Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 24, 2020

Created

Sat Nov 23 23:42:34 +0000 2019

Likes

515

Retweets

Source

Twitter for Android

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

You're omitting the key context here. Those are the rates the Trump campaign realized *within the first few days*, the story says. Not on a sustained basis. Any type of advertising will be more effective with a small, initial buy when you're targeting low-hanging fruit. — PolitiTweet.org

@NateSilver538 Per the WSJ today, FB's advanced targeting tools meant "every dollar that the Trump campaign spent o… https://t.co/kLwbsO1DU1

Posted Nov. 23, 2019 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Why are we uncritically quoting from Brad Parscale and other Trump campaign operatives, who have every incentive to claim their tactics were the reason for Trump's win? There is no actual objective evidence that their Facebook ad targeting strategy actually mattered very much. — PolitiTweet.org

“Facebook and Twitter were the reason we won this thing. Twitter for Mr. Trump. And Facebook for fundraising." -Bra… https://t.co/Aw2gAOpFht

Posted Nov. 23, 2019 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

The Trump campaign ultimately did not spend very much on Facebook ads. Why? Because those ROIs did not scale. They would have been insane to spend so little if they were getting 2 or 3x their money back on a sustained basis. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Nov. 23, 2019 Hibernated