Russian Hacking (You People are Idiots)

[Jhhnn]

Yet the real reason Clinton lost is because people who voted for Obama in 2008/2012 chose not to vote this election.

Correct. That's due to a relentless campaign of character assassination by Repubs with ammo conveniently furnished by Putin & spun into propaganda gold.

 

[Jhhnn]

You're missing the point in your defense of your candidate.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy you wanted to win won.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy who should have won won.

Saying that it didn't happen just because your guy won is asking for trouble down the line.

Willful blindness is a shared value among American conservatives. How else could Donald Trump ever be President?

 

[Bird222]

I am fatigued from keeping up with the other thread. This one will be to discuss a different take on this.

It seems that intelligence is quite confident that Russia orchestrated cyber attacks against the US election. This is true independent of any intent or efficacy in undermining a particular candidate or party and changing the votes of the election.

The reaction has been one of divisive partisan politics wherein Americans' main focus is on whether Trump's presidency is legit.

Wake up people. Russia orchestrated an attack on our political system. This is an act of war. In saying so I am not calling for us to declare war on Russia, merely for us to see plainly the aggressive act against the US. Not against Clinton. Not against Democrats. Not against Republicans. Against the US government.

Seeing this as an opportunity to correct an injustice in our election results or otherwise to defend against the notion that the attacks may discredit those results is wrong. We are Americans first. Russia attacked America. America should respond to Russia. When parties respond to each other, even seeing it as an opportunity to discredit each other, we are taking responsibility for Russia's attack. I don't think they could have set it up any better.

Discuss.

It's sad that so many people can't see that because 'their side' won.

 

[JSt0rm]

Yet the real reason Clinton lost is because people who voted for Obama in 2008/2012 chose not to vote this election.

No shit. How many didn't vote because of the propagandist from Russia?

 

[Victorian Gray]

No shit. How many didn't vote because of the propagandist from Russia?

Bingo! Someone gets the point of the interference. It's all about destroying the legitimacy of the political/electoral process. The fewer people that vote, the easier it is for them to win. The Republicans have been working that issue for decades and for this election they apparently got some outside help.

 

[Bitek]

...No, Russia has not tried to influence US elections this way before. And if the US doesn't put its foot down now, when does it take action? ...are we supposed to wait until Russia slips out more plausible-looking fakes before we take action? Do we give Russia the impression that it can do this unhindered in 2020, and maybe embolden it to try hacking voting systems next time?

This is the most threatening part of all of this.

What deterrence has been shown? If anything, they are being encouraged by American partisans.

The Russians are reported to also be acting against our Western European allies.

The country in its current state seems wholly unprepared to confront this Russian aggression. How can we begin to offer a robust defence when we can't even admit we're being punched in the face?

 

[JSt0rm]

This is the most threatening part of all of this.

What deterrence has been shown? If anything, they are being encouraged by American partisans.

The Russians are reported to also be acting against our Western European allies.

The country in its current state seems wholly unprepared to confront this Russian aggression. How can we begin to offer a robust defence when we can't even admit we're being punched in the face?

American authoritarians want to hold hands with authoritarians around the world. The real enemy is gay marriage.

 

[disappoint]

I am fatigued from keeping up with the other thread. This one will be to discuss a different take on this.

It seems that intelligence is quite confident that Russia orchestrated cyber attacks against the US election. This is true independent of any intent or efficacy in undermining a particular candidate or party and changing the votes of the election.

The reaction has been one of divisive partisan politics wherein Americans' main focus is on whether Trump's presidency is legit.

Wake up people. Russia orchestrated an attack on our political system. This is an act of war. In saying so I am not calling for us to declare war on Russia, merely for us to see plainly the aggressive act against the US. Not against Clinton. Not against Democrats. Not against Republicans. Against the US government.

Seeing this as an opportunity to correct an injustice in our election results or otherwise to defend against the notion that the attacks may discredit those results is wrong. We are Americans first. Russia attacked America. America should respond to Russia. When parties respond to each other, even seeing it as an opportunity to discredit each other, we are taking responsibility for Russia's attack. I don't think they could have set it up any better.

Discuss.

Our response should be to take the high road, and denounce irresponsible actions, not stoop to their level.

Also there are too many people in our government that fall for simple phishing attacks that almost no one on these boards for example, would fall for.

They need to be educated on the topic, their education tested, and if they fail then they should be replaced with someone more competent.

 

[cubby1223]

You're missing the point in your defense of your candidate.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy you wanted to win won.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy who should have won won.

Saying that it didn't happen just because your guy won is asking for trouble down the line.

But attempted influence does not hold any greater significance on the basis that the guy you detest won.

I can guarantee you some foreign influences were also trying to push Clinton towards victory over Trump.

My personal opinion is Clinton's own "Deplorables" comment, along with the non-stop identity politics strategy of the Dems, did more damage to her than the DNC emails. But that's just my opinion. At least I have an opinion that actually means something. Really, what is your point? Someone tried to influence an election. So?

 

[agent00f]

Repub voters don't need to understand anything. They won. They make the rules now and your opinions have been relegated into obscurity. You have no power, your ideas have no relevance, your desires no recourse. But by all means continue to lecture as if you have control of the reins of power. It marginalizes you even more.

Perfect candidate for great new jobs rounding up minorities.

 

[agent00f]

Our response should be to take the high road, and denounce irresponsible actions, not stoop to their level.

Just a heads up it's mathematically proven that playing nice is a losing strategy to the sort quoted just above.

We, otoh, have had plenty of time & exposure & are every bit as naive. Witness Trump.

The same research which reveals trump supporters' ethnic resentment also shows they tend to be racially isolated.

Yet the real reason Clinton lost is because people who voted for Obama in 2008/2012 chose not to vote this election.

About as many people voted for Clinton as Obama in 2012 (and her margin of votes about as great), hard as it might be for folks like you to compare numbers that big. The biggest difference was the white non-college vote going +14% for trump and their counterparts +10% for clinton. So it was somewhat of a wash, but unfortunately all the uneducated bumpkins were in the important places electoral-college wise (which btw, is not a real college).

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You're missing the point in your defense of your candidate.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy you wanted to win won.

It matters if someone is trying to influence your system even if the guy who should have won won.

Saying that it didn't happen just because your guy won is asking for trouble down the line.

LMAO!!! I didn't vote for Trump. I'm just calling out all the diversions/excuses by those who supported Clinton for why she didn't win.

 

[WelshBloke]

Really, what is your point? Someone tried to influence an election. So?

That it might be an idea to look into how and why they did it with an eye to stopping them in the future.

Nation states spy on each other all the time. We don't go "Well, Duh!" and ignore it. We try to mitigate any problems that spying causes.

 

[agent00f]

LMAO!!! I didn't vote for Trump. I'm just calling out all the diversions/excuses by those who supported Clinton for why she didn't win.

It's a simple reality that the electoral college just happens to be skewed in favor of white nationalists, and no amount of gloating about that happenstance going in your favor will change the fact.

 

[WelshBloke]

LMAO!!! I didn't vote for Trump. I'm just calling out all the diversions/excuses by those who supported Clinton for why she didn't win.

When people were throwing phrases like "low information voters" around I thought that they were being silly, butthurt and partisan. But you actually seem to want to ignore a possible serious issue just because it gives you some schadenfreude.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You just don't want to accept the simple reality that the electoral college just happens to be skewed in favor of white nationalism.

LMAO!!! Another excuse.......racism. Is that why more blacks and Hispanics voted for Trump than for Romney. Those minority votes helped elect Trump

 

[Londo_Jowo]

When people were throwing phrases like "low information voters" around I thought that they were being silly, butthurt and partisan. But you actually seem to want to ignore a possible serious issue just because it gives you some schadenfreude.

Key word possible. I haven't seen anything that shows people changed their vote based on any of the email that were leaked or Comey's letter.

 

[agent00f]

When people were throwing phrases like "low information voters" around I thought that they were being silly, butthurt and partisan. But you actually seem to want to ignore a possible serious issue just because it gives you some schadenfreude.

He's proud to be low information. Eg:

LMAO!!! Another excuse.......racism. Is that why more blacks and Hispanics voted for Trump than for Romney. Those minority votes helped elect Trump

As I've mentioned on occasion, Obama drew historically high minority votes even for obvious reasons, which is hardly Romney's doing, while Clinton's were in-line with the norm; the numbers here are very straightforward, but no big surprise they still confuse your sort. Trump lost by similar amount of votes to Clinton, more numbers which you obviously have trouble comparing; he just happened to compile minor margins in states with high proportion of your low info friends.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

LMAO!!! Now comes the personal attacks.

 

[WelshBloke]

Key word possible. I haven't seen anything that shows people changed their vote based on any of the email that were leaked or Comey's letter.

Hmmmmm, go with the intelligence agencies of several western nations or brush it off because Londo Jowo on the internet hasn't seen anything?

 

[WelshBloke]

LMAO!!! Now comes the personal attacks.

Well your argument seems to be "I haven't seen anything, therefore nothing happened."

Its hard to not be slightly insulting if you use that argument and you arent privy to some highly sensitive information.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Hmmmmm, go with the intelligence agencies of several western nations or brush it off because Londo Jowo on the internet hasn't seen anything?

I don't deny that the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta's email, I don't see where it changed voters minds and cost Hillary the election like many in here are claiming. There is no evidence that the vote was hacked.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Well your argument seems to be "I haven't seen anything, therefore nothing happened."

Its hard to not be slightly insulting if you use that argument and you arent privy to some highly sensitive information.

I don't find it necessary to insult others during discussions.

 

[Meghan54]

I don't find it necessary to insult others during discussions.

Sure you do....you post here.

 

[WelshBloke]

I don't deny that the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta's email, I don't see where it changed voters minds and cost Hillary the election like many in here are claiming. There is no evidence that the vote was hacked.

Why do you think they did that (acquired and released those emails) if it had no effect?