• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
One of those things that made be go, Hmmmm.

Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary? | SourceFed.com

Published on Jun 9, 2016

While researching for a wrap-up on the June 7 Presidential Primaries, we discovered evidence that Google may be manipulating autocomplete recommendations in favor of Hillary Clinton. If true, this would mean that Google Searches aren’t objectively reflecting what the majority of Internet searches are actually looking for, possibly violating Google’s algorithm. According to a research paper cited in this video, that kind of search result manipulation has the potential to substantially influence the outcome of actual elections.

 

MrT

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2015
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
2,426
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
One of those things that made be go, Hmmmm.

They certainly make a really compelling argument. I was able to duplicate their results myself and I would be curious to get a statement from Google on this issue.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They certainly make a really compelling argument. I was able to duplicate their results myself and I would be curious to get a statement from Google on this issue.

I did so as well, before I would post it here. I, too, would like to hear from Google. My response hasn't changed so far, it's still just, Hmmmm.
 

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,908
Reaction score
3,573
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Very interesting; wouldn't surprise me if it were a deliberate distortion in light of nomination process thus far.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't understand why nobody can just admit that Hillary is the Democratic nominee because she got more votes than Sanders. Jesus Christ.
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,246
Reaction score
14,269
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I don't understand why nobody can just admit that Hillary is the Democratic nominee because she got more votes than Sanders. Jesus Christ.

People will admit it, but that doesn't mean there likely wasn't much cheating, wheeling and dealing, and corruption behind that win.
 

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,426
Reaction score
15,333
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The guy in the video wrote this in the comment section....

Matt Lieberman11 hours ago

To reiterate the video, there is no proof that Hillary Clinton or anyone who works for her knew about or pushed for Google's search manipulation. To assume or allege otherwise is irresponsible. All we have are the facts on record. Thank you for watching.
 

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,908
Reaction score
3,573
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't understand why nobody can just admit that Hillary is the Democratic nominee because she got more votes than Sanders. Jesus Christ.

People will admit it, but that doesn't mean there likely wasn't much cheating, wheeling and dealing, and corruption behind that win.

Precisely, none of which Clinton supporters will themselves ever admit to.


The guy in the video wrote this in the comment section....

...Which doesn't in any way mean Google, or individuals at Google didn't do this independently in support of Clinton per the conflict of interest stated and highlighted in the video. No one is asserting that the Clinton Campaign actively lobbied for this by the way, and that same disclaimer is featured in the video itself, so why the redundant, useless mention of it?
 
Last edited:

RetiredNSmilin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
4,242
Reaction score
1,985
Location
East Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
meh...it is just another political manipulation done by techies for the candidate they favor.

everyone does it in one way or another.

If conservatives do not like it, then they had better start creating their own search engines and setch....

This is one arena the liberal techies have it all over the conservative people.

Even if this BS helps Clinton get elected, I have 100% certainty her antics and arrogance will created yet another scandal if she is Prez.

Even if her next scandal is so far over the top in corruption, her worshipers will still make apologies for her, like they do out of habit now.

Pretty sad when a candidates supporters get so used to making apologies for their person it becomes a habit.

BTW...the above comment equally applies to Trump supporters like me.

I hate the fact I can see clearly when I look in the mirror.
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
68,404
Reaction score
21,272
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One of those things that made be go, Hmmmm.





hmmm I agree, definitely "seems" shady on the surface. . .
and if true google has some explaining to do but I dont know if I care one little bit since its just auto finished. Ive never stopped lookign for somethign because it wasnt auto finished lol

you know what I mean if that makes sense, for example when I typed in hillary clinton indictment it did not auto finish for me just like the video said, but i finished typing it myself anyway because thats infact what I was looking for and it did return like 900k results.

BUT that got me thinking, could i get that info on BING and Yahoo also?

so I did it on the others:

yahoo 14,800,000 results
Bing 18,400,00 results

now I find THIS why more way interesting and concerning than "auto finish" . . auto finish is meaningless to me . . but I think this matters . . IF there is actually somethign shady behind it and not logical it is a big deal IMO.
 

truthatallcost

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
26,719
Reaction score
6,277
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If ever presented with evidence that Google manipulated search results, I think I can guess Hillary's response.....


hqdefault.jpg
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,981
Reaction score
30,192
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't understand why nobody can just admit that Hillary is the Democratic nominee because she got more votes than Sanders. Jesus Christ.

That she officially on paper has more votes is not what we're disputing. We're upset that the DNC heavily skewed the election process towards Hillary before Bernie even began to run. They're supposed to be the impartial arbiters of the contest and instead they did everything in their power to suppress Bernie and his voters. There was rampant voter fraud in the primary in numerous states and the DNC has made no real effort to adopt any of our platform. They tried to limit the number of debates to reduce Sander's air time and not a day has gone by we weren't reminded that ALL superdelegates voted Hillary even though none of them vote until July.

As for Google, I would do more research before you write this off as a conspiracy theory, as there's some pretty damning evidence. Take a look at something called "The Groundwork". It's a program started by Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, with the express purpose of using the internet to get Hillary elected.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
That she officially on paper has more votes is not what we're disputing. We're upset that the DNC heavily skewed the election process towards Hillary before Bernie even began to run. They're supposed to be the impartial arbiters of the contest and instead they did everything in their power to suppress Bernie and his voters. There was rampant voter fraud in the primary in numerous states and the DNC has made no real effort to adopt any of our platform. They tried to limit the number of debates to reduce Sander's air time and not a day has gone by we weren't reminded that ALL superdelegates voted Hillary even though none of them vote until July.

I'm not thrilled with it either; the whole process stinks. Precisely why I'm not a registered Dem and haven't been for more than a decade.

The only thing I question is the bolded -- I've seen numerous claims of fraud, but very little that convinces me it actually occurred.

As for Google, I would do more research before you write this off as a conspiracy theory, as there's some pretty damning evidence. Take a look at something called "The Groundwork". It's a program started by Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, with the express purpose of using the internet to get Hillary elected.

I'll look into it.
 

truthatallcost

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
26,719
Reaction score
6,277
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That she officially on paper has more votes is not what we're disputing. We're upset that the DNC heavily skewed the election process towards Hillary before Bernie even began to run. They're supposed to be the impartial arbiters of the contest and instead they did everything in their power to suppress Bernie and his voters. There was rampant voter fraud in the primary in numerous states and the DNC has made no real effort to adopt any of our platform. They tried to limit the number of debates to reduce Sander's air time and not a day has gone by we weren't reminded that ALL superdelegates voted Hillary even though none of them vote until July.

As for Google, I would do more research before you write this off as a conspiracy theory, as there's some pretty damning evidence. Take a look at something called "The Groundwork". It's a program started by Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, with the express purpose of using the internet to get Hillary elected.

Which makes sense to me, since Schmidt bankrolled a startup company dedicated to helping Clinton get elected:

"An under-the-radar startup funded by billionaire Eric Schmidt has become a major technology vendor for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, underscoring the bonds between Silicon Valley and Democratic politics.
The Groundwork, according to Democratic campaign operatives and technologists, is part of efforts by Schmidt—the executive chairman of Google parent-company Alphabet—to ensure that Clinton has the engineering talent needed to win the election. And it is one of a series of quiet investments by Schmidt that recognize how modern political campaigns are run, with data analytics and digital outreach as vital ingredients that allow candidates to find, court, and turn out critical voter blocs.
But campaigns—lacking stock options and long-term job security—find it hard to attract the elite engineering talent that Facebook, Google, and countless startups rely on. That’s also part of the problem that Schmidt and the Groundwork are helping Clinton’s team to solve.
The Groundwork is one of the Clinton campaign’s biggest vendors, billing it for more than $177,000 in the second quarter of 2015, according to federal filings. Yet many political operatives know little about it."

The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House — Quartz
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
23,099
Reaction score
13,423
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I don't understand why nobody can just admit that Hillary is the Democratic nominee because she got more votes than Sanders. Jesus Christ.

I hear ya. But I think we both have an uneasy feeling knowing that Hillary had more delegates than Sanders even before the first vote was cast, no?

I don't blame this on Hillary at all. Dem's da rulz.

But if I credit Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump for anything, it is that they both opened my eyes up as to how rigged our elections really are. I really didn't see that coming. I really thought votes mattered. Gerrymandering. Electoral College. Super-delegates. Polling place restrictions and the list goes on. Both parties are complicit. We are all played like fiddles.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I hear ya. But I think we both have an uneasy feeling knowing that Hillary had more delegates than Sanders even before the first vote was cast, no?

I don't blame this on Hillary at all. Dem's da rulz.

But if I credit Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump for anything, it is that they both opened my eyes up as to how rigged our elections really are. I really didn't see that coming. I really thought votes mattered. Gerrymandering. Electoral College. Super-delegates. Polling place restrictions and the list goes on. Both parties are complicit. We are all played like fiddles.

I hate the superdelegate nonsense as much as anyone else, and I have a feeling Sanders is sticking around so he can basically point at the whole shebang and say "hey, this is effed." And he's not wrong.
 

Greenbeard

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
13,889
Location
Cambridge, MA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I hate the superdelegate nonsense as much as anyone else, and I have a feeling Sanders is sticking around so he can basically point at the whole shebang and say "hey, this is effed." And he's not wrong.

It was clear in mid-March that Bernie was going to lose the pledged delegate count. Hope that superdelegates would for some reason overturn the popular result and throw the nomination to him (an argument he not coincidentally started making in late March) is literally the only thing that allowed him to stay in the race past March and pretend he had some viable path to the nomination. It was illusory of course, since superdelegates never overturn the pledged delegate results, but it kept the cash rolling in for him. So I'm not sure I get the superdelegate hate from his camp. Without them, this thing is over way earlier.
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,981
Reaction score
30,192
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It was clear in mid-March that Bernie was going to lose the pledged delegate count. Hope that superdelegates would for some reason overturn the popular result and throw the nomination to him (an argument he not coincidentally started making in late March) is literally the only thing that allowed him to stay in the race past March and pretend he had some viable path to the nomination. It was illusory of course, since superdelegates never overturn the pledged delegate results, but it kept the cash rolling in for him. So I'm not sure I get the superdelegate hate from his camp. Without them, this thing is over way earlier.

This is mindblowingly incorrect. Since march he's been less than 300 pledged delegates behind Hillary, and in many cases as little as 150-200. To pretend that was an insurmountable hurdle that he never could've made up for and was just scamming his supporters is silly and baseless. Hillary had all of the superdelegates on lock before Bernie even entered the race by using the Hillary Victory Fund to buy them off with campaign contributions. Every single day of Sanders' campaign we've been hit over the head that we should quit because the superdelegates have already made their decision even though they don't vote until July. The DNC and media stacked the cards against him as hard as they could and he still almost beat her.

Cut the bull****. This was one of the closest primaries we've had in a very long time.
 

Greenbeard

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
13,889
Location
Cambridge, MA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
This is mindblowingly incorrect. Since march he's been less than 300 pledged delegates behind Hillary, and in many cases as little as 150-200. To pretend that was an insurmountable hurdle that he never could've made up for and was just scamming his supporters is silly and baseless.

It was insurmountable. The primaries have now ended (not counting Hillary's upcoming final win next Tuesday) and he's behind...375. That's why starting in late March he changed his tune on superdelegates and suddenly became a much bigger fan of them playing an active role in determining the nominee. Surely you noticed that about-face. They were his lifeline once it became clear the pledged delegate race was no longer in doubt.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
So I was all ready to attack Google over this but apparently it doesn't fill in "crimes" and "indictment" regardless of who you are searching for. Like Bill Cosby, for example. But "Hillary Clinton emails" is among the top recommended searches when you start filling in her name.

So, after looking further into this, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Hillary Clinton and is just the way their algorithm operates.
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
68,404
Reaction score
21,272
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So I was all ready to attack Google over this but apparently it doesn't fill in "crimes" and "indictment" regardless of who you are searching for. Like Bill Cosby, for example. But "Hillary Clinton emails" is among the top recommended searches when you start filling in her name.

So, after looking further into this, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Hillary Clinton and is just the way their algorithm operates.

That is interesting, I havent tried that but thats interesting . . .
DId you read my post though?

While Im like you I want to wait to have more info the auto fill didn't concern me really at all but the limited amount of returns did. Still not saying anything is wrong I just found that MORE curious that the auto fill which is meaningless to me.

"clinton indictment"
Google 844,000
yahoo 14,800,000 results
Bing 18,400,00 results

This seems shady to me but could be part of the same formula . . . wonder if i can duplicate it with bills cosby

lets see

"bill cosby indictment"
Google: 310,000
Yahoo: 76,300
Bing: 12,300,300

"Bill Cosby Crimes"
Google: 499,000
Yahoo: 187,300
Bing: ??? dont know, since bill cosby is an actor a move bar appears at the top and "returned searches" doesnt seem to be anywhere on the page

Anyway, hmmmm seems I have to agree with you . . .on the surface it looks like this is much to do about nothing
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The guy in the video wrote this in the comment section....

He said the same thing a number of times in the video, which is why he started the statement you quoted with: "To reiterate ..." I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to repeat it once again, because that is not what the thread is about, since neither the video, nor I, have made such an accusation regarding Google.
 
Last edited:

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So I was all ready to attack Google over this but apparently it doesn't fill in "crimes" and "indictment" regardless of who you are searching for. Like Bill Cosby, for example. But "Hillary Clinton emails" is among the top recommended searches when you start filling in her name.

So, after looking further into this, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Hillary Clinton and is just the way their algorithm operates.

Great point, and great post - thank you.
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
23,099
Reaction score
13,423
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
So I was all ready to attack Google over this but apparently it doesn't fill in "crimes" and "indictment" regardless of who you are searching for. Like Bill Cosby, for example. But "Hillary Clinton emails" is among the top recommended searches when you start filling in her name.

So, after looking further into this, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Hillary Clinton and is just the way their algorithm operates.

Thread killer...... LOL
 
Top Bottom