Politics Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

What's that have to do with anything? Certainly not the narrative I proposed. And certainly not the election of the president.

---

I think we have diverted from the original point...I was simply saying the Dems miscalculated/underestimated, possibly based on polls of popular vote. More people voted for her than against her. The lack of action to prevent Russia from intervening allowed people to be exposed to constant Hillary bashing, much of which was fictional. After re-reading your initial reply it seems as if you believe the Russian ads/posts were mostly based on real facts? Regardless the media coverage was a joke, and spent more time talking about Hillary’s emails than anything negative Trump was associated, including grab them by the p***y.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masterofreality

Yeah. I read the whole article. This is the key passage:

"Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the ranking Democrat on the panel, said in an opening statement that “we were caught flat-footed at the outset and our collective response was inadequate to meet Russia’s escalation.”"

Anything after that, including OBummer's "stern warning to Putin" which was largely ignored ("Red Line in the Sand" Obama was great at "stern warnings" with no follow-up action) is nothing more than cover their 2 year old asses from their incompetence. This ludicrous Mueller Investigation that continues to be a marathon nothing-burger is even more off the reservation now.

Typical. Dems playing the reckless finger pointing game to distract from their malfeasance.

---

So is it a nothing burger or was Obama too soft on Putin? Can’t be both

What makes you think I believed the fake news? And more people voted against Hillary than for her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

What makes you think I believed the fake news? And more people voted against Hillary than for her.

---

It’s either that or you replied with a completely different context to my statement, which was a direct response to Russian interference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noteggs

Just lost a great man tonight - Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer... he put civil in civility when discussing politics! Wish we had more of that in today’s environment.

---

Trump called him a jerk and am overrated clown but I thought he had some good points once in a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun

It’s either that or you replied with a completely different context to my statement, which was a direct response to Russian interference.

---

You said that was the cause of Hillary's loss. I would say Hillary being a shitty candidate had as much or more to do with her loss. No Russian propaganda necessary to believe that.

Though looking back I see how you can read it that way. Don't mean they saw how toxic she was through "fake news". Just regular ass news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xudash

Curious - and I'm not trying to derail the dialogue on the issue of separating families, but let's see where we all stand on this one: IS ANYONE HERE IN FAVOR OF OPEN BORDERS?

A REPHRASED VERSION OF THE QUESTION: Anyone here in favor of letting everyone in? The follow-up to that is that do you favor providing governmental financial support to them?

---

No. Rephrased version. No and no.

Something I’m curious about. Everyone talks about the Russians spreading fake news on Facebook and Twitter. Didn’t they spend something like $100,000 for targeted ads? Didn’t Hillary spend something like 20 times that? How much influence could that have really had? Seems to me it’s a false narrative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bjf123

No. Rephrased version. No and no.

Something I’m curious about. Everyone talks about the Russians spreading fake news on Facebook and Twitter. Didn’t they spend something like $100,000 for targeted ads? Didn’t Hillary spend something like 20 times that? How much influence could that have really had? Seems to me it’s a false narrative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

It doesn’t cost much to have bots send out millions of tweets and FB posts. So using dollars spent is not exactly an accurate measurement of influence. It’s not like we were watching TV ads from Russia during prime time TV. I don’t think we were anyways... anything is possible these days!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

You said that was the cause of Hillary's loss. I would say Hillary being a shitty candidate had as much or more to do with her loss. No Russian propaganda necessary to believe that.

Though looking back I see how you can read it that way. Don't mean they saw how toxic she was through "fake news". Just regular ass news.

---

I did? Just suggested influence. Was more or less trying to imply it had an impact that Dems underestimated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

And more people voted against Hillary than for her.

---

Huh? What's that mean Go? I think she won the popular vote; certainly not the electoral college.