opponents and restrict and punish journalists who publish stories he and his backers do not like, promotes simplistic solutions to complex problems, usually with an absence of detail that makes the solutions suspect even without further analysis.

            He would have to have a raging hate-on for a racial

      • I think the money went to his head a long while ago and it became a boring business. I think he lost his sense of humor, too, but he's getting ideas from around the Web and he has hired a couple of editors to pick the ones he illustrates for his strip. Nothing that feels like his originality there.

        As regards Trump, I think it was a head fake. If Trump wins, he gets to say "I told you so" and if Trump loses he'll claim credit and say "If I hadn't scared, you then Trump could have won."

        I still can't understan

      • From your link:

        Here I pause to remind new readers of this blog that I'm a trained hypnotist and a student of persuasion in all its forms.

        He's also a certified genius level IQ. We mustn't forget that!

        And I'm here to tell you that if you are afraid that Donald Trump is a racist/sexist clown with a dangerous temperament, you have been brainwashed by the best group of brainwashers in the business right now: Team Clinton.

        Well, if you're merely afraid of that then you might have been brainwashed by someone. Anyo

    • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @11:39PM (#53112845) Homepage Journal

      I've been here through a couple of elections, and I can say definitively that this place goes to hell just prior.

      About 6 weeks before an election this place starts to get crazy with spammers and sock puppets, and about 3 weeks prior it goes completely bonkers. It's happened before, it'll happen again in 4 years. If you're worried, just ignore it for the next 3 weeks.

      Apropos shadow banning, I myself was banned from Slashdot for about a day [slashdot.org] because of trolls modding my submissions as "spam" (and triggering Slashdot's anti-spam auto ban).

      I sent an E-mail to feedback, an op read it, and I was unbanned. To my total astonishment.

      Slashdot is awesome, please don't paint us with the same brush as Twitter or Facebook.

      It's just our 4-yearly version of pon-farr.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I've had this happen too, twice. First time with troll mod-bombing on comments, and then the second time with spam modding of submissions. In both cases, a quick email sorted it out. I can't fault the Slashdot team on that front, they fix moderation abuse quickly.

    • Interesting post, and if I ever saw a mod point, I might give it to you, even though you only posed the questions.

      Anyway, it's obvious that technology is influencing elections in many ways, but mostly for the worse. Just picking a few examples off the top of my head:

      (1) Scientific polling that makes voting feel meaningless
      (2) Precise gerrymandering that distorts the House of so-called Representatives
      (3) Trump's self-immolation via Twitter

      Still no funny comments and the ones modded insightful weren't, and th

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by meta-monkey ( 321000 )

        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 bec

        • The pollster picks the demographics for the poll, but never justifies why those demographics are reasonable.

          As far as I am aware, the normal procedure is to record the demographics from a random poll, and then adjust the weightings of each demographic group based on the actual recorded demographics from the last similar election.

          The rest of your comments display a considerable amount of the Dunning-Kruger effect [rationalwiki.org]. I really don't think you should write about things you so clearly know nothing about. Maybe you should spend some time and educate yourself about polling procedures, practices and organizations?

  • by dbreeze ( 228599 ) on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @11:20PM (#53112789)

    i just don't think raw $ is going to have quite the effect it's had in the past. Information control isn't bought quite as easily, nor is it nearly as effective, as in the past. Far fewer are glued to their TVs for their world-view. I can't imagine Trump getting in this if he knew of some true skeletons to hide. I can't imagine Hillary ever imagined how quickly her closets would fill up way back before meeting Bill. Hiding skeletons seems to be all she's ever done. And too many of you are too young to realize how long some of us have been watching the "Slick Willy" crime syndicate operate.

  • by Chas ( 5144 ) on Thursday October 20, 2016 @12:26AM (#53113021) Homepage Journal

    Basically, it it's tied to Tweet count, Trump can cause these people to violate campaign finance laws, simply by being prolific.

    Though, realistically, it would more likely just cause financial hardship as a big chunk of cash disappears from their account.

    Anyone who uses this is basically a moron who basically WANTS to be stolen from.

  • I'd have thought she'd have a 'Donate arms to ISIS whenever Donald Trump tweets" campaign

  • by jittles ( 1613415 ) on Thursday October 20, 2016 @07:19AM (#53114021)
    This clearly is targeting 1%ers. Who else could afford to donate even a few cents every time Trump says something stupid? Just further proof that Clinton is in bed with the rich elite, though probably not with her own husband.

Moneyliness is next to Godliness. -- Andries van Dam

Working...