Actually it was "expert [Dr. Robert Epstein]: Google swung 2.6 to 10.4 million votes" towards Hillary in 2016.  He could have won the popular by 2,868,686 for all we know because the 2.6 million was a 'rock bottom minimum'. video: https://westvirginia.forums.rivals.com/threads/googles-got-some-splaining-to-do-swayed-2-6-to-10-4-million-votes.206887/ https://twitter.com/goodmedicine4us/status/1151677370245369856  She won the popular vote in the November election by 2,864,974 votes.  link  So rock bottom maximum win of popular vote for her would be 264,974 and the maximum loss of popular vote by Hillary would be <7,535,026>.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that biased search rankings can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more – up to 80% in some demographic groups. Extrapolating from the mathematics introduced in this report, in articles published in February 2016 and thereafter, the lead author of the PNAS study predicted that a pro-Clinton bias in Google’s search results would, over time, shift at least 2.6 million votes to Clinton. She won the popular vote in the November election by 2,864,974 votes. Without the pro-Clinton bias in Google’s search results, her win margin in the popular vote might have been negligible. The implication of this, if it can be replicated,  is pretty clear. Google acted as a political actor n 2016 to fluff for Hillary Clinton. The skewing of search results is clearly a donation in kind to the Clinton campaign and should be investigated by the FEC. https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2017/05/30/google-gave-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-victory/ "By inserting negative search suggestions under the name of a candidate, search engines like Google can shift the opinions of undecided voters by up to 43.4 percent, according to new research by a team at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and reported exclusively by Breitbart News."  The lead author of the study, Dr. Robert Epstein, has previously conducted research into what he calls the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME). This research showed that the manipulation of results pages in search engines can shift the voting preferences of undecideds by anywhere between 20 and 80 percent, depending on the demographic.  Recall They also had this going on: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-10/google-was-working-get-hillary-clinton-elected-silent-donation-according-leaked http://archive.is/LQoWc#selection-925.0-924.3   ..an internal email on [Tucker Carlson] Monday night's show from a senior Google employee who admitted to using company resources to make a "silent donation" to a liberal group that was creating ads and donating funds to bus Latinos to voting stations during the 2016 election in key swing states, in an effort to help Hillary Clinton win.   That didn't work out as well as planned   In the end, Google was disappointed. As Mario herself conceded "ultimately after all was said and done, the Latino community did come out to vote, and completely surprised us. We never anticipated that 29% of Latinos would vote for Trump. No one did. -Tucker Carlson  So in light of that, how many Latinos are they planning on busing to vote in 2020 and are they busing them in from Mexico, central America, South America?