Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why Do So Many Liberals "Like" Mitt Romney On Facebook?

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the strange-bedfellows dept.

Facebook 376

pigrabbitbear writes "Mother Jones reports that, 'In recent weeks, a host of liberal types have complained that their Facebook accounts have erroneously "liked" Romney's page, and some are floating the theory that the Romney campaign has deployed a virus or used other nefarious means to inflate the candidate's online stature. This conspiratorial notion has spawned a Facebook community forum, and its own page: "Hacked By Mitt Romney" (cute url: facebook.com/MittYouDidntBuildThat)' So what's going on? Is the Romney campaign engaging in some tech wizardry to hijack Americans' Facebook pages? Seems unlikely, but Romney did somehow manage to acquire millions of fake Twitter followers. But it looks like the Romney campaign isn't behind this one — Facebook and its mobile app is."

cancel ×

376 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Simple mix up (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621753)

I'm pretty sure the folks just assumed they were liking a page about an android. Honest mistake, that's all.

Re:Simple mix up (-1, Troll)

Jonah Hex (651948) | about 2 years ago | (#41622013)

So does this go the other way too? Are Romney supporters accidentally "Like"ing Obama's page? Or do they just not use smart phones as well as not using their smarts in general? - HEX

Re:Simple mix up (0)

mcgrew (92797) | about 2 years ago | (#41622247)

So does this go the other way too? Are Romney supporters accidentally "Like"ing Obama's page?

Considering TFA's author's theory, probably. It made sense to me: people "like" Romney (and likely Obama as well) just to hear what he has to say, and maybe catch him in some idiocy they can use against him.

Of course, in TFA it's more like "to see what both candidates have to say."

Re:Simple mix up (2)

chill (34294) | about 2 years ago | (#41622117)

Are you saying they saw "If you Liked Al Gore, check out Mitt Romney" messages and just clicked?

Re:Simple mix up (5, Informative)

Andy Dodd (701) | about 2 years ago | (#41622131)

One other thing is, to participate on discussions on a page, you must "like" it.

So some of those liberals that "like" him may have "liked" him for the purposes of trolling the page.

Re:Simple mix up (3, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | about 2 years ago | (#41622187)

...which makes this comment from one of TFAs twice as funny:
“I’ve deleted 5 people,” one read. “This is the only place that I have any intolerance. If you like that dude, even just on the Internet, we are enemies. No apologies.”

(Basically, if you facebook-like Romney, that guy considers you an enemy.)

Re:Simple mix up (3, Interesting)

gfxguy (98788) | about 2 years ago | (#41622361)

Sad, funny, what's the difference? I've seen a lot of posts like that on FB, though... "I will unfriend anybody who [has a different opinion on politics]." Even when I agree with some point, I often post contradictory just to see if they follow up on it... and if they do, I'm better off for it.

FP (0, Offtopic)

baldass_newbie (136609) | about 2 years ago | (#41621755)

This first post brought to you by Obama for President.

Re:FP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621793)

posted by someone with the perfect name

Issues (5, Funny)

Oh Gawwd Peak Oil (1000227) | about 2 years ago | (#41621757)

The thing is, Romney has been on every side of every issue. So there's something to like about him for everyone!

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621775)

Examples?

Re:Issues (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621809)

Every time he opens his mouth in a new venue.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621821)

Such as?

Re:Issues (1, Troll)

Gerinych (1393861) | about 2 years ago | (#41621839)

You didn't get the joke, did you?

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621865)

I understand the joke, but this particular joke is also an accusation which should be backed up by facts.

Re:Issues (4, Funny)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#41621921)

I believe he's taking a 'wide stance' on the abortion issue.

And "obama care" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622085)

I believe he's taking a 'wide stance' on the abortion issue.

Governor Mitt did some "liberal" things about healthcare when he was governor of Mass. Then as Rep Pres candidate, he was against Obama Care - similar to what he did - WTF?!? Now, he's back to being in favor of it - I think - I lost track.

Paul Ryan is also a flip flopper. As a Congressman, he brought up some important issues about Medicare - like cutting $700+billion to keep it from going bust - and now as Ryan the VP candidate, he's against it.

That's why when the Presidential debates are happening, I tell folks that if I want to see that much hot air, I'll turn my furnace on. Because they are debating issues that the President has little or no control over: taxes (Congress controls that) and the economy - tell me how the President can do anything about unemployment and the economy?

And as far as the VP debates go tonight, I'm going to watch something that is more intelligent and pertinent to the economy and our country: monkeys flinging poo at one another.

Re:Issues (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622063)

Minimum wage
Vietnam service
Abortion
Roe v. Wade
Stem cell research
Healthcare
47%
Gun control
Climate change and greenhouse gas reduction

It was actually not a joke. There is *no* issue which this man has not claimed to stand for just one side of.

Re:Issues (2, Interesting)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#41622095)

47%

I don't see what all the brew-haha is about on that one. I mean, he actually hit that one smack on the head.

I guess the truth hurts....

Re:Issues (5, Informative)

chill (34294) | about 2 years ago | (#41622197)

No, he didn't.

He took a statistic from a WSJ article that said 47% of the population was getting a check from the gov't for one reason or another and assumed that meant they were all welfare queens, life-long Democrats and rabidly pro-Obama.

He didn't take into account the number of people getting Social Security. Nor Veteran's Benefits. Nor Military Pensions. Hell, nor active duty military drawing a paycheck. Nor many, many other categories of payments that go to people who aren't just in it for a handout.

Or are you trying to tell me that every military person, active duty or retiree; senior citizen or person drawing veteran's disability is a died-in-the-wool Democrat and Obama supporter?

He was talking to a bunch of fucking morons who can't think beyond simple sentences and telling them what they wanted to hear. He was being a money grubbing, lying politician.

Re:Issues (-1, Flamebait)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#41622223)

He took a statistic from a WSJ article that said 47% of the population was getting a check from the gov't

I believe it was more along the lines of 47% of the people in the US that pay no federal tax...many of which are also on the dole...

Frankly, anyone working (or able to work) should be working AND...have to pay SOME federal tax..I don't care if it is $10 or so....just as long as everyone has some skin in the game, eh?

I don't like it that a large block of people are just voting themselves more money out of the general tax fund.

Re:Issues (5, Informative)

chill (34294) | about 2 years ago | (#41622393)

My grandmother and grandfather invested post-tax for decades. They did this so they could draw their investment income in retirement and not have to pay federal tax on it. In their retirement years they collected Social Security -- for which they paid into earlier, and drew from their retirement funds -- which had been taxed years before. They paid no income tax during their retirement years and rightfully so.

My daughter has a job that earned her only a couple of thousand dollars last year. She didn't pay income tax because she lived at home and went to school full time. She was claimed on MY return and her income was reported there.

However, under the method used by the WSJ she would be reported as paying no Federal tax as it was all returned.

Keep in mind, anyone working has Social Security and Medicare withholdings. Both are FEDERAL taxes they pay and aren't returned at tax time. They just aren't INCOME tax.

The amount of money would would collect from the lowest end of the spectrum is offset by what it would cost for you to collect. You'd actually LOSE money processing their returns and everything that goes with it.

Think of those pictures that occasionally make the news where a doctor frames the $0.01 check he received from Medicare and the $0.42 stamped envelope next to it. Are you honestly saying you want to see that?

For every complex problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant and wrong. Demanding that EVERYONE pay SOMETHING is an example.

Re:Issues (1)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | about 2 years ago | (#41622349)

I guess the truth hurts....

Like the truth about Mitt being two-faced at the head of this thread?

Re:Issues (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621855)

Abortion, taxation of the middle class, exporting jobs over seas, just to name a few.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621897)

Don't forget gun control.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622003)

and Healthcare

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622089)

And sex with animals.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622259)

Links?

Re:Issues (5, Informative)

Oh Gawwd Peak Oil (1000227) | about 2 years ago | (#41621889)

Abortion. He's gone back and forth on that since the 90s.

He's been pretty solidly advocating new laws against abortion recently, but a couple days ago he told the Des Moines Register, "There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda." Then his campaign hastily "corrected" that a couple hours later and said he "would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life."

Re:Issues (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#41621947)

Which in and of itself is weasily. He's already on record as saying he would seek to kill Obamacare, except for the bits he figures voters will like.

Seems to be working, too. Certainly he's polling better, though the state projections still heavily favor Obama.

Re:Issues (1, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#41622081)

Then again...people might be finally starting to wake up, and realize that voting a small soap dish into office would be better than voting obama in again....

I shudder to think about a new 4 years of a BHO administration...unbridled by the fear of re-election hanging over their heads.

Re:Issues (4, Insightful)

Shadow99_1 (86250) | about 2 years ago | (#41622169)

I'm a registered independent and frankly I think that soap dish would be better then 4 years form either of them...

Re:Issues (0, Troll)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#41622257)

I'm a registered independent and frankly I think that soap dish would be better then 4 years form either of them...

I'm reg, as independent too.

And, while I largely agree with you....realistically, I realize that I only have 2 choices facing me....one is a given, the other is not.

I'll pick the unknown of the two as my 'soap dish'...since I KNOW how bad the incumbent choice is....had 4x years to see that.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622249)

http://www.roboromney.com [roboromney.com]

Re:Issues (0)

Titan1080 (1328519) | about 2 years ago | (#41621815)

L2 liberaltroll. you forgot to call him Rmoney, noob.

Re:Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622293)

We just call him "Mittens".

Hey, wealthy lady !

Perfect Match (-1, Troll)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41621915)

The thing is, Romney has been on every side of every issue.

So then, the perfect Republican counterpart to a man who claimed to hate Gitmo yet leaves it open, claimed to hate war yet doubles down on drone strikes and issues a surge in Afghanistan, claims to hate Wall Street while bailing out (and taking huge donations from) giant Wall Street banks and companies run by democratic campaign donors, claims to hate the oil industry while taking huge donations from BP before the oil spill.

In a world where you get to choose between two Mega Flip-Floppers, the best you can do is chose the one who the press pays the most attention to living up to what he says he will do.

Currently that means only Republicans. The press does not care at all what Democrats will do, and rationalize any action they take. At least when you vote Republican you know the press will do their damnedest to catch them out in something.

Re:Perfect Match (1)

Gerinych (1393861) | about 2 years ago | (#41622059)

the best you can do is chose the one who the press pays the most attention to living up to what he says he will do.

Currently that means only Republicans.

To be fair, the Republican party got a lot of media attention in part because they had, like, 6 people running for the position of a Republican candidate (I'm awful with terminology).

Not over four years (2, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41622179)

To be fair, the Republican party got a lot of media attention in part because they had, like, 6 people running for the position of a Republican candidate

That's just the last two years.

The media has ignored just about any possibly negative thing to say about Obama over the course of four years; even longer if you include the campaign leading up to the last election.

There would be no such problem with Romney, even after the election is over. The press will gladly latch on to each and every mistake made. Indeed without other Republican candidates in the picture they will look at him ever more closely.

Re:Not over four years (2)

lgw (121541) | about 2 years ago | (#41622301)

Indeed. The press has been building in this direction for about 10 years now. There used to be some bias, sure, but there was at least some attempt at even-handedness. Now we seems firmly back to 18-19th century-style yellow journalism. When the National Enquirer was up for a Pulitzer because they were the only paper to run a political scandal story, something is pretty broken.

In an odd coincidence, redership/viewership of major news outlets has plummetted over the last 10 years. Almost as if a new outlet that's totally in the tank for one political party wasn't all that appealing to people.

Re:Not over four years (-1, Flamebait)

Jeng (926980) | about 2 years ago | (#41622333)

The media has ignored just about any possibly negative thing to say about Obama over the course of four years; even longer if you include the campaign leading up to the last election.

They still say negative things about Obama, I think you are just used to the complete fucking failure that was Bush.

It's like the difference between one of those snap things you throw to the ground vs 5 pounds of C4.

Just because there isn't enough to make your ears ring that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Proof is in the reporting of what was and now is (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41622421)

Since Obama is carrying over, and mostly doubling down on, most Bush policies (use of drones, attacking Libya for freedom, warrantless wiretapping, funneling government money to large corporations, TSA/Homeland Security) yet receives none of the same negative coverage of same that Bush received - I fail to see how you can possibly make the case that Obama's negative coverage is anywhere near what a Republican would receive.

Romney cannot carry forward the same policies without a ton a negative press. Obama can. That has been proven to us over four years now.

Re:Perfect Match (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622241)

So then, the perfect Republican counterpart to a man who claimed to hate Gitmo yet leaves it open

The fault of the States that wouldn't accept the prisoner transfers because of security concerns.

claimed to hate war yet doubles down on drone strikes and issues a surge in Afghanistan

Leaving Afghanistan when their own military can't defend against the crazies from Russia and Pakistan isn't very responsible.

claims to hate Wall Street while bailing out (and taking huge donations from) giant Wall Street banks and companies run by democratic campaign donors

The bank bailout happened under Bush, genius, also does it bug you that bulk of American manufacturing didn't go under? That the companies and Unions that built the middle class and provide living wage jobs with benefits worth having still exist? Well, suck it, jackass!

claims to hate the oil industry while taking huge donations from BP before the oil spill.

And yet you say nothing about Citizens United. Here is an idea: ask your Representative and Senators to legislate against it to end these campaign contributions that you so despise or would that negatively impact the political party you agree with?

Re:Issues (5, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#41622029)

That's the great thing about Romney as a presidential candidate: there are so many choices. I like moderate Mitt! I like severely conservative Mitt, with Spock's beard accessory! Collect them all!

If pro-choice Mitt met pro-life Mitt, would there be an antimatter explosion?

Re:Issues (-1)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#41622031)

The thing is, Romney has been on every side of every issue. So there's something to like about him for everyone!

Sounds like Obama over the years that you're describing....hell, he changes based on the audience he happens to have attending in front of him at the time....imagine.....

I'll take it! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621783)

ANYTHING in the white house, is better than a muslim sympathizing NIGGER.

Re:I'll take it! (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | about 2 years ago | (#41621951)

Remember the Reichstag! [wikipedia.org]

Nobody believes that you are anything but an Obama supporter trying to "show" everyone what Romney supporters are like.

Because Romney is a liberal. (4, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | about 2 years ago | (#41621787)

except when he's not.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#41621831)

He is what's known as a neo-liberal, like Reagan and Thatcher.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622025)

"Liberal" is yet another term co-opted by the spin doctors over time. Other such terms are "hacker" and "anarchist". None of which are recognized by the general public under their original definitions.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (0)

fermion (181285) | about 2 years ago | (#41621911)

Actually, given that Mitt Romney is a Massachusetts Republican, that he pushed universal health care as governor, that his kids are reported to have used fertility treatments that by Paul Ryan standards would involve the murder of babies, I figured it would not be as bad as say the second Bush. I figure a lot of what he is doing is because it is what he is paid to do, and the powers with money really aren't going to let the religious fanatic let the country devolve into a place where those fanatics are free to commit terrorist acts and thus impede commerce. At the end of the day I would, as a middle class person, have to pay more taxes and there may an issue with retirement, but the gloom and doom would not come.

That was until the picture of him smiling over the death of Americans. That is not cool. When people die, even if you don't like them, even if their death is going is going to bring you untold wealth and power, you don't smile. Obama was not caught smiling when he walked up and later down the hall to announce the death of Bin Laden. Someone who is so happy that someone is dead that he can't keep it to himself for even a second scares me more than anything.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (1)

kaatochacha (651922) | about 2 years ago | (#41622091)

Some people smile and laugh at uncomfortable things. I've got a friend who laughs when you tell him sad news, then when you ask him why, he laughs some more. He can't stop himself.
And no, he's not crazy.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (1)

fermion (181285) | about 2 years ago | (#41622225)

And I would not be faulting him for that if were to be CEO for HP. But he wants to be President of what he would probably characterize as the greatest and most powerful country in the world. This requires a person that can handle these high pressure situations without appearing crazy. I can argue that i have friends involuntary twitch their heads, or cannot hold a conversation without getting confrontational, or need to pee every half hour. None of these things reflects on the person, but in some cases may indicate they are suited for a certain profession. For example, if Romney is going to smile every time he is asked to give condolences when a marine dies, that may not be good for morale.

Re:Because Romney is a liberal. (3, Interesting)

flyingsquid (813711) | about 2 years ago | (#41622291)

If you'd asked me about Romney a month ago, I'd have said he seemed like an okay guy. Boring, but okay. I'd have voted for him if I thought he had a better economic plan than Obama.

But the Libya press conference changed my mind. He was openly gloating. Maybe the Obama administration did screw up in Libya. But Romney saw this first as an opportunity to score points on Obama, and second as a tragedy, if he even thought it was a tragedy at all. He went through the motions of expressing regret, but that asshole smirk was the only genuine, believable part of his entire performance. What kind of person does that, I thought? Then it hit me: the kind of person who picks on a gay kid, holds him down, hacks off his hair, then when confronted years later, lies about it. An asshole.

That Romney went back behind the curtain again for a bit. I wondered if maybe I'd been too harsh on him. Then came the 47% clip. Some people said he was just playing to the crowd. But again what I found striking was the way Romney spoke. He was dynamic, engaged, alive. He didn't sound like the pandering guy on the campaign trail. There was conviction.

People ask about the real Mitt Romney... watch those speeches, and you'll see him, you'll see the real Mitt Romney slip out from behind the carefully constructed mask.

Happens with Paul Ryan, too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621805)

My father's account was showing that he liked Paul Ryan this morning.. he most definitely did NOT choose that.

A like isn't always a like (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621837)

I try not to be overly political on my Facebook account but I do like certain things just to see what some groups I would oppose are up to. Other times I subscribe to the pages of tech companies that I don't like as much as I find it useful to be informed of due to my job. Just because you're on a like list doesn't mean someone likes you.

Are you kidding me? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621845)

What a retarded post.

Romney isnt "hacking" your stupid Facebook account. Most of these dopes were likely drunk on FB and liked it themselves, had their nutcase "friends" start yelling at them, and now they want to blame someone else for their screwup.

Sounds just like a typical Obama supporter.

Re:Are you kidding me? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621957)

go fuck yourself, seriously, there is no typical obama supporter you twit, just like there is no typical romney support. But your a typical douchebag, so there is that.

Re:Are you kidding me? (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#41622035)

go fuck yourself, seriously, there is no typical obama supporter you twit, just like there is no typical romney support. But your a typical douchebag, so there is that.

Well, at least he's behaving better than you (or are you the same person trying to be funny?), not that that is saying much.

Re:Are you kidding me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622219)

MOD PARENT UP

Using "Like" to stream "Lies" (4, Insightful)

domulys (1431537) | about 2 years ago | (#41621849)

Some people "like" Romney only to get updates from his social media feed. Think of it as automated 'opposition research'. What Romney days one day, my neighbor repeats the next, so it gives me a leg up.

Re:Using "Like" to stream "Lies" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622065)

Arguing with people who've already made up their minds makes you look like an idiot. But I guess if the shoe fits...

Well, Does Anyone Care? (1)

gpronger (1142181) | about 2 years ago | (#41621873)

OK, so I do use Facebook. And yes, I am massively tired of the political ads. But, do I care who has "liked" either candidate? Or, more importantly, will that impact who I vote for; likely not.

Or are we now in an age where the popularity of a candidate on Facebook now is part of how we determine the candidate's potential for office?

I hope not, but am afraid it may be so.

Re:Well, Does Anyone Care? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#41621959)

Or are we now in an age where the popularity of a candidate on Facebook now is part of how we determine the candidate's potential for office?

If people are buying fake Twitter followers, and talking about how many Facebook likes you have ... then someone seems to believe that's a valid metric.

I bet it even bumped his Klout score. Which, again, someone believes means something.

Why are media pundits so obtuse? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621883)

They think a Facebook "like" means something, that it is symbolic of supporting whatever is "liked". It's a pointless mouse-click that most people don't give more than a second of thought to. The only people who actually believe (or say they believe) that "liking" something on Facebook is Facebook itself, in order to promote itself as a great source of ad-revenue or user-data.

Given the choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621907)

Why would you like Barry over Mitt?

Re:Given the choice (1)

JoeZeppy (715167) | about 2 years ago | (#41622099)

Because I think social conservatives are busybody prudes, and I don't believe in supply side economics.

Re:Given the choice (1)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 2 years ago | (#41622303)

Because I think social conservatives are busybody prudes, and I believe in trickle-down government.

FTFY

Really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621919)

These are the stories that people post about on /.? I'll just go ahead and vote anyway if no one minds.

Not Just Romney (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621929)

Both campaigns have been doing this...not sure how, but I've been seeing complaints from left-wing friends wondering how the hell they 'liked' Romney's page and a roughly-equal number of complaints from right-wing friends wondering how the hell they 'liked' Obama's page.

I've seen too many complaints about this to believe that it's just mis-clicks or accidents. Somehow or another, the campaigns have been getting into peoples' list of likes without them knowing it.

Re:Not Just Romney (2)

MisterMidi (1119653) | about 2 years ago | (#41622007)

You can buy Facebook likes, Google +1s or Twitter followers by the thousands, and this is probably what the campaign teams have been doing. I don't know how the sellers get their likes though. It could be a lot of fake accounts, it could be worms hidden in games or maybe Facebook itself selling likes.

Obligatory Sun Tzu (4, Insightful)

cmiller173 (641510) | about 2 years ago | (#41621933)

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle. - Sun Tzu

I'd be willing to be the Obama campaign has an account somewhere that has liked Mitt as well.

Black Box voting should come to mind (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 2 years ago | (#41621941)

It seems like if you can not win, then simply cheat.

Re:Black Box voting should come to mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622227)

Sounds like a quote from the DNC's election strategy in states with no Vote ID laws.

Figures ... (0)

NoSalt (801989) | about 2 years ago | (#41621943)

In other words, if you’ve ever accidentally fumbled your thumbs over a political story or tapped the wrong ad on your iPhone, you might accidentally ‘like’ Mitt Romney

It's probably all of those liberal lunkheads that were in such a hurry to dismiss any Romney ad that popped up on their device, that they inadvertently "liked" him.
LOL ... Serves them right.

Re:Figures ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41621999)

Ermahgerd! Teh liburals!! Theys out to getcha!

What is this even doing here? (1, Redundant)

cjc25 (1961486) | about 2 years ago | (#41621955)

So nobody is doing any clickjacking, there are plenty of legitimate reasons people who don't "like" Romney might capital-L "Like" Romney's feed, and Facebook's mobile interface is a little cluttered.

This is not a story, this is a series of banal statements including "clickjacking," "Romney," and "Facebook" to drive traffic (and it unfortunately worked on me).

uhh, practical reasons (4, Insightful)

ThorGod (456163) | about 2 years ago | (#41621961)

Perhaps they just wanted to see what his current platform was by viewing their wall.

Also, it's routine for people to "challenge" the choices of others when those choices are apparently strong and rigid. Maybe some liberals "like" conservative topics/people as a way to show their friends that they've considered those topics/people.

That's a different segment of voters though ... (1)

NickFortune (613926) | about 2 years ago | (#41622191)

Maybe some liberals "like" conservative topics/people as a way to show their friends that they've considered those topics/people.

Could be. But those people are probably not the same people who are complaining that their facebook account erroneously liked Mr. Romney.

The obnoxious whining of the "independent" (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 2 years ago | (#41621963)

What if one 'liked' both candidates and read their updates in order to make a better-informed decision come November? Nah - wouldn't happen. Cuz [sic] then all of your friends would see that you 'liked' the other guy, and would give you shit for making such a public preference. I would.

Bless your heart. You must be one of these [hulu.com] .

Stick a fork in Slashdot (0)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | about 2 years ago | (#41621981)

It's done.

You have become World Net Daily.

a host of liberal types have complained that their Facebook accounts have erroneously "liked" Romney's page, and some are floating the theory that the Romney campaign has deployed a virus or used other nefarious means to inflate the candidate's online stature.

I see the ideologues are as disconnected from reality as usual. Keep clinging to your little labels like they matter, though. That;'s working REALLY WELL!

A one act play (1)

FacePlant (19134) | about 2 years ago | (#41621997)

Maw: Who you gonna vote fer?
Paw: I dunno, who you gonna vote fer?
Maw: I think I'ma gonna vote fer Romney.
Paw: Why you gonna do that?
Maw: Well, people on Facebook like him.
Paw: what about all those policies that you disagree with?
Maw: Who cares about that? People on Facebook like him. That's what really matters.

Why "Like"? (4, Insightful)

DarthVain (724186) | about 2 years ago | (#41622017)

Why do I have friends on Facebook that "like" pepsi, amex, costco, walmart, etc...

Why do they post religious jesus quotes in cheesy photos of angles or little girls praying, or images with stupid insperational quotes, or stupid photos of things to "like": Like if you don't want to kill kittens, etc...

Tempted many times to simply post on my wall: "Seriously WTF is wrong with you people!"

Hacked! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622021)

/. hacked by political propaganda... C'mon. Real stories, please?!?!

This is not a Romney issue, it IS a Facebook issue (4, Insightful)

Aqualung812 (959532) | about 2 years ago | (#41622043)

I have noticed a ton of my friends that "like" things I know they know nothing about.

For example, a friend of mine that is a stay at home mom that can't use her iPhone "likes" Barracuda networks. When I asked her about this, she was clueless.

I've also seen many other friends liking things that do not fit them at all. I mean, they shouldn't be even seeing ads for these things, so I don't buy TFA's assumption that these are fat-finger issues.

Nuthin' that happens on facebook surprises me... (2)

Kazoo the Clown (644526) | about 2 years ago | (#41622051)

Zuckerberg is always dicking around with it looking for an angle. Maybe he wanted to give Romney a boost, just to see if he can.

OBAMA did it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622057)

Well my facebook page sent status updates stating that I liked obama and it was time to go get a mail in valot and vote, that same day quite a few friends told me about this and they know how much of a Romney advocate I am. I had unliked obama months ago yet this appeared. This is called a false flag to your own people so that velify Romney. I guess if you loose on issues poison the well anyway you can.

Why Romney specifically? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622129)

If this is a Facebook issue then shouldn't it be hitting the Obama page too? And every other page that you can like?

Moron filter? (1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 2 years ago | (#41622137)

If you use the number of "likes" (or any other information from Facebook) to make decisions of any kind...you might be a moron.

Meh (1)

mdarksbane (587589) | about 2 years ago | (#41622139)

And I constantly hear about Obama because one of my friends "liked" him. Don't see much difference from the lame ads on youtube and pandora :P

I won't join Facebook until... (5, Funny)

Kaenneth (82978) | about 2 years ago | (#41622183)

They add a Loathe button.

Social networking, such a mystery. (2)

Tarantulas (710962) | about 2 years ago | (#41622189)

They don't understand it, so it must be witchcraft. Here's a solution. To get rid of the evil demons that inhabit your iPhone, simply bury it at a crossroads at midnight during a full moon. Problem solved.

Someone who lives on this planet outside the US: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622199)

Who the fuck is mitt romney and wtf is a liberal?

Re:Someone who lives on this planet outside the US (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622265)

Mitt Romney - Republican (conservative party) candidate for US President.

Liberal - Person who believes that the government should confiscate money from the successful so that their crony demographic supporters (minorities, unions, teachers, etc.) can receive this money and use it to ensure everyone lives equally in a state of misery (socialism).

Clickjacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622261)

TFA: ...rejected the idea that the Romney camp was engaging in clickjacking...

So, a user clicks on an advert or a story, with no intention of "liking" Mitt, but ends up doing so anyway, without any visual ques that the "like" has occurred... and this is somehow not clickjacking? Isn't that kind of exactly how it works?

hmmm (1, Funny)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 years ago | (#41622277)

Lets see... most liberals have Iphones/Ipads
Most Apple users consider themselves "Internet experts" and are really clueless ...
Apple Maps ...
They click to like the local farmers market/Headshop/Union headquarters...
Apple maps has that listed as "Mit Romney!"
Viola... mystery solved.

bit flip flop (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 years ago | (#41622305)

Skynet decided to flip a bit to match his flipping style

Like == Follow (3, Insightful)

JustinKSU (517405) | about 2 years ago | (#41622331)

I "Like" all my representatives regardless of party and whether or not I agree with them. In essence what I want to do is "follow" them so I can keep tabs on what my representative's PR machine is pumping out.

Who doesn't like a joke? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41622345)

My work contact in the UK is still convinced Romney isn't real and is an international practical joke being pulled by the US.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>