Russian Times back at it again

[tower912]

Me to a conservative friend in 2016:   You know you are just parroting Russian propaganda, right?

Him:  Nah, they are parroting me.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Me to a conservative friend in 2016:   You know you are just parroting Russian propaganda, right?

Him:  Nah, they are parroting me.

Yes indeed.

These pathetic fucks are now all CYA, "how we possibly have known these insane sums were tainted?"

But you know what they aren't doing? They aren't disavowing the actual content...because they 100% believe in and align with Russia.

As does Tuckems, as does Musk, as does one of the major party candidates for President who has consistently sided with Russia over the U.S.

[jesmu84]

There's clearly a LOT of money out there for anyone on the right who wants to make money

[rocky_warrior]

There's clearly a LOT of money out there for anyone on the right who wants to make money

Again.  Careful.  There's a lot of money in Russian disinformation.  Right wingers called out this time.

[Lennys Tap]

Can you imagine the party of Reagan siding with the leader of Russia?

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

But also, like Rocky says, neither party is immune from being duped.

[Uncle Rico]

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

But also, like Rocky says, neither party is immune from being duped.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*catches breath*

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[tower912]

Thank you, Lenny.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

But also, like Rocky says, neither party is immune from being duped.

Yes, I hate it when Bernie and Kamala keep siding with Putin. Yes, indeed.

[jesmu84]

Again.  Careful.  There's a lot of money in Russian disinformation.  Right wingers called out this time.

I guess I'm not seeing a lot of "rich" lefty/progressive voices.
Like $400k/month rich.

TYT might be the most well off?

And even beyond Russia, there's a TON of wealthy/elite money from US sources for similar voices.

[rocky_warrior]

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

There are social agendas you may or may not disagree with. 

And then there is Russia.  You can't be pro Russia.

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

There are social agendas you may or may not disagree with. 

And then there is Russia.  You can't be pro Russia.

Dang it Ron Johnson!

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

But also, like Rocky says, neither party is immune from being duped.

I guess projection is easier than introspection

[rocky_warrior]

And even beyond Russia, there's a TON of wealthy/elite money from US sources for similar voices.

Don't get me wrong China likes to create US political problem too.  Lots of money in creating political turmoil. 

But if money is flowing for those purposes, it's probably originating from those two sources... Or dumb people that believe them.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I guess projection is easier than introspection

"Florida Man Says Republican Support for Russia Unintentional, Really Democrats Who Keep Siding With Putin"

[JWags85]

I guess I'm not seeing a lot of "rich" lefty/progressive voices.
Like $400k/month rich.

TYT might be the most well off?

And even beyond Russia, there's a TON of wealthy/elite money from US sources for similar voices.

Then you're not really looking.  There are tons of lefty/progressive accounts with 500K+ Twitter followers, plenty with more.

There are also "progressive" accounts that have been called out in the Russian web that was spoken about the last few days.  The difference is they are REALLY far left that they think the Dems/The US government aren't liberal enough so they hate on them too.

[jesmu84]

Then you're not really looking.  There are tons of lefty/progressive accounts with 500K+ Twitter followers, plenty with more.

There are also "progressive" accounts that have been called out in the Russian web that was spoken about the last few days.  The difference is they are REALLY far left that they think the Dems/The US government aren't liberal enough so they hate on them too.

Fair.

I suppose I'm considering those that would be considered the progressive/left equivalents of rubin, pool, etc.

I wouldn't consider rubin/pool/etc to be super far right.

[rocky_warrior]

I might not understand.

Does 500k Twitter followers make one $400k/month wealthy?

There's probably also a difference if someone is being paid by an outside source directly vs building followers organically resulting in revenue generation

https://buzzoid.com/buy-instagram-followers/

[jesmu84]

https://buzzoid.com/buy-instagram-followers/

Well you'd have to have money up front to be able to afford that, no?

[Pakuni]

Intentionally? No. The party of Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? Yes.

But also, like Rocky says, neither party is immune from being duped.

It was so weird how Tucker got lost on his vacation  and wound up in Moscow spewing pro-Russian propaganda.

Or how the party's standard bearer mistakenly said Russia can do "whatever the hell it wants" to certain NATO members.

Or how that same guy forgot to condemn the murder of Alexei Navalny.

Whoops!

[rocky_warrior]

Well you'd have to have money up front to be able to afford that, no?

A couple hundred thousand followers for a couple hundred bucks.

Are you guys actually living under rocks?

[jesmu84]

A couple hundred thousand followers for a couple hundred bucks.

Are you guys actually living under rocks?

So does 500k Twitter followers equate to $400k/month income?

[JWags85]

I might not understand.

Does 500k Twitter followers make one $400k/month wealthy?

There's probably also a difference if someone is being paid by an outside source directly vs building followers organically resulting in revenue generation

I'm not talking about their "organic" revenue sources from Twitter payouts or brand deals or anything.  But those sort of followings are the threshold to become attractive to that sort of outside influence/source.  Its enough to have plenty of eyeballs and also get the engagement that triggers algorithms to push the content to the front.

Its not like that clown Tim Pool is a Kardashian or Cristiano Ronaldo that has 50MM+ followers.  He has 2MM.  There are plenty of lefty shill/propogandist voices that have numbers approaching that.

EDIT:

So does 500k Twitter followers equate to $400k/month income?

What are you even talking about? 

The $400K is supposedly what people were getting paid by Russian proxies.  They viewed the people that they targeted with that sort of follower amount as worthwhile for that sort of sum. 

You claimed, I guess, that there were no leftist voices that were making $400K from social media a month (which alone isn't remotely true at all).  Which isn't what we were talking about.  I was stating that there are plenty of people on the opposite side of the fence who have followings/influence equal to that of people being named the last few days that would attract (and likely have attracted) offers of that nature.

[rocky_warrior]

So does 500k Twitter followers equate to $400k/month income?

No, but you'd take it if it only involved refuting destists takes on muscoop.

[jesmu84]

I'm not talking about their "organic" revenue sources from Twitter payouts or brand deals or anything.  But those sort of followings are the threshold to become attractive to that sort of outside influence/source.  Its enough to have plenty of eyeballs and also get the engagement that triggers algorithms to push the content to the front.

Its not like that clown Tim Pool is a Kardashian or Cristiano Ronaldo that has 50MM+ followers.  He has 2MM.  There are plenty of lefty shill/propogandist voices that have numbers approaching that.

I understand.

My OP was my own observations that more mainstream right commentators seem significantly well funded compared to equivalents on the left, regardless of funding source.

[jesmu84]

I'm not talking about their "organic" revenue sources from Twitter payouts or brand deals or anything.  But those sort of followings are the threshold to become attractive to that sort of outside influence/source.  Its enough to have plenty of eyeballs and also get the engagement that triggers algorithms to push the content to the front.

Its not like that clown Tim Pool is a Kardashian or Cristiano Ronaldo that has 50MM+ followers.  He has 2MM.  There are plenty of lefty shill/propogandist voices that have numbers approaching that.

EDIT:
What are you even talking about? 

The $400K is supposedly what people were getting paid by Russian proxies.  They viewed the people that they targeted with that sort of follower amount as worthwhile for that sort of sum. 

You claimed, I guess, that there were no leftist voices that were making $400K from social media a month (which alone isn't remotely true at all).  Which isn't what we were talking about.  I was stating that there are plenty of people on the opposite side of the fence who have followings/influence equal to that of people being named the last few days that would attract (and likely have attracted) offers of that nature.

Response to your edit: sorry if my OP was a verbal mess. I was simply trying to compare/contrast funding of equivalent right and left commentators.