Trump Campaign Pays Millions to Overseas Big Data Firm


From today’s NBC News:

LONDON — Big data crunched in a nondescript office more than 3,000 miles from the U.S. might just convince you to cast a ballot for Donald Trump.

In September alone, the Trump campaign paid British firm Cambridge Analytica $5 million to help target voters.

The company says it holds data on 230 million adults across the U.S. — and around 4,000 “data points” on each of them.

Using transaction information from loyalty cards, club and gym memberships and charity donations, it seeks to understand which way an individual might lean politically — and how to potentially change their mind.

“The more you know about someone, the better you can engage with them and the more relevant you can make the communications that you send to them, so our job is to use data to understand audiences,” chief executive officer Alexander Nix told NBC News.


This is news why? Both parties have been doing this for a while now.


Because the Clinton camp and their cronies in the media are getting desperate


How is this news?


:yawn: Next news will be trump gets hair cut in france, just because…


LOL, this is what Big Data firms, and political campaigns, do.

Comical to even discuss this.


A far more important question would be whether the Trump campaign took foreign company or government donations in order to fund itself and, as a result, altered its platform to align with the wishes or interests of those foreign companies and governments.


There is a mountain of evidence that one campaign did just that…

…and it wasn’t the Trump campaign.


It’s just good to know that Trump is no different than most other politicians. He targets voters with what he thinks they want to hear rather than with what he really thinks. He’s no straight talker or truth teller.




That’s an opinion. I believe this proves Trump is using his own money in his campaign contrary to what the left has been saying


This is ridiculous. Using analytics to target voters is good money management.

For example, if you are creating a sub-campaign targeting independent, right leaning female voters you want to make sure you have as many email addresses that fit that profile.

The campaign pays per email address, so why send emails to men or to die-hard female democrats if the sub-campaign ad is targeted towards independent, right leaning female voters?

The Big Data firms simply allow advertisers to better target the intended audience of an ad.


but it is alright for HRC to have bombarded us via a certain internet service provider with full page ads on our log-in screen for months prior to any ads from DJT or Johnson or Stein… :ehh:


Exactly… I for one am sick of seeing Hillary ads popping up while my children are watching YouTube Kids and all the ads during World Series game 7 were disgraceful. Kids should not be subjected (and targeted) for these negative ads.


Well that is one interpretation of what he did.

Another is that he sincerely wanted to get in touch with what the issues are for the common Joe or Jane on the street. He also hired someone to listen to phone-in radio talk shows for a year before deciding to run in order to ascertain what was of real concern to ordinary citizens.

It may be that he only wants to “target… voters with what he thinks they want to hear,” but it also may be that he really does want to know what is of most or real concern to them.

Part of coming up with “what he really thinks” is to be better informed about what those people that “he thinks” about are truly concerned about. If a politician is truly concerned about the good of the people, it would seem a no-brainier to get some sense of what the people think is to their good or benefit, no?

The conclusion you draw that he is “no straight talker or truth teller” is a non sequitur. It doesn’t follow from the evidence you have provided. Other possibilities are, in fact, just as, if not more, plausible – as I have outlined above.

Imagine a politician who has no clue about what the people want or what might benefit them but only thinks about them as “deplorables” or with disdain as “ordinary Americans,” and instead chooses to base their policies upon how much cash can be funneled into his/her coffers from interested parties no matter where they live, even if they live on large estates or in palaces in foreign countries. Now THAT would be a real cause to be concerned, wouldn’t it?

Certainly, these traits would NOT be descriptive of someone who was a “straight talker or truth teller,” especially one who admittedly has a “public” and a “private” position on important issues.



It is news onl to those desperate to get HC elected and to draw attention away from her myriad corrupts actions.:rolleyes:


You said it much better than I could have. :thumbsup:


LOL at this being news. Come on. For someone as ripe for criticism as Trump, we don’t need to clutter the board with this sort of non-story, do we?


Pretty comical how desperate the Clinton campaign has become.

I heard that Hillary made something up about Trump being supported by the Klu Klux Klan newspaper (which does not exist), and Obama said that the day Trump is elected, Medicare checks will stop being cut and Michelle’s garden will be ripped out. :smiley:

Where do they get this stuff?


They are desperate. Hillary thought the presidency would be handed to her!!! Man was she wrong!


what’s even crazier is that I read that the current grand dragon of the KKK is supporting Hillary… but you don’t hear that in the MSN.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit