100% correct.

the goverments are alien reptile from plaent x!!! the flat erath!!!!1!! is faaake mans!!

Glad you have the ability to be seen, though it isn't worth anything to anyone else.

This is why critical thinking needs to be taught in school. Ppl need to get off social media and have thoughtful discussions face to face. Bring back the ye olde tavern life when ppl would have open discourse.

The worst thing to ever happen to drinking is TV's in bars.

That first sentence says it all. We need to do away with this Prussian education system we currently have in place. Go back to reading writing and arithmetic.

Back to that and then add assisted self guided exploration

How do you teach critical thinking?

The Socratic method of teaching focuses on asking questions and ask the teacher guiding the discussion but allow students to try to work out the answers.

Truth be told the push for common core not long ago had a stronger focus on critical thinking as well, but people went apeshit over it because of how fast it was rolled out and the last generation had the idea that “I memorized times tables and it worked great for me, I don’t understand why they can’t just do that”

+1 to Socratic method. By asking questions of students and forcing them to 'perform' thinking in the classroom, they grow accustomed to asking themselves critical questions that help them evaluate new information as it comes.

Learning my rote memorization makes an excellent response-machine out of a person; a lovely boon for our overlords who need efficient, pliable, and loyal workers, but a terrible omen for those very workers whose lives are reduced to meaningless service.

The actual common core curriculum was secondary to it's testing component.hard to teach critical thinking when your future job relies on how well your students can multiple choice. That is aside from the other problems with the Prussian schooling model. The model itself being invented to create obedience over true education.

I can understand the argument against the standardized testing, but most of the criticism I saw was people hysterically whining about the new way to teach math, even though it's a major improvement over the old way.

I like some parts of it, but I don't think the current school system is the best way to learn it.

It does become more difficult to critically think when you don't even know what the truth is anymore. Both sides twist and distort things to fit their narrative that the average Joe is forced to make opinions based solely on assumptions.

Like for me as an example, I have become so jaded by the never ending 24/7 Russia meddling circus that I just assume everyone is lieing to suit their own needs and try to just ignore them and live my life out.

Accept that truth is not a concrete subject and that various truths must be battled against each other.

Sadly, most are :( but I take the same stance as you here. When you begin to see that your own government, religion, news, and other ways to find information for the normal person are lying to their people, or letting them believe lies, you (or sorry I don't mean to assume I know how you feel towards it all) rather I just see how the general population is getting Fucked, how they not only don't see it but smile and ask for it harder! And once I see how fucking stupid people are and there's no changing or fixing them, I realize there's no reason stressing about them, and just focus on living my own life and improving that and things I have control over! :)

Agreed. This is why the mainstream media is no longer trusted by many. Those of us who recognize the constant stream of lies from every new outlet about every major actor in politics and entertainment are shutting these noisemakers out of our life and allowing our own options to be formed to the best of our abilities with the information available.

Teach people to ask questions. The problem is that this leads people to question everything including science and accepted political dogma.

These days, that gets you called a Nazi.

Yeah, that probably depends on the questions asked if you get called a Nazi or not

Not really. You can get called a Nazi for almost anything today

Yes, gj missing the point of my comment ;)

Not really, Jordan Peterson is getting called a Nazi daily despite asking all sorts of questions that intrinsically bare no nature. If someone is going to project their beliefs upon you it doesn't matter what you ask, solidifying u/TheWiredWorld's point.

I wont go into too much detail here, but gj on missing the point as well. I dont know who that is, but lets say be said some raciat stuff that aligns with Nazi ideology in the past then everyone can feel free to call him Nazi on questions that dont include Nazi stuff. That doesnt mean his opinion should be dismissed though.

Perhaps you should make a more salient point in the future, despite the fact that it appears we generally agree.

What can I make clearer than saying it depends on the question? If your question contains Nazi ideology and you try to pass it as a critical question, I will still feel free to call you a Nazi. If it doesnt contain Nazi ideology I wont. Depends on the question.

Listen, you Nazi, I didn't see you ask a question in your previous statement, now did i?! Wait fuck then you wouldn't be a Nazi, never mind carry on with your work! You now got 2 people that completely Missed the point of your comment! /s

Of course it does. If the question indicates agreement, no name calling.

Just ask People to define the words they us.

What did "hack the election" mean?

What did "influence the election" mean?

When you boil those two down to their core, you realise nothing that had happened to justify the mainstream media's lust for WWIII

I mean for christ sake the US is more guilty of meddling in other countries elections more so than any nation in the world. Where does CNN get the balls to spew the kind of bullshit that they do? Better yet, who are the people who actually watch & listen to it? It is frightening to say the least.

Russians shitposting on Twitter?

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

US assassinated elected officials and installed a puppet state that eventually used their resources to backstab the US and disrupted the entire Middle East causing civil wars and immigration crises?

*cricket cricket cricket*

They drink heavily to cope with their jobs, probably.

I asked those questions. Apparently I am a troll.

Don't troll bro. Damn. lol

Must be Russian!

If you're lucky ONE of your highschool teachers will brush the topic and get you started. Most highschool teachers don't really care about how the minds turn out they just teach the curriculum.

Bless those passionate schoolteachers though who make you understand why education is important

I teach kindergarten. When my kids ask me a tough question (that's not directly related to a specific activity we're working on), I ask them what they think the answer is. Then I ask them how we would be able to test that idea and if possible I'll help them create an activity based on the concept they were interested in. I try not to just explain concepts to them because that way I can help them keep their curiosity, creativity and help them improve their self confidence by giving them the opportunity to basically guide their own education.

The movie director Stanley Kubrick said the main thing that should be taught in school is problem solving. If you can solve problems you can do just about anything in life.

yup. When I teach people at work I tell them you don't have to know how to do everything, you just have to know how to figure out how to do anything.

The best kept secret to IT success is the Google search engine.

Searching for answers does not build problem solving skills. Mayhap search engines dumb down the population.

One of the dumbest things I've read all day. Having the wealth of the entirety of human knowledge at your fingertips has "dumbed down society"? Sounds like something I'd read on /r/im14andthisisdeep

Don't need to have a database of knowledge in your brain or memorize poems or such anymore, you can just google it!

Think the man has a point.

Yeah I guess we should just go back to messenger pigeons. The world was so much better in the dark ages....

No ones saying your wrong... The fact no one has to study or memorize anything bc it's all there and you can "just google it" means people today have less comprehension and knowledge retainment skills....thats all they were saying. Maybe you're part of who they're talking about...

This is literally a thread about how problem solving should be taught more/is important.

The firsr guy said the most important thing to know in IT is how to Google something (which is half joke, half truth).

Then some 14 year old comes in with his "Google makes you dumb, searching for answers to problems is dumb" meme when that's not even what the original thread was about. It's about problem solving in the 21st century. No shit I'm going to Google something when I have a problem that I can't solve on my own, that is literally problem solving skills.

I agree that the fact that we have the wealth of human knowledge at our fingertips may (in some cases) cause people to have shorter memories, and it definitely killed off oral traditions and myths of the past etc. That isn't necessarily an inherently negative thing though, and the benefits of having all of human knowledge able to be found in seconds far outweighs any perceived negativity.

But that's just, like, my opinion. You can feel free to disagree I guess.

When I was a kid I had a whole mess of poems memorized. I still can recite quite a few.

I think far less kids do that today, bc they have "the wealth of human knowledge at their fingertips." That's all fine and well, but what if someone pulls the plug?

Are the people who relied on the internet to be their brain going to be smarter or dumber than the people who actually learned and memorized knowledge?

I'm not sure how memorizing poems has anything to do with problem solving.

How about chess? I would venture that there's a correlation between being a skilled chess player and being a competent problem solver.

Would also venture kids are less likely to learn opening sequences like dragons and such, bc they can just google it.

That was just the first thing that popped to mind. I'm sure I could think up many more examples, probably more pertinent than that. I just think they're everywhere and was just talking about chess.

I think you'd also agree that there needs to be an education reform all over the globe. Critical thinking is more base of a skill, which should be taught. Problem solving skill is a derrivative of critical thinking, in my opinion. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills are very much interlinked and interdependent.

If that tool is taken from you, or subverted, then what will you do. Sure we are smarter then ever, but on whose shoulders are we standing?

But then once you've learned something, you can pass it on to other people and you possess this knowledge. Should the internet die, you'd know how to light a fire, if you've read about that or tried it empirically. It gives you access to knowledge, which you can then use free of charge forever, if you wish to. So sure, if internet and electricity dies in one moment, lots of people will know lots of things and humanity will rebuild.

I agree that the knowledge gained is essentially permanent. I'm thinking of Fahrenheit 451 where everybody memorizes a book. But I see a different problem. Let's say Bob's toilet is leaking. Instead of checking the inside and experimenting on it, he jumps right to eHow and follows the guide to the letter. So he demonstrates comprehension, but not problem solving, if that makes any sense.

Yeah, totally does. I see your point. What people are essentially saying (as far as I see from the chain of comments) is that this example is problem solving in itself. It's just easier to do it nowadays. Basically why ignore everything that tech brought us and live in stone age, while you can be super productive utilising all the tech around us.

Let's be fair, if google is gone, there's probably something very wrong with the world and you don't need the skill to clean the toilet, you need the skills to gather food and survive. This is a very different beast that we need to tackle.

The point I was trying to make myself is that critical thinking is even more basic, it impacts comprehension, allows people to discern truth from lies (even in case of a corrupted source of information) etc., hence in my view extremely important.

If you're talking about news and opinion, sure. If you're looking for technical information, you'd be hard pressed to find a better organized knowledge base.

The most important thing you can learn in school is how you learn.

Discover your learning style. Know what it takes for you to understand a thing. Know what you have to do to learn something.

Yep. Let's see, we've got extreme materialism, blind nationalism, belief in our left/right false dichotomy, and public schools encouraging all of this. Not a combination for anything good.

Blind nationalism? please elaborate?

N f l

People like to watch sports and entertainment without seeing people blatantly virtue signalling rather than doing their job, which they get paid an absurd amount to do? They don't come to sports games for the politics.

Good thing no one is kneeling during the game. Only during a ceremony paid for by the U.S. Military.

I'd support people who kneeled against the US military installing a ceremony in our sports for money.

That's not what they were kneeling against. They were kneeling against the country itself.

No one said they were kneeling for that reason.

I said the players presence during this ceremony only exists because the US Military started paying for them to be on the field.

The implication they are kneeling instead of doing their job is factually incorrect, They are kneeling during a paid promotional period. They are not kneeling during the game is during practice.

So you want to take their right to protest away?

Before you answer consider this: When black people protest in the streets they're told to stop. When they kneel they are told to stop. When they tweet about it they are told to stop. Lebron James protests and is told to stop because this country made that ungrateful son of a bitch rich.

It's not that people don't want to here minorities protest this moment,that moment or in that way.They don't want it period.

I find it a pretty useless way to protest. No one watching the game is going to say "wow this woke me up, I care now." And kneeling before a game doesn't accomplish much. It's like prayer. Just virtue signaling in front of a lot of people. It may make people feel fuzzy inside, but it's been blown up to a degree that exceeds its usefulness.

I want my jesters to entertain me, and not bore me with their irrelevant politics.

How about instead of protesting and virtue signaling - we take all of that energy and actually work on solutions to whatever it is we're upset about.

Totally agree. When our dialog is mediated by TV, internet, etc., there is no other 'person' on the other side. There are only talking points and recognizable positions to agree or disagree with, to feel good about or to abhor.

Media makes for a shitty mirror where we ultimately only react to our best and worst images of self.

What I find so interesting about this whole affair is the open question about the relative power of social media. Needles points out that propaganda is not new, but the power of social media is. SM pushes dialogue into "thumbs up/thumbs down" dichotomy which bifurcates the population and doesn't allow for a middle ground. Furthermore, because the propaganda is spread by "friends" instead of MSM there is increased pressure to assimilate in-group norms.

I'm not saying social media is definitely more powerful than old forms of propaganda but I think there are reasons to believe it could be.

Social media is more insidious as like to before ot, it manipulates our perception of what the norms are. But it is more effective because it allows manipulation to masquerade as real person rather than mass media presentation. Further it allows very targeted influence, if not on you personally definitely on the people who surveys show to be opinion makers or thought leaders.

Reddit bifurcates with upvote downvote. Facebook and Twitter do not do that. You can't "bury" a post on facebook that you disagree with.

I've always thought that since computer programming and logic are usually 0 or 1, this or that, that it inherently makes things dichotomous.

fucking talking points. I'll strike up a conversation and someone will spew 10 things not even directed to what I said, but to the public talking point closely related to that topic.

I am unable to have a thoughtful discussion with any of my friends because if I do anything other than agree, I am a racist Nazi Fascist pig.

Yet CT is one of the main concepts that Republicans do not want. Half of their base barely graduated high-school, think God created the Earth and that Jesus is coming yo save them.

The greatest thinkers are/were theologians. Dawkins, Hitchens, and the alike have no new ideas just repackaged historical debates and made money off edgy teens. Being atheistic doesn't make you more intelligent or wise. There are/were amazing atheistic philosophers and their lack of childish animosity is what made them great.

No new ideas? Dawkins re-invented evolutionary biology you dingus lol

Was refering to theology

And democrats think socialism/communism might actually work.

Critical thinking would be a nice start.

I only go to bars that have local bands

Propaganda worked before the tv and internet it’s not new

You can’t teach people how to think. That’s another firm of brain washing. A lot of the folks brain washed Pressurewash think they are critical thinkers without realizing that they were taught to make certain assumptions.

Teaching people how to think for themselves and telling people how to think at two different things entirely.

What do you think that looks like? Have you been to public school recently? The current model is to teach people "how to think for themselves". Every class that involves any writing has "critical thinking questions". Yet there is always a correct answer. Teachers have the ability to subjectively snuff out the opinions they don't agree with by labeling it bad analysis.

Part of critical thinking involves questioning everything. All of our assumptions need to be critically examined. By its very nature, the education system we have set up is designed to do the opposite. One of the reasons I am very pro private schooling, homeschooling, and alternative schooling like Montessori.

The truth is that most people do NOT want to critically think. They want the easy path out. They want their ipod and facebook feed. As long as they are comfortable that will be enough for them to believe whatever is most convenient.

This is what I was thinking! Civics class was removed a while back though. It teaches how the government interacts with us and how the average person can affect larger political changes. BRING CIVICS BACK

Actually I'd say the worst thing to happen was "club scene" culture, as it further degenerated the population and distanced them further from talking to each other.

I was even at a "pub" not a nightclub, but it was playing that really loud obnoxious club music that they all play, and so loud you can't talk, you your just sorted expected to shut up and get drunk.

And that was just a pub, and now they all seem to be the same.

It’s not going happen in schools. Schools exist to make you a good little automaton who believes what you’re told and trusts in the wisdom of authorities who understand things you never could.

this is why critical thinking ISN'T taught in school

I have a degree in critical thinking and am a Trump supporter, FYI.

The problem now is the divide has already been made. Your have the overloud loony left ( and i mean the nutters not anyone that is left leaning as am I) Shutting down debate in universities, screaming down people that have a different viewpoint than them and marking anyone on the right as some sort of jackboot wearing thugs. You have people on the right assuming that anyone on the left is one of these hypersensitive morons that needs a lie down any time they hear anything that doesn't fit with their world view.

You have both sides only trying to drown out the other while refusing to enter any sort of reasonable debate. Social media has just made it easier to live in your own personal bubble while only consuming material and viewpoints that only confirm your own bias.

How would you feel if it was your group that was told to shut up and conform? Maybe the lesbian cat owner society would rather not be told what the fuck they can and can't do by the likes of you? You won't ever fix a divide by forcing people to abide by YOUR view of what people should be like. You will just create more division. And you know what? I reckon the transgender lesbian cat owner society wouldn't be pushing everlasting wars to fund their all powerful MIC :)

Nice man. It must feel a special kind of good to be able to help out people and causes you are interested in. Gratz on succeeding in life :) I understand what you are saying and I know in general those are the rules you don't get any points in life simply for being different. (unless those differences are genuis or other super useful skills)

Actually lesbians have a huge rate of domestic abuse so I wouldn't call them so peaceful across the board. Cat ladies are even more terrifying but that's cause my view has been colored by the Simpsons

sorry I wasnt actually trying to make a real point about lesbians, I was trying to be glib and pretty much failed :)

I'm a bit late but my bad for being daft I was hoping I could say it more comically but it just ended up being some half baked factoids

If [he] wouldn't have done that and shareholders would've found out about it, he could have been held liable for essentially not being a team player and not following the law.

Maximizing shareholder value is not a law.

You can't blame the right for being tired of the shit from the left.
Once the left becomes more reasonable, and kick it's nutter loudmouth, he right will discus more seriously with them.
That can't happen until all the universities are fixed though.

I'm just sick of people collapsing the complicated multidimensional space of public politics into a single dimension. No wonder everything's confused and people talk past one another.

So from what I said you took from that that only the left is to blame ( and these hypersensitive morons are not the left, just idiots) And how can I possible blame the right for anything?

You have both sides only trying to drown out the other while refusing to enter any sort of reasonable debate. Social media has just made it easier to live in your own personal bubble while only consuming material and viewpoints that only confirm your own bias.

I punctuate every political discussion with this. I invariably piss someone off since I have the wherewithal to see issues from both sides. If it's someone deeply set on either side they just clap their ears shut and the conversation is over or they wait for their turn to counter point with rehearsed lines

I mean you dont even have to see it from the other side just understand other people do have other viewpoints and shouting them down does nothing. If you find someones viewpoint so unreasonable debate them, talk to them and try to change their mind. Even if you don't you have accomplished more than just screaming shit like "Libtard or Nazi" etc etc

You have people on the right assuming that anyone on the left is one of these hypersensitive morons

Yeah, lets just leave out mention of the hypersensitive loud loony right that screams on street corners about gay sex causing hurricanes or bringing about the apocalypse.

I agree but still don't believe Nazi's should get a platform. Have read about Popper's paradox of tolerance?

If someone is getting called a "Nazi" by people trying to shut down their speech, they probably aren't actually a Nazi.

What if they are chanting "Jews will not replace us"?

wouldn't the Nazis be the ones shutting down free speech though?

I'm referring to literal genocide Nazi's so I guess we agree. Richard Spencer and his like don't deserve free speech.

No I don't believe Nazis should get a platform. But being right wing doesn't make you a nazi. Having conservative viewpoints shouldn't make you a target for disruption. Sure go protest these peoples talks, outside. You dont need to charge into the room and just drown them out while refusing to enter and reasonable debate

I agree conservative isn't the same thing but if someone is a Neo-Nazi I don't believe in their free speech.

But we aren't talking about neo-nazis are we? I was talking about the left shutting down all discussion and calling anyone on the right a nazi that doesn't agree with them. The situation we have Unis atm is a real problem. Here in England, we are having the same problem. Last week a tory politician ( who I cant stand btw) who basically epitomises everything I hate about this particular conservative government was giving a speech at a uni when the room was pushed into by a bunch of protesters who then got on the stage hurling abuse calling him a nazi etc. He isn't a Nazi, he may be a complete cunt, but he isn't a Nazi and what they did was unacceptable.

Yeah it boggles the mind. Where I live I have to deal with real neo-nazis, so I guess I get sensitive about the issue

Do you really believe the election was subverted by a dozen Russians on a very small budget? How embarrassing.

Trump and Clinton both spent $81,000,000 on Facebook advertising combined, and that's just Facebook alone.

Many world leaders tried to directly interfere in the election and got praised by US citizens for doing so.

You are now playing right in to the hands of "the Russians" by making it seem like they had a large impact on the election, and that it was only them attempting to influence people. They are loving this right now, because this is what they wanted all along.

That's what baffles me. A couple of ads and some twitter accounts supposedly beat a billion dollar campaign. I don't buy it.

That's what baffles me. A couple of ads and some twitter accounts supposedly beat a billion+ dollar campaign. I don't buy it.

I don't buy it either, because it's absolutely absurd. The people promoting this type of thinking are basically doing the Russians work for them now, long after their funding dried up.

After the collusion myth failed, the new thing is that we're supposed to believe the Russians set up a system that effectively countered the voices of 90% of the US media and Hollywood, as well countering hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds... with what? A million dollars or so, and a dozen people? Give me a break.

And the worse part too is the double speak they constantly show. On the one hand when you show that a single "event" in the narrative is based on hearsay and no actual evidence of anything they say, "It's about the entire story not individual evidence" but then when they mention the dossier with known falsities in it they say, "But it has correct information in it" to defend it...

Genuine question, what are those falsities?

Genuine question, what are those falsities?

The parts of the Clinton-Steele dossier about Michael Cohen (one of Trump's lawyers) being in Prague, and everything that stems from that, are false. It was a case of mistaken identity.

The parts about Carter Page are very likely to be false. And those parts make up a large portion of the collusion claims.

Claims: One of the more significant reports, it again asserts that Page met with Rosneft chief executive Sechin in July. At the meeting, Sechin offered [Carter] Page and Trump a 19 percent stake in Rosneft in exchange for lifting sanctions on Russia if elected.

It also asserts that Cohen, Trump’s lawyer, was playing a “key role” in the Russia-Trump relationship.

Analysis: The Rosneft claim received a lot of attention when, in January, a 19.5 percent stake in the company was sold to an unknown buyer. Later reporting, though, indicated that the buyers were companies based in Qatar and Switzerland. It was essentially a loan, and Moscow prearranged to buy back some of the company from the Qataris.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/10/25/what-the-trump-dossier-says-and-what-it-doesnt/

WaPo calls this "one of the more significant reports" from the dossier. So, one of the more significant reports from the dossier has been debunked already.

The Clinton-Steele dossier relies heavily on Carter Page to make the collusion claims, and none of it holds up.

They are trying to hide information. Reasonable arguments won't be had

Yet the FBI have confessions of Americans doing it and indictments of Russians doing it and a $1.4 million per month budget. And the US does the same shit. But... nothing to see here. Move along. Fake news. MAGA. Crooked Hillary. Build a wall and so on.

Yet the FBI have confessions of Americans doing it

Doing it? What, exactly?

Being 4chan shitposters and meme specialists.

As Mueller.

As Mueller.

What?

You are talking to a bot, friend.

I meant ask Mueller. I’m not a bot.
Bulletproof pussy I like your username.

Thank you

I meant ask Mueller. Sorry I thumb type poorly. He’s one of the two guys that signed the indictments. Him and the grand jury foreman they know the details of the plot.

Cool username btw.

Are you talking about the man from California who was indicted for selling fake IDs over the internet? That's the only American indicted here.

So you have not heard about the Russians that they indicted? Okay. I guess it didn’t happen since you didn’t hear about it.

WTF are you talking about? Of course I did. You were talking about "Americans". I corrected you. Don't get mad.

You stills think the Russian meeting was about “adoption of Russian babies?” Bless your heart.

Has "Donny Jonny" been indicted? You fool. Quit while you're ahead, because you're way out of your depth here.

Whatever

Let me paint a scenario here: You see a multi-million dollar ad saying a candidate is for a strong, and united Western world to stand against their enemies. But then you see a tweet, "By that they mean going to war! By voting for that person youre voting for war!" You dont want to vote for war. You see another multi-million dollar ad, the candidate wants to support lgbt rights. A tweet, from LGBTCalifornia, "See that one time she said something slightly against lgbts? Out community supports the other candidate!" You dont want to vote for a hypocrit. Tweets get shared, and once the doubt is there it makes it hard for you to shake it off. It dont find it that farfetched that something like this could work.

Meanwhile correct the record totally transformed the politics sub on the 6th largest website in the world, into a 100% left wing echo chamber, hell hole, where any and all dissenting voices are completely crushed, and alternate viewpoints downvoted into oblivion. But apparently no one cares about that, oh no it's the 'Russians'.

I can't say for sure what caused /politics/ to turn out that way, but yes... it definitely turned out the way you said. It's nothing but an echo chamber.

When the correction to the fake news about the Florida shooting was posted there (the Politico article about how 4chan fooled the media) it was downvoted to nothing.

The truth never made the front page, while the original fake story was #1 for a long time. They simply downvoted the truth to continue the fake story that they enjoyed more.

It wasn't a couple of ads. It was a multi-million dollar campaign. Why do people keep acting like it was a shoestring budget?

Because compared to the budgets they were up against it might as well been 2 dollars, a shoestring and some buttons.

Right. A multi-million dollar campaign by a foreign government. Shoestring.

Relativity motherfucker, do you speak it? Couple of million is duckshit compared to the billion dollar plus campaigns your shitty candidates ran. Not to mention the entire US media and hollywood collectively coaching who to vote for.

by a foreign government

It doesn't say this any where in the indictment.

So we can conclude you are a massive liar.

I'm sure this organization just decided to do it on their own. That makes total sense.

That is your baseless opinion, you stated it as fact which makes you a liar.

Uhuh. I'm sure your opinions are all based on official record. You make zero judgments and don't connect any dots. Only the official record is what you refer to in your claims.

You didn't offer it up as an opinion, did you not learn to write properly at school or something?

Sure sure. I'm sure that was very confusing for you.

It makes no sense that the government would do it, either.

They guy bankrolling it is nicknamed "Putins Chef" you really don't see a connection?

My twitter handle used to be President of Kekistan.

What is your point?

And you really think that had any effect? Compared to the Mainstream media and Hillary's Billions? You guys aren't being honest, you know that, if the allegations are true, it was just stupid trolling.

"Them" = "The Russians". I thought that was clear.

I'm talking about a systemic problem, while you're focusing on a rather small problem.

I'm discussing the facts that we have access to right now.

I guess we just have to trust Mueller and crew until we learn otherwise. Do you think he's trying to frame people for crimes they didn't commit? Or is he hiding the true extent of the interference?

That doesn't seem like something he could get away with for too long.

Don't worry about me... I'm not a trusting person when it comes to politics. If we find out Mueller is dirty, or he is hiding something, I'll be the first to talk about it. And I agree a lot of this is about driving people apart.

It’s not the size of your budget, it’s how you use it.

A dozen russians and three russian entities including the Internet Research Institute. All three employed many more than a dozen people. I keep seeing people conveniently leave out this fact from the indictment.

How many people?

Apparently it's the internet research "agency" and not "institute" fyi. Here's the only place the indictment mentions the organization's size afaik:

The ORGANIZATION employed hundreds of individuals for its online operations, ranging from creators of fictitious personas to technical and administrative support. The ORGANIZATION’s annual budget totaled the equivalent of millions of U.S. dollars.

It's wikipedia page is pretty sparse but says:

More than 1000 paid bloggers and commenters reportedly worked only in a single building at Savushkina Street in 2015[23]. Many other employees work remotely.

The indictment doesn't mention how many people worked for the next two entities "Concord Management and Consulting" and "Concord Catering" but they're connected and (if I'm reading this correctly) they had a combined monthly operating budget of $1.25 million. (page 7)

Thanks.

I wonder why they weren't all indicted. It's not like anyone involved will ever be convicted anyway, since they'd have to voluntarily visit the US. They're not going to be extradited.

It's still a fairly small budget, considering what they were up against. And that's even if they were all working on the US side of things the whole time, which is doubtful. Aren't we told that they've been trying this all over Europe and elsewhere?

What do you mean by all? The individual employees working at these agencies? I'd assume it's impossible to determine their identities and tie each with evidence toward this effort rather than go after the agencies as a whole instead (as well as a select few who took prominent roles and even traveled to the US, ie the 13 named). You're right they won't but extridited, the indictments are instead meant to 1. inform the US public of Russia's activites 2. Limit these people's ability to travel and whatnot and 3. send a very clear message to Russia that we know what they did and how they did it with enough confidence to put forth criminal charges.

And yea it's impossible to know the impact of Russia's efforts, not least of all because presidential elections are extremely multicausal. But 1 million a month stretches a lot further when you're focusing almost exclusively on online efforts. Comparing it to Hillary or Trump's campaign for instance doesn't work considering the majority of their money is going to TV ads (and a much lesser extent mail, radio). Further, all the stuff they promoted already played into the narrative of one campaign or another. If you put a fake news story about clinton out there, Trump or Bernie supporters might run with it and do a lot of the actual leg work spreading it on social media.

Yes, all good points. However, if they can't ID each person and tie them to US election interference, then where did the 1,000 number come from? This is what I mean about exaggerating the effect they had.

Also, see my edit about the Wiki reference (CNN article). They were using this budget to fund multiple projects. Probably some "PR work" for Russian involvement in Syria / Ukraine mixed in there? And whatever else we've been told they were doing around EU and elsewhere.

And on a related note, go and check out the Jill Stein trend on Twitter that's happening right now: https://twitter.com/search?q=%22Jill%20Stein%22&src=tren

Apparently she is a Russian shill, a traitor, and a co-conspirator all of a sudden in the minds of a lot of people. A surprising number of people, actually, so yes... the divide is real, and it's wide.

Might be why the indictment cites hundreds of people rather than the thousand plus from the CNN article, it doesnt actually provide the intel it's basing it's claims off of so im not sure how they came to that number. All in all you're entirely right we have no real idea how many or the extent of their impact on the US directly, merely they existed and the US was a prominent focus. It's clear it's more than 13 people, however.

Here's another article you may be interested in:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/18/the-russian-journalist-who-helped-uncover-election-meddling-is-confounded-by-the-mueller-indictments/

A lot of Russian conservatives were proud. They said: “Look at what Russians can do! Only 90 people with $2 million made America scared! We are strong!” And for conservative people here, they see that Americans have CNN, Radio Free Europe, etc., that cover Russia. They say, “Why can’t we establish groups in America and have our own influence?” That's how conservative people think here. They think this was normal.

I don't know much about this Russian journalist, but they're saying he's one of the two who helped uncover the election meddling. He says 90 people were involved and $2m was spent, but he says it in more of a joking way I think... and sort of paraphrasing what other people say.

Take from that what you will... but in any event, the Russians are enjoying the way this is being represented by US media. That's for sure.

It was a multi-million dollar budget in an election that was won by an extremely small margin in a handful of states. Yes, it is entirely believable.

I don't believe the election was subverted though. I truly believe Hillary lost because she was an awful candidate to begin with. So bad that a reality tv show guy won. As much as I believe Trump to be a master manipulator I 100% believe she was worse. I think the Russian's intended aim was to cause strife between Americans. And to be honest I think the MSM has played right into that. They are the ones I hold responsible for the fractured state of our nation. Russia only did what many, many other organizations were doing. The media however has a personal axe to grind. And they've been doing it non stop since 2016. I know the constant barrage on all things Trump related flipped me. It was entirely too much. Just like this Russia shit's been. Too fucking much. Critical thinking is important. Everyone should be aware that there is a legit propaganda war going on right now. Everything we see and hear someone wanted us to see and hear. And the louder that message is, the more skeptical of it you should be. And it's not only Russia behind those messages.

I don't believe the election was subverted though. I truly believe Hillary lost because she was an awful candidate to begin with

Exactly, it is all nonsense, even Muller says what ever they did or didn't do, the conduct did not alter the outcome of the 2016 election

I think the Russian's intended aim was to cause strife between Americans

and they are rank amateurs by CNN and MSNBC standars

When did Mueller say everything Russia did, did not alter the outcome of the election? I've seen a lot of people saying there's no way of knowing if what they did actually altered the outcome but I haven't seen anyone outside of the white house saying that they know that the outcome of the election wasn't altered... They can say that they know that polling machines didn't have votes flipped but to say you know for sure what impact fake news and lies being spread online and through social media had on undecided voters is 100% speculation.

When did Mueller say everything Russia did, did not alter the outcome of the election?

Applogies, my mistake.

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election,” Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversees the special counsel probe, said at a Friday press conference.

Yeah.. that isn't saying that nothing done altered the outcome of the election. That is saying that nobody is being indicted for altering the outcome of the election because they can't prove something like that. You could only prove the outcome of the election was altered if you could prove that votes were switched. There's no way to know what impact reading lies on facebook or twitter had on somebody's vote.

that isn't saying that nothing done altered the outcome of the election.....There's no way to know what impact reading lies on facebook or twitter had on somebody's vote.

So trolling on the internet for the lolz is a crime in your opinion?

You really should read the indictment. You are grossly mischaracterizing what was fine by the Russians. They were running a massive operation with hundreds of employees. It had a graphics department, an IT department, managers who supervised the performance of employees. They made trips to the US to learn out political culture so they could find weak points to target.

For you to call it “trolling for lolz” shows you either don’t really know what was done, or you are trying this minimize it.

They were running a massive operation...

Allegedly in Russia and thus American law does not apply to them, it literally says on page 2 of the indictment

U.S. law also bars agents of any foreign entity from engaging in political activities within the United States without first registering with the Attorney General

The actual indictment reads lime it was written by a cry baby leftist, for instance..

posing as U.S. persons and creating false U.S. personas, operated social media pages and groups designed to attract U.S. audiences

Defendants posted derogatory information about a number of candidates

buying political advertisements on social media in the names of U.S. persons and entities.

sought, in part, to conduct what it called “information warfare against the United States of America” through fictitious U.S. personas on social media platforms and other Internet-based media

They are literally describing shitposting, it's embarrassing as fuck for our country.

I don't know why, but I am a little bit stunned by your slavish devotion to Russia -- ahead of your own country. (I am guessing you're an America, but maybe I'm wrong.)

Allegedly in Russia and thus American law does not apply to them, it literally says on page 2 of the indictment

U.S. law also bars agents of any foreign entity from engaging in political activities within the United States without first registering with the Attorney General

I'm not a lawyer; I highly doubt you are a lawyer. But I put more faith in the US Justice Department's interpretation of the law than yours. But it's very nice of you to try to protect Russia and downplay their interference in our elections on behalf of Trump. It just goes to show that the Trump movement is fundamentally treasonous.

They are literally describing shitposting, it's embarrassing as fuck for our country.

Shitposting has to do with the quality of individual posts. There is nothing you quoted from the indictment -- or in the indictment itself -- that supports your claim they were just "shitposting."

They were running an operation that had tens of thousands of fake accounts operated by hundreds of real live employees. It was just one part of the much larger Russian operation. It is not comparable to anything done in previous elections, nor anything done by other countries.

I don't know why, but I am a little bit stunned by your slavish devotion to Russia -- ahead of your own country. (I am guessing you're an America, but maybe I'm wrong.)

I mean, you are arguing with a person with the user name “fuck the Clintons” and an overt admiration of Russia. It’s not really that stunning.

I have a great strategy for our upcoming elections, if there are any inconvenient truths you want to suppress, just hire some Russians to spread those truths and then all of a sudden they are lies and you're in the clear!

This is going to be a game changer! Hire a bunch of Russians to say that trump brags about pussy grabbing, then if you get outraged by that, you're just an idiot who falls for Russian propaganda!

Facts don't matter, only where you heard it.

We're now free to rig elections! We're free to wiretap political adversaries!

exactly, in 7 years we're going to be cracking up about how gullible democrats are/were

Well, I think most of us are doing that right now.

good point lol

russia had people working hard to release information about our government being corrupt? well, we should give them thanks then lol. Those type of paid social media groups are all around the world and are all doing the same shit, whether it was a Russian group or Chinese or Brazilian or American hardly matters. What matter is if everything they were releasing is false or not

I would love to see some of these posts the Russians made. If it was on T_D it was probably literally shitposts.

This wasn't trolling on the internet for the lolz. This was a coordinated effort by Russian operatives to effect the election. The dummies who ate this shit up and spread the fake posts around twitter and FB aren't being arrested because what they did wasn't a crime. The people who knowingly and intentionally attempted to influence the election with fake news and propaganda are being indicted because that is a crime.

The people who knowingly and intentionally attempted to influence the election with fake news and propaganda are being indicted because that is a crime

These alleged hero shitposters live in Russia, American law does not apply to them and by all accounts is not against Russian law either.

Well you better call up the FBI and let them know that attempting to illegally influence an election isn't actually illegal. That's information that they certainly don't have. So if a group of people get together and organize and plan to spread fake news and attempt to get unwitting Americans to help them in their effort to influence the outcome of an election that's not illegal.. it's just a hilarious prank, bro!

Can you tell me how Russians shitposting in Russia is relevant to American law?

What this indictment is tragically saying is some dumb fuck Americans got memed so hard on social media that it effected their political opinion.

Do you not understand how fucking sad that is?

Yeah.. turns out advertising works.. I guess that's why companies spend billions of dollars a year on advertising... who would have thought?

And also, you may want to e-mail the White House too and let them know that what these Russians did wasn't illegal because they agree that the indictments are sound and that what the Russians did was illegal but they just say that they didn't have any hand in it.

That is a long winded reply in not explaining to me...

Can you tell me how Russians shitposting in Russia is relevant to American law?

Can you tell me how Chinese hackers hacking in China is relevant to American law? If you do illegal things in your home country that effect another country it is still illegal. They will indict you and want you to be extradited to be charged.

Can you tell me how Chinese hackers hacking in China is relevant to American law?

It isn't, that is my point and China also doesn't have an extradition treaty with the U.S

If you do illegal things in your home country that effect another country it is still illegal

What these alleged Russians did in Russia, isn't illegal in Russia and the indictment will never go to court and thus the claims made will never be proven to even be illegal here.

Sorry to say, that is illegal.

Shitposting is not illegal, are you out of your mind?!

Have you ever heard of the First Amendment?

It's not shitposting. If you say something that is untrue and you know it's untrue and it's defamatory about another person that is no longer free speech. It is illegal. Defamation is a real thing. Slander is a real thing. Libel is a real thing.

Do you really think you know the law better than the fuckin FBI? Better than the White House lawyers? I honestly think you have no idea what the indictment was even about. You think it's about pepe memes or something. It's not.

Saying Hillary is Evil isn't provable but it's not defamatory. And he's right, Russians doing it certainly isn't illegal. Go ahead and link some of what they posted...it's hardly slanderous, and all those lovely legal terms you used don't apply to them. You act like Russians can't buy ads but they have owned whole major sports franchises in the U.S. Like they can't use those to promote advertising they want? Last I checked we're not actively at war with Russia.

Our laws do apply to acts that they do that effect us. We most certainly can indict them. If one of them was to step foot into our country they would be arrested. And they weren't just saying "Hillary is evil." There were posts about her sacrificing children and killing people. When you couple that with the stated intention of "we are going to post shit online with the intention of hurting her chances at winning the Presidency" you have evidence that they were knowingly lying with the expressed intent of hurting her chances of winning. Again, even the White House who read the indictment and got to see where the evidence came from and what was actually being done now agrees "Yep... they should be indicted and what they did was illegal and we can't let this happen again."

And where am I acting like they can't buy ads? They can buy ads but if they are buying ads that are knowingly false and defamatory that is illegal in the US and they would have to face the consequences of that if they were to come to America. And now Trump is going to be forced to deal with Russia and either ask for them to be turned over to face the charges or to act like he doesn't care about it even after he now admitted that they did meddle in the election.

Well, she does reference Molech in an email. I hear that god demands sacrifice.

Trump isn't gonna be "forced" to do anything. That's a silly statement.

My father was in intelligence, and for every Russian agent in the U.S., according to him, we have ten in Russia. The game is played both ways, and the U.S. also likes to have people friendly to them is places of power.

Yeah but I mean if Trump doesn't do anything then he looks complicit now that he admitted that there was meddling and that something needs to be done. So he can either do nothing and hurt himself or do something and prove that he actually does give a shit and does want something to be done.

He looks in no way "complicit", regardless of action or inaction. That is your opinion, and he does give a shit. That's why he ran against Clinton, who yet again references things like Molech and "channeling Eleanor Roosevelt". Yeah, that's a person I want in the White House.

He does look complicit. If he says "they meddled and we can't let this happen" and then people say "Ok.. talk to Putin and ask him to turn over the 13 Russians who we indicted" and he says "Nah.. let's just forget about it on second thought" how is he trying to do anything to prevent it from happening again and why wouldn't he want to do anything about the 13 guys who we know meddled in this election?

Because asking for Russia to turn over 13 people is nothing, and Putin has no reason to even respond anyhow. Tell me, do other countries even possibly meddle in our elections? Then maybe we should investigate other countries as well.

Let's see, this went from treason, to indictment, to impeachment, to collusion, to distant meddling with ads and memes. And those indictments don't even mean they committed the crime, necessarily. Have they had a trial?

But it's laughable thinking that Trump's gonna have a hard time over this. You'll probably lose more sleep than he does.

Trump won't have a hard time with his fans because they would literally cheer for anything he did. And I'd love for these guys to have a trial.. only way to do that is for Trump to get them handed over. If he actually wants to do something about meddling in our elections then surely he'll talk to Putin about that and since Trump is the greatest deal maker of all time and a master influencer he'll have no problem convincing Putin to hand them over.

And, again, how many times is somebody gonna say "Oh.. you are talking about problem A?.. Well what about problem B over here?!" Why deflect? We can't talk about Russia meddling because other countries might also be meddling too? Maybe Trump should have been smart enough to not get on live TV in front of millions of people and say shit like "Hey, Russia, if you are watching.. See if you can find the 30,000 missing emails!" Maybe if he didn't say stuff like that people wouldn't be so interested in looking into Russia?

LOL...you'll stlll try to pin it on Trump. Good luck, it ain't gonna pan out.

No, let's talk about Russian meddling AND other meddling.

Well good... if you have any evidence of other countries meddling then send it on over to the FBI and they'd love to look into it. Believe me Trump would love that to be looked into to deflect from the Russia thing too. I'm sure he has a legion of people looking into it as we speak.

And I'm not trying to pin anything on Trump. His actions will be telling though. If he does something then I believe him that he actually wants to stop meddling in further elections. If he does nothing then it seems like he doesn't give a shit.

Do you understand how fucking sad it is that you have continually tried to obfuscate and minimize the extent to which the Russian government attacked our Democratic institutions? Or do you think the attack only involved shitposting? Or are you stupid enough to this that these are the only indictments on which the Special Counsel is working?

Or maybe you, considering your username and three month old account are trying to do exactly what you were designed to do. That's what's fucking sad. You're argument has boiled down to Americans are dumb and fell for Russian shitposting. Except that argument isn't really arguing anything and only function is to absolve the Russian government of responsibility. We knew a large portion of the United States was dumb when they voted for a fucking moron to take the highest office in the land. You aren't giving us any new information with your clearly inflated opinion on what went on. Sorry comrade, but I'm gonna wait for Mueller to come out and say the probe is over before believing the bullshit that you sell.

to which the Russian government attacked our Democratic institutions?

Source this claim, the indictment makes no mention of this, so you are just a liar.

This fucking indictment, you dunce.

...makes no claim what so ever of Russian government involvement.

You liar.

Can you tell me how Russians shitposting in Russia is relevant to American law?

Maybe you should read the indictment? I should tell you: While you undoubtedly feel very clever with your questions, they're not going to fool anyone who has actually read the indictment. To anyone who has actually read the indictment, you just sound like a tool.

I know it's long -- 37 pages -- and you bore easily. And besides, you don't really care what it says in the indictment. But maybe I can convince you this way:

If you read the indictment, you can lie about it more effectively!

You are probably the eighth person now to tell me to go read the indictment, when I have already read through it several times.

HERE IN THE INDICTMENT FOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T READ IT

It reads like it was written by a ten year old and it is all copy pasted garbage from buzzfeed anyway.

Funny, because to me it read like a indictment from the DoJ, in the same style the mist indictments are written in. Once again, you are lying and obfuscating the truth of the matter because you either are truly too stupid to be able to understand these things, or it's your job not to.

Reads like a shitty Buzzfeed article to me.

We better not say anything bad about Putin on Twitter during their next election or Russia will indict us. This is scary shit.

Every election has organized groups (PACs) releasing information of questionable truth to sway the common man. Why do you think spending is so vital to any campaign?

Sure... and if you register as a PAC and advertise legally then what you are doing isn't illegal. If you intentionally lie about your opponent (for example) in an advertisement and they can prove you lied and it hurt their image then that becomes defamation and it is illegal.

The beauty of this entire election is it reveals on a prominent level the hypocrisies we hold towards our system. Going back to the point u/HasStupidQuestions was making, our problem in this particular case isn't that we're bombarded by half-truths and misconstrued facts - it's that the half-truths and misconstrued facts are not coming from a 'legal' source (ie: the money spent isn't going to the 'proper' people). These types of things aren't new; otherwise every political attack ad would be a smoking gun that completely tanks a candidate's campaign (rarely happens, because most of us are aware that the ad is nowhere near the true story). Similar to the Wikileaks releases - the problem with that isn't that our freedom of election was being subverted from the inside, but that it was being exposed. If our government agencies had discovered that France's elections were a sham and revealed that information to the French public we'd never stop jerking ourselves off over it.

Our outrage is being deflected towards the lesser parts of the issue rather than the root of the problems - our highest levels of government are swamped with corruption and money is the only thing that talks. Their goal was to sow discord, which is why they funded pro-Trump stuff, anti-Trump stuff, racially divisive (BLM-esque) stuff, and various protests. It is why they have been aiming to subvert the presidency post-election. They're cutting into our media's action and that's why our media is unhappy about it.

I'm pretty leftist but I read something on a conservative site that quipped the only thing these 13 Russians did wrong was not form a PAC, and it made me laugh out loud. This country won't allow foreigners to do the propaganda. But to the average dude paying attention to all of this it shouldn't matter where the guy sowing disinfo is born, if it's illegal for these Russians then these PACs need to be brought to task... But yeah im not gonna hold my breath on that one

So, yes, you were completely wrong. All he is saying here is that the indictment itself makes no claims about impact on the election — one way or the other.

It is absolutely not the blanket exoneration you tried to suggest. (Why exactly are you downplaying what the Russians did, anyway?)

Why on earth do you think that anything alleged would alter the outcome of the election? That's laughable, honestly. People who voted for Hillary just really want to believe it, I get it.

I didn’t vote for Hillary. But why the hell do you think countries meddle in foreign elections if they don’t believe it can effect the outcome? Just for the hell of it?

First of all, these are alleged crimes. Secondly, they haven't alleged that they were directed by Russia. And lastly, I don't, nor do I have any reason to trust guys like Rosenstein, Mueler, Clapper, or anyone like that.

So then I suppose Assange thinks that advertising doesn't work and companies spend billions of dollars a year to influence decisions people make just because they feel like throwing money away for nothing?

He's saying that its implausible that they were trying to do anything other than troll, if the accusations are even true.

That's not an "everyone agrees with me" argument. It's a "when even Trump is now saying that he sees there is evidence of Russians meddling in the election there must be something to the indictment." Do you think Trump would have said he agreed with the charges if he looked at the indictment and thought it was bullshit? Of course not. He'd be saying "This is just another stage of the witch hunt by the FBI!!" Instead of that he is now having to admit that there's something there. And if Trump is saying that after actually looking at what the FBI saw I'm going to go ahead and believe him more than I listen to Assange who saw nothing and is talking out of his ass.

But as far as the "Russians were just trolling, lol!" argument. Why the hell would people in Russia decide to "troll" a foreign election? And why would they troll in a way that was specifically targeted to hurt on candidate and help another? That sounds like that trolling had an intended purpose. Almost like it wasn't just "trolling" which is why there were indictments that even Trump can't scoff at.

The thing is, even if its all true, you have to look at it relative to everything else. And when you look at it like that, it can never be more than a tiny drop in a bucket. And their goal was supposedly to "sew discord" because they didn't just have things supporting Trump and Trump's policies.

and they are rank amateurs by CNN and MSNBC standars

That's the truth. I would add Fox though as well. ALL of MSM is spinning and pushing a narrative. If your only getting your information from a left leaning/right leaning site your not getting the full picture. I think it's incredibly important to try to be objective about this shit. There really is a propaganda war being waged and to get to the truth you really have to dig. But it is out there. It's our responsibility to listen to folks who have a different take than the one were already inclined to believe. Does that make sense? I just think its far too easy to read and listen to folks who have the same worldview. I think that's a good chunk of the reason we're in this mess today.

Echo chambers are real and only serve to reaffirm what you already believe but it does nothing to advance the truth. We've got to be diligent these days. You'd think with all of the 24/7 news channels and the internet it would be a piece of cake to see what the actual truth is. But that's just not the case. Both sides keep us so wound the fuck up we can't see straight. I appreciate forums like these where I'm able to discuss things with folks, but even this sub has been overrun with shills/bots. Although I haven't been subscribed for too long I have absolutely noticed the shift as of late. So I know when I'm seeing ideas and opinions being down voted what the actual deal is. For cats who haven't been here, it's rather unfortunate that they believe this is how people in this sub believe. It makes it more difficult for them to discern the truth from the spin. And while I believe that the entire Russia narrative that has been spun is nothing more than a way for people to censor and suppress conservative viewpoints, I hope the biggest take away for Americans is that shills/bots exist. And they are coming from EVERYWHERE.

Fox was actually Anti-Trump during the election.

To be honest I wasn't following any of this shit at the time so you may be right. However now that he is in office, with the exception of Shepard, Fox is absolutely a fan of Trump. I'm not saying don't watch Fox. I had to to get some information on the conspiracy theory involving the FBI/DOJ/HRC. But I wouldn't be objective if I didn't admit that they too are spinning shit. That's all my point was. It's a real bad idea to only get your information from one sides propaganda outlet. I stand by that comment.

During the primaries, until it was clear he would win. Then as expected the tune suddenly shifted.

Didn’t they turn on him at every scandal though? Especially Pussygate.

LOL, sure they were.

Tucker wasn’t always a ‘thing’ there.

Trump kind of made him. Before only Hannity was positive. Remember when things started out Megyn Kelly was still riding the FOX

I followed the election very closely - before and after the primaries. Fox News was not monolithic on Trump before the primaries: different hosts and guests had different opinions. And like a lot of the right, there was a little bit of fear getting too close to Trump because until Trump proved you could be an openly racist bigot and hatemonger, people thought it was backfire. Once he proved how well it worked, the right rallied around Trump -- in fact, they fell in love with him. He's the new Reagan. They would trample Reagan into the dirt to shake Trump's hand if they had a chance. Now the right is all, "Reagan who?"

But even during the primaries there was a lot of support for Trump on Fox News -- more than any other candidate. And of course once he secured the nomination, Fox News became what it is today: The Trump Network.

Preeety sure that they're not actually saying the effort did not sway votes, but that aspect wasn't actually a part of their investigation. And why would it be? Whether or not it swayed any votes is irrelevant as to if a crime was committed.

Perhaps something else came out but what I read said they couldn't prove it altered the election. If their aim was to cause strife, which definitely worked, couldn't you deduce that it could have played even a small part? I agree Hillary was a horrible candidate but there would definitely have been people who voted because of the strife.

Maybe you're referring to the fact that they didn't announce any evidence of them changing votes or something like that.

Rosenstein was very careful to NOT say the Russian interference had no effect of the election outcome; he said he didn't know, it was outside the purview of their investigation and would leave that question to political scientists. Anyone who says they know that this Russian disinfo campaign did NOT affect the election outcome is quite frankly talking out of their ass.

I've talked to people who have worked on crafting such strategies. One of them was a Russian old timer.

r/thathappened

If the guy was really a Russian old timer you do realize that he would have been a part of the Soviet Union right? Russia is a completely different place now largely thanks to the U.S. meddling in Russian affairs to help elect Boris Yelton...

We only had 4 choices in the election and only 2 of those had a legit chance. So my point was absolutely fair. Furthermore I acknowledged that the Russians attempt wasn't to subvert the election but to seed disagreement and discourse with Americans. My point again was that I truly believe the MSM either bought into that or are the true perpetrators of it. And in case you aren't aware, Russia isn't the only country to do what they did. There are also plenty of companies right here in the good ol' USA doing the same goddamn thing. Maybe your comfortable pointing the finger at Russia, but I'm keenly aware that there are many, many players in this propaganda war being waged. Again, Russia didn't cause Trump to win, Clinton did.

MSM is pushing the agenda of their owners and shareholders and responding to the demands of the people who are willing to spend their time following the news and watching all those sweet ads.

Are you aware of Operation Mockinbird? Did you know that CNN gave Clinton the questions that were to be asked at the town hall debate they hosted? Have you heard about Clinton's pied piper strategy?

MSM's agenda is far larger than just profiting off those sweet ads.

So what do you propose we do? Aside from looking past those cats, what should we do in the next election?

Well that's awesome! I think a lot of folks in this country would do themselves and the country a great service by working on themselves. Jordan Peterson says "Clean your room", couldn't be truer. But we do have to choose people to head and make up our government. And in order to start up a business and have a slice of the American dream we have to have people in government who are representing us and pushing policies that will help us achieve our dreams. While I get where your going with this and I agree more than you'd think that a lot of this shit is just smoke and mirrors, if we continue to believe the media and our politicians they will continue to pull the wool over our eyes and push forth there own agendas. Again I do believe you've got the right approach. We have to hold ourselves accountable before we can affect change at a larger level. I think it was Ghandi who said "Be the change you want to see". Couldn't be more true. Props to you for being a responsible, accountable person. We need more individuals like yourself.

Having my own business and working for myself is a dream of mine. I know I could do it. When I'm passionate about something I throw myself in entirely. But I'm unclear on exactly what it would be. I've been meditating trying to figure it all out. When I do I may hit you up!

A little Tony Robbins, but I fucking love self help shit so if you've got suggestions I'm absolutely open to them. Again I think my main obstacle is not being clear on what it would be. I need the vision first if that makes sense. Anyways thanks and I absolutely will!

I realize that in all likely hood I will fail initially and that it's what I learn from that failure that will have the biggest impact on future endeavors. Hell I'm likely to fail many, many times. But your right. Gotta just jump in. I appreciate the advice. Thanks for taking the time. Enjoy your Sunday!

They still have to bicker. They still need to defend themselves as though they actually made the choices consciously. They kid themselves. The truth will embarrass them later, but for now the nation is in a state of denial and will remain so until the other boot falls.

If you are going to issue pronouncements about what the Russians were doing, you should probably read the indictment. Because your characterization of their efforts is flat wrong. They were trying to get Trump elected. Period. The reason for sowing division was to destroy any unified opposition that could have beat him.

Read the indictment. Until you do it will be obvious you don’t know what you are talking about.

I did read it. What was there purpose in buying ads on Facebook AFTER the election? How about them holding rallies both for and against Trump AFTER the election? And what did Rosenstein say about it? Did you watch his press briefing? I did. He clearly stated that they did NOT subvert the election and were only trying to sow seeds of discourse with Americans.

I think a lot of folks just don't want to believe that Clinton lost because she sucked. That's the only conclusion I can come too. I know she wrote an entire book about how it wasn't her fault. Thy doth protest too much. She had over a billion dollars at her disposal. Companies like Google rearranging search results. Companies like ShareBlue and Correct The Record doing the exact same thing Russia has been accused of.

And something else that is being completely overlooked, this is an indictment. It's not a guilty conviction. And more likely than not those cats will never be extradited, therefore there will never be a trial. We will never see their point of view or evidence contradicting the accusation. It's amazing to me how in this day in age people are so quick to presume guilt just because someone tosses out an accusation. It's entirely too convenient. Innocent until proven guilty is dead in this country.

They were trying to get Trump elected. Period.

Then why did they hold anti-Trump rallies? Did you even read the indictments? Or did you just pick and choose the info you wanted from it?

And you're upset about outside nationals influencing US elections? The Democrats invited a foreign national to their Democratic Convention. The Democrats paid a foreign spy to gather up Russian propaganda which was then used to spy on a political opponent. Yet you're upset that some Russians bought some Facebook ads?

I think the Russians' goal was to undermine the incoming president, whoever that may be. If so, then the Democrats screaming about Russian collusion and Russian influence and undermining President Trump would be directly playing into the Russian propaganda and doing exactly what they want.

The way to fight back against the Russian propaganda would in fact be to reunify as a nation and work together to make America a stronger, better nation.

If all we saw was this thread it would appear they succeeded.

And to be honest I think the MSM has played right into that.

The MSM has been whipping the populace into a frenzy for well over a century. Selling papers, baiting clicks, the same principles of mass manipulation are at play.

While true, I believe this shits epic right now. If I watch an hour of CNN and then watch an hour of Fox I legit get two entirely different stories. And while I admittedly haven't been following politics for awhile, I've never seen it this polarizing.

True. The principles remain the same, yet the process is accelerating.

The worst part is they are both lying.

It's true both sides are lying, or often misleading or lying by omission.

However, the left has been dragged so far off the reservation by their radical side they've made common sense a platform of the right wing. When asked what conservatives stand for today, they can point at Bill Nyes gender bending song and raise their eyebrows and say "fucking not that". It's very persuasive. Here's hoping the left can get their house in order before we go too further down this road.

This is the logical result of our capitalist system. I don't know how you would expect otherwise without regulation of how news corporations present their messages.

If you think this is limited only to capitalism, I have a gulag for you.

You make to much sense. Even Michael Moore who I am not a fan of predicted EXACTLY how Hillary would lose. Those rust belt states cost her plain and simple. Wisconsin, Ohio etc. I personally knew when Jeb Bush got destroyed here in SC and Trump won that things were not going according to script.

/u/starry7833378333, what you just asserted, essentially, is that aggressive campaigning didn't work. The problem is that aggressive campaigning does work. Swift-boating, smearing, and generally rallying does indeed work, which is why political operatives do it.

"I truly believe Hillary lost because she was an awful candidate to begin with." That is certainly part of why she lost -- she was a terrible candidate for many reasons, one of which was a three-decade-long hate campaign. Nevertheless, her loss was an upset of historic proportions -- it was puzzling in part because, despite all the various fireworks of 2016, nearly every poll indicated she was the front-runner -- yet she lost by quite a few states. That indicates there was something particularly unusual about this election.

Well, Mueller found something particularly unusual about this election.

Whether the Russians swung the 2016 election or not is something that we will be discussing a long time, but there can be no doubt that they affected it.

Why is a top level FBI special council still being run on the taxpayers dime then? Genuine question.

What I asserted was exactly what Rosenstein said in his presser. He clearly stated that the election was NOT swayed by the Russians. Maybe you wanna blame someone, but the tactics they were allegedly using were the exact same tactics Clinton was using. People who unwittingly retweeted or attended rallies set up by Russians weren't influenced by them. They had already made up their minds.

As for Hillary being a terrible candidate, we all watched her lie repeatedly about her emails. She's not trustworthy. And as for the polls, I don't know why anyone was surprised that people weren't telling the truth about who they were voting for. The media was shaming folks on the right for months leading up to the election. They continue to shame them to this very day. The people who voted for Trump are not the ignorant, racist, bigot, islamaphobes that they've been depicted as. Immigration is a real problem in this country. People got behind that message. The sheer amount of jobs that have fled to other countries is another issue that pressed highly on their minds. Trump's was pretty clear on where he stood on those issues. And many of the policies that caused these issues in the first place she is responsible for.

Again, the election was NOT affected. Your entitled to your opinion just as am I but your wrong about this. If your so concerned with Russia and their influence here in the states, I wonder why you aren't so riled up about her involvement in Uranium One. You know the deal where Russia got 1/5 of our uranium. All of the money her foundation got from Russian donors who directly benefited from the sale and the $500,000 Bill got from speaking at a Russian event. You know the one Putin personally thanked him for.

You're misconstruing Rosenstein's words. He was talking about the people in that specific indictment, not in general.

And this post was about those indictments. Look I get you think that it was Russia's fault that Hillary lost, but I don't believe that. And neither you or I have evidence to back up our beliefs. There is an ongoing investigation. If Russia did somehow influence millions of Americans to vote for Trump, Mueller's already on it. I will say though that were nearly a year into this investigation and neither you or I have seen evidence that supports your theory.

I truly believe that Clinton lost because she robbed Bernie and lied repeatedly to all of us about those emails. It was very unfortunate for her that the wikileaks dump and the email investigation happened right before the election. But she still had the advantage in my opinion. Which the exception of Fox and a few right wing online publications she had the vast majority of media shilling for her. Hell CNN gave her the questions to the town hall they hosted. She had over a billion dollars at her disposal. She had companies like ShareBlue and Correct The Record doing her bidding. Google was all in for her. It's amazing to me to this day that she didn't win.

I saw someone else post this elsewhere and I kinda like it, he didn't vote for Trump he opted for Green. I think it sums up pretty well what happened in the 2016 election.

So, on the day Hillary lost and Trump won, I was very pleasantly surprised, because it meant that America has at least a few fucks to give left, and she told Corporate DC to fuck right off.

Fuck the emails. She lost when she called half the country 'deplorables'

Wasn't that half of all Trump supporters?

Hillary Clinton said half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views.

Now, I don't think was a clever thing to say, but.....I know many Trump supporters. Honestly, what percentage of Trump supporters that you know could accurately be described as having “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views?

I don't know if it's 50 percent, but it's up there- speaking only out of who I've met who I know to be Trump supporters.

Giant tax cuts? More military spending? Trump has turned out to be just as corporate DC as she was lol

1. Giant tax cuts for nearly everyone combined with rising wages and never before seen management of wasteful Federal spending and a new direction for immigration, international trade agreements, and international tax havens is the reality we are entering. But sure, let's just toss around oversimplified platitudes like "tax cuts for the rich bad!" and bury our heads in the sand regarding the massive economic revival we are about to experience. Aren't you brave and so original and clever too!

2. Trump inherited a massively overstretched military. Yes military spending was high, but it was in fact far too low to keep support the existing infrastructure. It was a legitimate national security risk. I expect that we will see a lot of restructuring and unwinding of existing military conflicts before this is all said and done, and ultimately we should want to have a very strong and capable military. The reason we are spending so much is because we had been trying to police the world. Those days are hopefully ending soon, but it would be disastrous to just pack up and go home after causing so much chaos and codependent relationships with war torn areas.

1. Giant tax cuts for nearly everyone combined with rising wages and never before seen management of wasteful Federal spending and a new direction for immigration, international trade agreements, and international tax havens is the reality we are entering. But sure, let's just toss around oversimplified platitudes like "tax cuts for the rich bad!" and bury our heads in the sand regarding the massive economic revival we are about to experience. Aren't you brave and so original and clever too!
   

Pretty fucking rich for you to talk about oversimplified platitudes when you say shit like "a new direction for immigration". The tax cuts are disproportionately weighted to the rich and will increase government borrowing.

1. Trump inherited a massively overstretched military. Yes military spending was high, but it was in fact far too low to support the existing infrastructure. It was a legitimate national security risk. I expect that we will see a lot of restructuring and unwinding of existing military conflicts before this is all said and done, and ultimately we should want to have a very strong and capable military. The reason we are spending so much is because we had been trying to police the world. Those days are hopefully ending soon, but it would be disastrous to just pack up and go home after causing so much chaos and codependent relationships with war torn areas.

Again, you're arguing in platitudes. You cite no figures or relevant quotes to back up these claims you're making. In one year's time Trump increased the size of the U.S. forces in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

U.S. forces totaled just over 18,000 in these three countries at the end of last December, just before President Obama completed his term, according to the Pentagon's Defense Manpower Data Center.

The combined figure was about 26,000 as of the end of September, the most recent data available from the Pentagon

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/12/01/566798632/under-trump-u-s-troops-in-war-zones-are-on-the-rise

with rising wages and never before seen management of wasteful Federal spending

He did nothing for wages and increased the deficit??? What are you on? He cut taxes and increased spending????

I expect that we will see a lot of restructuring and unwinding of existing military conflicts

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/17/us-military-syria-isis-iran-assad-tillerson

He clearly stated that the election was NOT swayed by the Russians.

Wrong.

He stated nothing in the indictment alleges the election was swayed by the Russians.

It wouldn't, of course. That's not what indictments are. That's not Mueller's job to find out. It would be up to Congress.

Mueller may very well believe the Russians swayed the election. It still wouldn't be in that document.

And as for the polls, I don't know why anyone was surprised that people weren't telling the truth about who they were voting for.

The polling models assumed that working class whites who went heavily for Obama in 2008 and 2012 were Democrats and would likely vote for Clinton out of party loyalty. Oops.

Funny that isn't it? The people voting for change in 2008 and 2012 that didn't experience any to speak of, voted for a new "change" candidate in 2016. Crazy that he won, right? Who would have thunk that voters desperate for change would continue to vote for it no matter who promised it.

Polls are used to tell you how to think, not to accurately measure public sentiment. Edward Bernays figured this out a century ago, folks need to catch up a little bit.

Polls can be used either way. Done right, they are scientific instruments. Done "wrong", they are propaganda tools (e.g., "push polls").

Oh absolutely but I suspect the only polls done "right" in the last presidential election were internal Trump campaign polling and Cambridge Analytica. I think Nate Silver did the best he could but failed in subjective analysis, otherwise there were no major polls that were "done right."

Information is critically valuable. Polls freely available to the public should always be considered suspect, unless done extremely openly like 538.

Push polls are not polls at all. They're fake surveys intended to influence peoples' decision making.

Whether the Russians swung the 2016 election or not is something that we will be discussing a long time, but there can be no doubt that they affected it.

lol

Clearly the silent majority was huge. Many pro trump people were scared of the ridicule that was coming by being the only one in the room that preferred trump, even though they rarely were.

...or maybe the polling companies aren't as good as they think they are.

Your argument is flawed:

1) Polling says Hillary should have won

2) Hillary didn't win

3) This is particularly unusual (Not at all, but we'll let that slide)

4) Muller found something particularly unusual about the election.

5) Russia affected the election (I read this as Russia had an actual effect on the election, otherwise your post is meaningless)

Even if we accept your - quite interesting - premises, they do not support the conclusion.

We could even change 4) to "Putin did everything in his power to get Trump elected" and your argument still wouldn't hold water.

The issue is that you build on the premise that there can only be one reason that polling companies guesses incorrectly and this is obviously not true.

No, actually, you haven't captured it properly.

(1) Polling is usually approximately right, and has been since the Carter adminstration.

(2) Polling was grossly wrong for this election.

(3) This is particularly unusual for a presidential election (thanks for letting that slide, but I'll elaborate. It's highly unusual for every major poll to be wrong. It's not unusual for an individual poll to be wrong).

(4) Muller found something particularly unusual about the election: Russia attempted to interfere with it.

(5) It is at least plausible that Russia affected the outcome of the election.

Note that I am not drawing the outright conclusion that Russian influence caused the election to swing. I'm making the case that it is plausible they did.

"Whether the Russians swung the 2016 election or not is something that we will be discussing a long time, but there can be no doubt that they affected it."

You're cleaning up your conclusion now.

No, not really. In the one case I'm discussing the outcome of the election. In the other case, I'm discussing the election itself. There is no doubt that the Russians affected the election itself. The only doubt is whether they swung the election.

Downvoting people just because you disagree with them is a bad habit.

..or to be more precise, it tries to move the argument from what is actually correct to a popularity contest.

Anyways...

I affected the election. I wrote something online that was read by somebody who had the potential to vote. It might have affected them.

Is this really what we're looking for?

But my argument still stands.

You have not proven a connection between poor polling results and Russian interference.

There are many other potential reasons why the polling companies were wrong. My guess would be that they have an outdated understanding of which demographics vote and how they vote.

I'm not a statistician by training but I use it in my daily work. I assume that the models they use are quite complicated, and based on several assumptions, many of these based on historical data.

We know that the 2016 election was unique in many ways. (It seems we agree on this). I will postulate that one of the ways it was unique is who turned up to vote and who they voted for. (Im sure we also agree on this)

This does not mean that the Russians did it. It means that something changed.

her loss was an upset of historic proportions -- it was puzzling in part because, despite all the various fireworks of 2016, nearly every poll indicated she was the front-runner

Those polls were factually wrong. Many were biased and slanted towards Democrats. Many people did not want to be called a Nazi just because they voted Trump. The only thing odd about this election is that the media elites are too far removed from the reality of everyday people and tried to convince the people they know what's best for them. They are now upset that their propaganda did not work and are doubling down and trying to overthrow a democratically official.

I also like how you dismiss criticism of Hillary Clinton as "three-decade-long hate campaign" but you the imply that Mueller's investigation into Trump is evidence of something. No, it's just another smear attack done by a political opponent.

The Mueller investigation is concerning -- but they did bring home at least some bacon. For comparison, at this point in the Ken Starr Whitewater investigation, we were about 1/3 of the way in. That search turned up zip.

Funny too because at the time Hillary was declaring that WJC was the victim of a "vast right wing conspiracy". Some things never changer, right?

Sure. We know that there was no "vast" conspiracy. On the other hand, Whitewater and the impeachment effort were being pushed by a small conspiracy who really, really wanted to get the Clintons. In the end, the Whitewater probe (what Hillary was talking about when she used that term) found no wrongdoing at all. Bill was impeached over a quibble about the definition of sex ("By the definition you gave me, I did not have sex with that woman") -- but the three leaders of that effort (Dennis Hastert, Newt Gingrich, and Bob Livingston) all ended up having worse sexual pecadilloes. Hastert eventually went to prison for his.

no doubt that they affected it.

who is "they"?

That's meaningless. I affected the election by talking to my neighbor about it. These Russian trolls had no effect. People who voted for Hillary are just clinging on to that idea, but its pure idiocy.

Russian troll bots didn't do anything. A Republican finally ran on The Sailer Strategy and won just as expected.

I think you missed a key point. Aggressive campaigning can and does work, when the publics perception has yet to be formed about a candidate. You can get out ahead of a Mitt Romney and turn binders full of women into a campaign sinking visual.

You couldn't do that to Trump though. People already formed an opinion of him over the span of 40 years. To compound that, there was loads of media of the same people trying to sink him in 2016, striking his ego a decade previous. The more shit they threw at him, the worse it made them look and the more right it made Trump seem.

Sure. But the question isn't what the opposing campaigns were doing -- it is whether the Trump campaign received a winning boost from the Russians. We don't have proof (and maybe never will, unless Hari Seldon or his equivalent arrives to tell us) that the Russians swung the election with those tactics -- but it's certainly plausible that they did. That plausibility is very concerning, because it strikes at the heart of our democracy. If public opinion can be swayed by a microtargeted propaganda campaign directed by a foreign power, how can we maintain our integrity as a nation? A few years ago, the very idea would have been laughable. Now it is deadly serious. The seriousness of the concern is distinct from the question of whether the election was actually affected. Our democracy depends on the notion of electoral legitimacy of leadership. That rock-solid idea was what made things like Birtherism laughable to the mainstream. The need to keep it rock-solid in the public's mind is what made birtherism so insidious and erosive for the country as a whole.

The fact that there is a real, not-crazy concern that this President might not be legitimate is a real worry -- never mind what might have happened in an alternate Universe without Russian meddling. The worry is not that this President sucks (or not) -- we've had bad Presidents before. The worry is that, with so many of the population genuinely, legitimately (heh) concerned about it, the nation is less stable than it has been since, oh, the 1860s.

I agree that it's insane and dangerous that people actually believe the election might not have been legitimate, and you can blame the frothing at the mouth legacy media for that. Do you know that this was actually the intended goal of Russian "meddling"? Facebooks head of advertising even came out and said the vast majority of the small number of ads bought were launched after the election.

Let me ask you this. We're sitting around here talking about a million or 2 spent on divisive Russian troll ads on social media, where most people are scrolling past anyway. Why aren't we then talking about a foreign citizen like say, John Oliver, or Trevor Noah, running daily propaganda broadcast out to millions. Did that have an effect on the election?

That is the fallacy of whataboutism. The examples you just gave may be of interest, but they are quite different in kind from deceptive organization of fake political rallies, and the other things the russian operatives did. They are certainly worth discussing, but introducing them now, in this context, can only be a distracting tactic.

Nobody seems to really get whataboutism.You seem to take it I'm conceding the point and trying to deflect.

First of all, I don't think it's a good idea at all to either go around figuring out what speech and by whom is allowed because that has not only the potential but guarantee to be an abuse of power. Republicans had to deal with this, and still are by the way, with George Soros for example. The guy has spent orders of magnitude more doing the same and far worse than these Russians. People in the right got organized and got the word out that there were bogus protests being organized. What they aren't doing is wondering out loud if we need a minister of truth to discern what is and isn't propaganda (like obama attempted with an executive order).

And I'm sorry, but if you want to make the point that what the Russians did is of dire consequence and that it possibly undermined the election, it is entirely relevant my asking if you're as concerned if not far more concerned with the examples I brought up. That helps me get a gauge on the particulars of the problem you're trying to outline and what could or should be done about it. That you see it as "whataboutism" to me says you don't really see it as an issue, just a tool to be picked up and used when politically expedient to you and dropped when it becomes an inconvenient contradiction aka "whataboutism"

I do not think you are “conceding the point” I just think you are, in bad faith, trying to deflect our discussion. Issues surrounding Trevor Noah do not affect whether Russian operatives tried to sow mayhem in the American political system, which is he topic we have been discussing. Sorry, I am done now.

But why are you done now? You clearly seem concerned about the integrity of our election and I've seemingly brought to light an even bigger case of foreign meddling than we'd previously been focused on. Clearly this IS a problem we need to address and it's even worse than we thought!

Or you're scampering away now because you realize what a glaring inconsistency I've pointed out and you in fact don't care and don't believe it's that big a deal and it's nothing more than a convenient tool you've picked up and used. Have you been arguing in bad faith this whole time with just me or were you fooling yourself as well? Or maybe you do think this stuff is important but you'd rather try to save face by deflecting again?

You're not discussing with me, you're playing to a hypothetical third party. Message me if you really want to discuss these issues, but can the hyperbole.

I was discussing with you, until I ascertained that you're full of shit and you don't actually give a fuck about "election meddling". Now I'm making an example out of you.

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeepublican?

So she's worse than someone who sexually assaults women?

Our nation isnt fractured. Thats just what the MSM want you to think. Out in the real world everybody gets along fine.

This is mostly true. The vast majority of people are decent to one another on a daily basis.

Right even though she got more votes

She knew how the electoral college works. It was her decision not to go to states that had historically gone blue. That was a bad move on her part. Not Russia's.

As much as I believe Trump to be a master manipulator I 100% believe she was worse.

That's because you fell for Russian propaganda. I like how people claim that propaganda had no effect on the election while they parrot literal Russian talking points.

Did Russia lie about her emails? Did Russia rob Bernie of the nomination? I didn't fall for anything my friend. Those were very real actions she committed. You however have become a victim of the propaganda she and others in the media and the left have been propagating.

Did Russia rob Bernie of the nomination?

No one robbed Bernie of anything. That was the Russian propaganda you fell for.

Is Donna Brazille a Russian operative promoting Russian propaganda?

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Brazile: I found no evidence Democratic primary was rigged

That Donna Brazile?

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

This Donna Brazille.

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal

Unethical is subjective, illegal isn't. Nothing the DNC did was illegal and I fail to see how the funding arrangement, that didn't apply until after the primaries, got 3.7 million more people to vote for Clinton in the primaries. Care to explain that?

Your correct that it wasn't technically illegal. Your incorrect in your assumption that this happened after the primaries. If you'd taken the time to have read the quote from Donna Brazille herself you'd recognize that.

As for the 3.7 million votes that has nothing whatsoever to do with Hillary buying the DNC and robbing Bernie and his supporters. It does have everything to do with the electoral college that Clinton was very much aware of. Maybe rather than robbing Bernie and his supporters blind she should have been out campaigning in states that she took for granted. That too is on her. Not Russia.

It's funny how people seem to think the unethical yet not illegal things Trump does with regards to tax dodging and bankruptcy make him smart but makes anyone else a crook...

I do agree that Hilary was a shit candidate who most people did not like, even a liberal person like myself.

Yep, not a fan of Clinton at all, but my god, she would not of been 1/20th this bad.

Your incorrect in your assumption that this happened after the primaries.

No, the funding agreement you're referring to only took effect after the primary was over.

"all activities performed under this agreement will be focused exclusively on preparations for the General Election and not the Democratic Primary."
The agreement also noted that the DNC "may enter into similar agreements with other candidates."

Clinton Campaign Had Additional Signed Agreement With DNC In 2015

As for the 3.7 million votes that has nothing whatsoever to do with Hillary buying the DNC and robbing Bernie and his supporters.

Please explain how Bernie got robbed? How did the DNC rob him? How was the primary rigged? Why can't anyone yelling about Bernie getting robbed ever answer these simple questions?

The head of the DNC at the time, Donna Brazille (the lady that gave Hillary the questions to the town hall when she was working for CNN), thought it was unethical. She felt bad for Bernie. Obviously you don't.

Please explain how Bernie got robbed? How did the DNC rob him? How was the primary rigged?

If I get a few Russians to tweet that trump bragged about grabbing pussies, does that mean you fell for propaganda by believing it? Even though you saw a video of him doing it?

No, of course not. Facts are facts, and who is saying it does not change facts. The primary was rigged, Clinton is a liar, and you are not a smart person.

The WikiLeaks emails were cryptographically verified to be authentic. Try not to fall over and hit your head when you find out just how badly you have been manipulated.

The WikiLeaks emails were cryptographically verified to be authentic.

Please explain what it was in those Wikileaks emails they did to get 3.7 million more people to vote for Sanders.

The Clinton campaign colluded with the DNC to influence the media portrayal of the candidates to favor Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders using networks of hundreds of media surrogates. They created a "surrogate firewall" to ensure that prospective voters viewed Sanders as an impossible alternative before the first primary race. The strategy is outlined clearly in the DNC and Podesta email leaks. Repeatedly quoting vote totals to discourage Sanders turnout was one of the strategies they created before the voting even began. You are either an unwitting victim of their collusion campaign or else you are intentionally covering for their wrongdoing.

Since you were apparently too lazy to perform a cursory search of the WikiLeaks archive, let me go ahead and spell it out for you. Of course, it's entirely possible and even likely that you already knew everything I wrote and you are knowingly covering for their blatant wrongdoing.

The Clinton campaign colluded with the DNC to influence the media portrayal of the candidates to favor Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders using networks of hundreds of media surrogates.

No emails show Clinton and the DNC conspiring together to do this.

They created a "delegate firewall" to ensure that prospective voters viewed Sanders as an impossible alternative before the first primary votes were cast. The strategy is outlined clearly in the DNC and Podesta email leaks.

No emails show Clinton and the DNC conspiring together to do this.

Repeatedly quoting vote totals to discourage Sanders turnout was one of the strategies they created before the voting even began.

No emails show Clinton and the DNC conspiring together to do this.

Pretty bold to tell a blatant lie when the evidence is sitting right there for anyone to see. I'll post a couple of very clear examples when I get on a real computer tonight. You have a couple of hours to decide if you want to stand your ground with your garbage lie or do the right and admit the truth about this collusion. Either way, you'll be proven wrong soon enough. If that's the side you want to be on, then that is your choice.

(Here's a hint in case you honestly missed the relevant emails: the clearest proof is found in the attachments)

I'll post a couple of very clear examples when I get on a real computer tonight.

Okay.

https://www.wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/5636

(See attachment #2)

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/27020

(See attachment #1)

Read through to the end of those attachments. It's amazing how clearly they laid out their manipulative strategies and media collusion.

Nothing there comes close to supporting the 3 accusations you made above. Feel free to prove me wrong by actually presenting a focused and detailed argument as opposed to just copy/pasting 2 links.

What a load of shit. My usage of "delegate firewall" is an exact quote. There are multiple points where they describe their network of media surrogates, both on record and off record. It will take 20 minutes for anyone to read through those two attachments and clearly understand how far the DNC/Clinton/media collusion went. I'm on mobile again, so it will be hard for me to spoon feed you at the moment. However, you are plainly deluded if you don't understand the relationship between the points that I made and the contents of those particular attachments.

It will take 20 minutes for anyone to read through those two attachments and clearly understand how far the DNC/Clinton/media collusion went.

Point it out. You've been dragging this on and on, time to actually make your case already.

Did Russia rob Bernie of the nomination?

According to the Mueller indictments Russia actually supported Bernie.

Russia actually supported Bernie.

So Russia's not as bad as the media's portraying then.

It may be that the Russians parroted the talking point that Hillary was worse than Trump, but people have hated her since her husband was president. Remember when a black guy with little political experience or name recognition smoked her in the democratic primaries? Remember when every poll ahead of the last primaries showed Bernie performing better than her against Trump in the general election?

Don’t buy into this Hamilton 68 bullshit that every perspective parroted by Russian bots is now Russian propaganda.

There was a reporter on NPR the other day citing Hamilton 68 and saying that the Russians CREATED #guncontrol following the Florida school shooting - it’s just absurd.

That's because you fell for Russian propaganda.

I've got hairs on my nuts older than most of the people on this sub.

I well remember the stink that has followed the Clintons since their days in Arkansas. The Mena Connection, White Water, Vince Foster, a litany of sexual assault allegations against Bubba, Mrs.Clinton's involvement in Filegate, President Clinton's disbarment for perjury, etc, etc.

That reputation and basis for distrust wasn't manufactured for the 2016 election.

Aside from the sliminess of the Clintons, something else hasn't changed since the 90's - namely, Hillary Clinton resorting to thin conspiracy theories to explain her and her husband's toxic reputation!

https://youtu.be/EwtkorQKGFE

The Russians weren't a convenient target back then, but the M.O. has never really changed.

Nothing is these people's fault, ever! Including their infamy!

But yes, why believe my "lying eyes", right?

I've watched Republicans attack the Clintons for well over 20 years now. I've watched them spend over 100 million of our tax dollars investigating Bill and Hillary and all they were able to produce was one count of perjury over a consensual blowjob. So scandalous! /s

Meanwhile, Mueller's investigation has produced multiple indictments as well as multiple cooperating witnesses in less than a year and at a fraction of the cost and it's not over. This is what a real criminal investigation looks like when it's ran by a seasoned professional.

For some reason, they decided to impeach the Clintons over something minor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Starr#Independent_counsel They were investigated over Whitewater originally.

For some reason, they decided to impeach the Clintons over something minor.

That's because they couldn't find evidence of anything else. 100 million to find out our President got a blowjob. Thanks party of fiscal responsibility!

party of fiscal responsibility

How people believe that is mind blowing. The deficit reduces with democrats and increases with republicans every single time.

Personally I think we should have a few more Benghazi investigations /s

Lots of Americans wouldn't vote for Hillary because she is a woman. They also have the Clinton's. They also hate Democrats. That isn't Russian propaganda that's just life.

lol "anybody who dares to disagree with somebody as intelligent as I am was duped by the Russians!" Grow up.

LMAO.

"Everything that makes Hillary look bad is Russian propaganda!"

I wonder if you actually believe that. If so, man, I'm sorry. No, she was fucking terrible and everyone knows it. That's how someone like Trump beat her.

We’re all familiar with the case of the man shooting up a pizza place because of fake news about Hillary and a pedophilia ring, right?

So explain to me how this flood of false information can get people to act in that matter. Yet it’s unthinkable that it could sway votes? That’s mental gymnastics at its finest in my opinion.

I don't know too much about pizzagate and the guy that shot up the computer in the pizza joint, but I did recently watch a TEDx talk about "fake news" and it's origin in the modern context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQcCIzjz9_s

Every side is pushing propaganda. Not just the right.

Yes but there are rules around how funds are spent during elections. I mean citizens united completely threw your democracy to the wolves, but honest candidates still play by much stricter rules than the Russians.

Of course legitimately or not this activity is done to sway votes! So we agree it has an affect. We should be able to agree Russia is doing this on a massive scale. All that’s left to determine is if you think your country should try to stop Russia and how you can do that.

Clinton literally bought the DNC. I don't get how you can consider her to be an "honest" candidate.

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

Clinton's a damn good lawyer and has damn good lawyers on her side. But I find it troubling that people donated to Sanders campaign thinking he had a shot when in fact Clinton had already paid for the nomination. Why this isn't illegal is beyond me.

K why do you gotta get triggered about Clinton non stop? I’m talking about candidates in general compared to foreign bodies acting under the radar. You aren’t going to address the Russia issue if you want to bring up Clinton at every turn. But maybe that’s your goal....

I'm not triggered by Clinton. She's irrelevant these days. I could however argue that there are many on this site who seem to be. I posted what I thought about this whole Russia, Russia, Russia bullshit. It's quite obvious to me that if Russia is doing it other countries are. There are companies right here in the states doing it. But the media isn't talking about them. A lot of you guys aren't talking about them. Why not? Why only Russia? The only think I can conclude is that a lot of folks truly believe that Russia is the reason Clinton lost and I just don't buy that for a minute. Maybe you should ask yourself if maybe your a victim of propaganda being pushed by the left and MSM.

You’re the only one bringing up Clinton......

If they are operating in the states there is a paper trail and the money can be followed. I haven’t scratched the surface describing the differences.

Your reply was a whole lot of “what aboutism?”

You were the one who brought up how there were rules regarding campaign finance. I brought up how she bent those rules. Your the one trying to change the topic.

Lol the point is there are rules she would have to break. My point stand regardless if either of the clintons were ever on politics. I said nothing about them.

In fact I simple said “honest candidates”

And your reply was” how can you say Hillary is honest!?”

You seem obsessed.

We’re all familiar with the case of the man shooting up a pizza place because of fake news about Hillary and a pedophilia ring, right?

This was your reply to my initial comment. You brought up Hillary first my friend. She lost. She's irrelevant to me and to the rest of the country. I'm not obsessed. I just don't believe she lost because of Russian propaganda. Was it Russian propaganda that cause her to lose the nomination in 2008? Of course not. She just royally sucked as a candidate.

You however seem to be a victim of her and the MSM's propaganda. I feel for you really. I think there will be much more to come to light in the next few months. It's going to be difficult for cats like you who are so dug into your worldviews and our clearly victims of propaganda that's been pushed on you all from many media sites. You'll either have your reality shattered and be a broken individual or you'll be a victim of cognitive dissonance. Good luck with that my friend!

You defended yourself well man. Sometimes I wonder if these are paid shills or actually people.

This one is tough to tell.

What you described is gas lighting and like you I think a lot of people will have a rude awakening when reality comes knocking.

Ahh...thank you! It's exhausting sometimes in here. Ha!

I get people have opinions that are different than mine and when their coming from a genuine place I can respect that. But lately I've seen many comments that were just outright wrong. And I guess it's possible some people may just be ignorant about the topic, but I do believe there are folks who are intentionally misleading and twisting facts to paint a picture that's false. Shills. If nothing else the indictments should prove to people that shills and bots exist to push a narrative that someone wants you to believe. It's just a reality these days. Suppression and censorship isn't as obvious as it once was.

I will say however, there are a few cats in here that I have been able to have a legit conversation with. Even though we may see things differently. This cat wasn't one.

Well that wasn’t really about Clinton so much as the fake news that spurred people into taking action. Can’t see the forest for the trees.....

mentioning the keyword "Hillary" set off his parameters

She was literally running on ending citizens united though.

Saying something and doing something are two different things. Things politicians are notoriously guilty of doing.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Well I guess we'll never know then.

And a lot of liberals didn't believe her.

Perhaps companies here in the states are involved with political messaging because it's here in the states. Russia is our foreign adversary with a stated objective to undermine our nation's security. Maybe that's why people are pissed. Clinton lost because she sucked, but maybe she didn't suck as much as was advertised by Russian turds.

There goal was to cause civil discourse. And you cats and the media are eating it the fuck up. Your the pawn my friend. You fell right into their trap. She lost. Time to let it the fuck go.

I know what you're trying to say, but "There goal was to cause civil discourse" means that they were trying to promote civil discussion. Also, *they're, and *you're. Something tells me you're not the intellectual you think you are. I've let it go, have you?

I had to repeat 11th grade English. You've got me.

Derp derp.

left and MSM

That is two different sides.

Whoa, you are not American. You better stop trying to influence people here with your "facts" or you will be prosecuted. Consider this your warning. American politics is for American discussion only.

case of the man shooting up a pizza place because of fake news about Hillary and a pedophilia ring, right?

Well somehow you've been convinced this is how the event took place so you should already be familiar with floods of false information.

We’re all familiar with the case of the man shooting up a pizza place because of fake news about Hillary and a pedophilia ring, right?

You do know that everything about that shooting was sketchy as fuck, right?

Or are we still allowed to have such observations on a "conspiracy" forum?

Pizzagate is not fake news and that guy was literally a paid actor. Oh, and he just happened to shoot the hard drive of their computer.

Critical thinking is important.

Russia supported Trump, not the left

uh

The Watergate break in didn't affect the outcome of the '72 election. That doesn't mean it didn't subvert Democracy. Maybe this time it didn't affect the outcome of the election, despite the razor thin upset margin. You still have to punish it or else someone else will do the same thing and actually affect the outcome.

Who we going to punish? Who do you think will be extradited? Do you really think there will be a trial? It's a little convenient if you ask me.

And it's like you cats don't know that they did it for several candidates, did a lot of it AFTER the election, and according to Rosenstein:

“The indictment alleges that the Russian conspirators want to promote discord in the United States and undermine public confidence in democracy.

What do you think this post might be indicative of?

You cats are passionate. I'll give you that.

The indicted Russian nationals are essentially banned from every country with an extradition treaty with United States.

And there are also American confederates that can be punished directly.

Wrong.

There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity.

Ok, there’s no allegation. There’s no allegation yet.

The ones subverting it are the Deep State. It is being subverted by them (and their buddies in the MSM), but fortunately, most of America sees through their bullshit this time.

Technically, Hillary got the popular vote. Trump only won through the electorate.

It makes a whole lot more sense when you think of the media class like they're someone who is nearing the end of a long term relationship who sees the writing on the ground wall, doesn't want to take responsibility despite deeply knowing they're responsible, and is desperate to deflect and project all their frustration and shortcomings into the other party.

If you've ever known people like this or been in the situation yourself, you'll notice that the preoccupation and focus and paranoia is intense and that any sense of self awareness goes out the window. This actually hastens the downward spiral and becomes self-fulfilling. You noticed that with the democrats and MSM, as you mentioned the obsessive overzealous nature of the pushback against Trump (who, empirically, was running on a fairly moderate platform that wasn't too far out of line from 90s democrats)

It had no effect on the election. Just liberals trying to play the blame/victim game as usual.

It's unlikely but impossible to know when it comes down to it.

I think enlightenment values, equality under the law, and shared national interest used to do a pretty decent job of holding the country together.

enlightenment values, equality under the law

Just curious but aren't these the same thing?

Yes and no. Enlightenment values certainly encompass equality under the law but also represent more ch more than that. And the actual application of equality under law in America during the enlightenment was so atrocious that I think it justifies singling it out.

Well yeah.. Just make the math. In their mind some russian trolls which was like.. 300k worth? (i dont know it anymore.) Had a bigger effect as millions of dollars of propoganda money and the media which was in hillary's favor anyway. Lol sure. Evil russian hackers.

Russia hacked our election!

Holy shit they broke into the voting machines and changed the votes?

No! They made Facebook posts!

Didn't Hillary hire an army of people to do that too? While also conspiring to steal the nomination from Sanders?

Well yea but Fuck Trump!

I believe that the manipulation was not aimed at the voters but at the media. The Russians know that the media in the country control how the general population think and were able to move the media in a certain direction and in turn the general population.

This needs to be be talked about more. As the recent "school shooter is a white supremacist" hoax proved, the media is foaming at the mouth to jump on "breaking news" that feeds into their narratives. Be it Russian Trolls or /pol/ autists making people freak out about "It's okay to be white", social and mainstream media is fueling the divide in the US. Click-bait, lazy journalism is destroying the country.

Couldn't agree more.

At one time it was called "propaganda". Then it was called "social engineering". Then it was called "fake news". Now they call it "Russian meddling".

The only shocking thing is how many people seem to believe this is a new idea.

Propaganda > Social Engineering > Fake News > What’s next? just accepting it as truth?

The end goal is to wear people down so they just don't give a shit...

Isn’t that already how it is?

Pretty much...

When is the last time we've seen a US President say shit like this to the whole world on a Sunday & the media doesnt acknowledge he says this stuff?

• https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/965212168449941505?s=20

• https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/965202556204003328

• https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/965194903142719489

I'm in agreement. This all started in 2014 when Obama signed https://amp.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5

I voted for Trump, however, I'm wondering why he hasn't repealed this NDAA bill if the Russians are "interfering" in our media/government elections as much as everyone is claiming they are...

I definitely wonder that as well. But sometimes you have to take wins where you can get them & we really cant be expect to get everything we want to happen. At the same time he is getting the word out about & encouraging more people to be skeptical about these shitty media companies. But if we are being honest about the Russians impacting the election... Nothing we've been told they were caught doing really impacted the election. Comey opening that email investigation with weeks to go did & so did the Podesta emails(still dont know with 100% certainty how they got those).

Which is why invariably the strong govern the weak because the weak have no will to govern themselves.

Is that a quote from some despot or are you just generalizing

It sounds like a quite from a despot, but use your head. Look around you. Do the vast majority of people seem very interested in what is happening to their country? No. They just expect someone will be there to eventually sort it all out.

We are lucky to be BARELY seeing a movement of "average US citizens" now making runs at local government. This is amazing but it's still not enough. I never suggested that what I said was right, but I will suggest it is true.

And the only way we will fight it is by empowering enough people so that we all feel ready to step in and get our hands down in the shit. Until everyone shuts off their bad dance contest shows/cable news broadcasts/ what have you, stronger men will always be coming around and dicking down America despite a Constitution designed to give us every advantage.

It depends on your circles. I'm surrounded by a very politically active crowd, so your premise might be off. I get what you're saying but it's a generalization

There's a whole lot of psychological projection going on when calling another person "weak" or "sheeple" or what have you.

Just because their strength is not easily visible or understandable to you doesn't mean its not there. Maybe you just haven't looked hard enough?

My experience has been anytime people start name calling its almost always an issue with themselves they haven't sorted out yet.

Wishful thinking

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Cool

That guy you think is an a$$hole? Very good chance it's you who's being the jerk.

Good observation

Or perhaps until they just don't know what to believe.

This is the argument that needs to be put forward...

To anyone, living anywhere: diversify the media you consume.

If the only radio station you listen to in your car is either Conservative or Liberal, then every other day, change to the other.

If the only newspaper you read is either Conservative or Liberal, then every other day, buy the other one.

If the only TV news network you watch at home is either Conservative or Liberal, then change the channel every other day.

You will gain nothing by being spoon-fed your existing opinions every day.

You will gain perspective by consuming both sides of the argument, and making up your own mind, because that's how this shit is meant to work.

Disclaimer: don't expect immediate results. It will take weeks, and possibly months, for any of your pre-existing biases to erode to the point where you hear whatever any of the media outlets are telling you, and you thinking "fuck that... CNN / Fox News is clearly bullshit"

We all need to start giving a shit. We all need to start consuming as many and varied sides of the media as we can.

When you've got one side of the story blaring at you 24 hours a day, then whatever they're telling you is all you'll believe.

Stop being a puppet. Go out of your way to learn both sides of the story, and make up your own mind.

Become a responsible consumer of news, and you'll become a responsible person. It really is as simple as that.

I already do all that. It's still not easy, given the huge volumes of information out there coming at us from all directions. It feels like standing in the middle of a busy intersection. It's also hard to recognize existing biases in yourself based on your upbringing, your socioeconomic status, the region and environment you live and work in, etc. Sometimes I feel like the more I read the more confused I get. When you try your best to consider every point of view, you still need some standard against which to test ideas. What should that standard be? I think this is why religion is such a "thing" in our species. It gives our brains a "true north". Or at least we choose to believe that it does.

Sometimes I feel like the more I read the more confused I get. When you try your best to consider every point of view, you still need some standard against which to test ideas. What should that standard be?

The standard for you is what feels right for you.

Consider yourself as a judge or a magistrate - listen to both sides of any argument, and make up your mind based on the evidence (or lack thereof) that each side provides.

Above all, be skeptical.

Even though last time Fox News / CNN turned out to be correct, next time, they might not be...

Every new issue is a new issue. Learn as much as you can before making a judgment.

I'm lucky - I work in news media, so a huge part of my daily life is trawling through everything from Breitbart to The Hill, reading all of the coverage from one extreme to the other, and then distilling that down into something that I work hard to make objectively, and subjectively, neutral. That's what I get paid to do.

But whenever anyone asks me about how to deal with media bias, I tell them the same thing in my original comment: Change the channel every day. Listen to both sides of the media, and more often than not, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

"The standard for you is what feels right for you".

So then, moral relativism, aka "the status quo". You're saying I can be the judge of "my own truth" simply by testing against my feelings?

If I am a judge or magistrate, I have the law as my "true north". What standard can be applied by the individual to test for truth in the media. Skepticism and listening to all sides still does not reveal truth, IMO. Ultimately each of us must choose what to believe...

My argument here isn't about moral relativism - it's about stepping outside of the media echo chambers that a huge percentage of the population, either wittingly or unwittingly, put themselves into by not changing the channel / reading a different newspaper / etc etc.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

The more you read, the more you know.

And just like people who spend more time reading the Bible than they do reading the news, their view on the world around them will be helplessly skewed.

The only standard that can be applied by the individual as a test for truth in media is the media that individual has consumed.

If you only watch Fox News, then anything that goes against that narrative will sound like bullshit. Same as anyone who only watches CNN.

Hence, we all need to consume a more diverse media landscape, and make up our own minds as to what is spin, and what isn't - rather than blindly accepting that what we're being told by political commentators during our morning commute are "the facts".

If you've got any reasonable argument against arming yourself with all of the facts before making a judgment about anything, then by all means, let me know...

Also, read some news sources that arent easily categorized as conservative or liberal. For instance, the intercept, that is hated by both the conservative and liberal establishments.

Reverse cargo cult: you blatantly lie and in a way that commends the public for knowing your lying simultaneously convincing them everyone else is lying and there is no truth.

It goes so much more beyond this.

http://mad.science.blog/2018/02/05/utopia-2-sociological-death/

http://mad.science.blog/2017/12/31/utopia/

Read the article. Author assumes that corporations have any other incentive besides the bottom dollar. The problem lies in money being the primary purpose of all business. Either get rid of business or money or we will always continue to have ethics disputes.

Yes that's neat. In mine I suggest these companies want to revolutionize the norms to update for our technology.

I’m sorry is are you seriously insinuating that, as of today still unsubstantiated claims that “Russian Hackers” swayed the US election by releasing the DNC emails? Or are you referring to shit posting on fakebook?

I’m still unclear on what people making this claim even think happened.

Anyway you slice it, the election is securely under the thumb of the Central Bank and the elite families of the world, if you still think we freely choose officials and policies in this country you are seriously mistaken.

Illusion of choice.

Illusion of choice.

While I agree, you can still go into r/politics and see how blatantly biased they have become there. Some people are also making bots that follow around TD posters and label them for others to see:

https://i.redd.it/d0n0awn9oxg01.jpg

In terms of TD, as someone who has lived down South (Knoxville for a year and Birmingham for another) yes there are a TON of Trump supporters in America, just like most cities (am in Chicago now) are Democrats.

Anyway you slice it, the election is securely under the thumb of the Central Bank and the elite families of the world,

This! I wish we were all United, together as One, putting all our focus on kicking out the Rothschilds banking system, Soros, and replacing the FED with a new system

Or for that matter, that it's only being done to "us" rather that we're doing it to them as well.

Or that people think Russia was hiding it at all. 😂😂😂

Fake news is the new name for propaganda. Both are simply the message of the opponent. Some % truth, some % lies.

Social engineering is the new name for con-artist. Lying to get what you want.

Similar, but not interchangeable.

And as you said, not new. These are tactics used by every intelligence agency in the world (including the Russians and Americans) and have been for a long time.

But sometimes calling something fake news is a form of propaganda.

Which doesn't conflict with what I said, it just depends on perspective.

Let's turn back the clock one minute here. During the election, I can remember how spewing with hatred people were for Hillary. That was due to this terrible amount of fake articles targeted towards the Hannity crowd.

As soon as Assdump was elected, he turned the term around as if he were a victim of fake news.

Soon he called any opinion counter to his Fake News.

Soon, conservative media called all opposing viewpoints mainstream and fake news.

Now... fuck I don't know what now. I just wanted to clarify this fake news phenomenon.

I'm sorry are you suggesting that hatred for Hillary is solely from fake articles?

You can't be that deluded.

Come on with tone "You can't be that deluded." Let's be civil or not speak at all.

assdump

Civil

K

Don't change the subject.

You can't see how people were spewing with overzealous hatred for Trump during the election too? And that he had been targeted by most of the media as a scapegoat?

There's no chance it was even and fair. I'm not sure how many presidential elections you've been through but there's a certain level it usually always gets to. Trump was getting news coverage for breaking all the rules, that's not overzealous or propaganda, that's what happens when you intentionally break the status quo.

Hillary had some emails and Benghazi and other scandals sure. These things normally and usually occur, and people get upset, and so on and so forth. This election cycle, we literally had conversations about how bonkers everyone was becoming about Hillary's flaws. Not critical, but red in the face, veins popping out about whatever she did wrong, no matter how big or small it was. This was the propaganda engine. Absolutely.

Her flaws were there, Trump was criticized of course, but no man in history received the same level of disgust and vitriol for even more heinous crimes.

Trump gets criticized not because of an agenda against him. He gets criticized not because Hillary leads anyone. Hillary is literally somewhere in the shadows, she hasn't led anyone or anything. He gets criticized, because believe it or not, the majority of Americans disagree with him (as shown by the popular vote, and recent approval polls). Now if you are all drinking some koolaid that makes you think whatever he does is right, I hope to GOD it's not because someone told you it's right, someone like Hannity.

I hope to GOD you formed your own opinion and support him because of it. Therefore, anything you say against a democrat is not some agenda, nor is it some conspiracy, it's just your opinion. Not Fake News, but the way you see things.

That's exactly what's happening with Democrats. I don't care for Hillary one way or another, but when I see an asshat being an asshat, I call him out. And that's not brainwashing, agenda, or propaganda. It's a man completely going counter to my values.

Brother, you definitely are not looking at it from a clear nor balanced point of view. Clinton didn't receive nearly (if any?) of as much hate from the media and the loud masses as Trump did and still does, and especially unwarranted and irrational hate. Some memes on reddit about Clinton don't overshadow all the other movements that have been going on against Trump the past 2 years.

Of course I formed my own opinion. I hope you did too, since you seem to be a little skewed on one side. Be careful not to tip over when you walk.

My favorite was when the guy goes out in the street and rattles off Trumps tax cut telling people it's Bernies and they couldn't find anyone that didn't agree with it.

Trump is a business democrat turned republican because in 2016 part of the republican platform became "we aren't drunk on identity politics". The dogs of war were unleashed on Trump not because his positions are radical, they aren't at all. He's saying things bill Clinton was saying in the 90s. Trump was targeted with such insane zeal because he wasn't groomed for the part and he couldn't be controlled with blackmail and he didn't need their money. He represented an existential threat to the elite class. Trump may have his own agenda and is surely being backed by some competing group along with military intelligence for sure, but this was still a coup.

Yes, he's a business democrat. But no, the dogs of war were not unleashed on him because he wasn't groomed for the part, and couldn't be controlled with blackmail and didn't need their money.

No, no, no, no. nope. nope. nooooooope.

When I saw him announce his candidacy - I was thinking - hmm, this man is onto something. And I listened intently. I told the person I was with, he's gonna get a lot of support. Then he started being racist, and isolationist. That's when I was like whoa whoa whoa wtf?

Then he started tweeting like a fucking idiot for lack of a better word. Then he started not taking stances against david Duke, then he started lying, over and over and over again. Then he started saying anything that was actually contrary to him was "fake news". Listen friend - you want him to be a legit alternative really bad. No one is picking on him unjustly.

NO ONE. Ever been to http://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpCriticizesTrump/ ?

He is full of shit, he is full of shit, he is full of shit, and yes he is full of shit. I am so sorry, no one is unjust in their absolute, complete dissatisfaction with this mockery of our presidency. He's not an existential threat to the elite class. He IS the elite class. He staffs his cabinet with elites, his entire republican congress takes bribes from the elite class, his entire tax cuts says that if you make elite businessmen richer, then it will 'trickle down' to the masses.

It definitely was a coup though. He is a literally a fox in the hen house, and he's using his powers in government to destroy government powers. Such a shit show. I hate it so much.

Man he's a sly one huh? Such a racist he got more minority votes than the last 2 republican presidential candidates. The race crap is laughable. There's definitely a political party obsessed with race and it's clear which that is.

Isolationist? Are you under the impression that we aren't doing crazy big business in global markets and those markets aren't interested in the US?

Trump is elite and knows all the elites, sure. And he turned on them. Go watch the Al Smith dinner if you have any doubt.

It's not laughable, it's a very serious issue facing America right now and the fact that you laugh at it is so disturbingly safe and naive.

Isolationist. Walk me through where our power in the world is right now, I'd love to hear your take on where it's headed. The British have been calling Trudeau the leader of the free world for months now. Our own officials just told the world to disregard everything the moron says on twitter.

Look at the long term benefactors of his tax plan. Look at who really makes a killing after 5 years, and look who gets shafted. There is no evidence that he has turned on any single elite ever. Bill Gates himself says he should be paying more taxes. He is figuratively spewing money back to the wealthy. Come ON now, whose talking points are you sucking up in your filter bubble. You gotta stop being so exceptional in your arguments, think critically.

Twice since trump has been elected, I've applauded him on twitter. I am being fair. Twice, I feel like he's represented me as an American. 2 whole, times. Asshole acts like his base are the only people that matter, he acts like they're the only ones worthy of calling themselves Americans. He acts like his base is the only crowd that he serves, and that he will go to the end for them. Well what the fuck about the rest of the country, friend? What the fuck about us? Who is American according to Trump? His base. He will pander, pander pander to his base. Non stop, all day every day. He will ignore, step on, forget, spit out, insult, shit upon the other 300,000 Americans, as if we weren't AS AMERICAN as his base. He treats us like shit, doesn't listen to us, do you actually think we won't talk shit about him? Do you consider that his Base is not America? America is America. His base are just the feeble in finances, weak in education, and poor in virtue, the scared, threatened, attacking and coldest.

Trump is a cheater. A cheater in love, a cheater in business, a cheater in law and a cheater in politics. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

Jesus Christ Trudeau leader of the free world? I thought it was merkel, has she fallen out of favor? You do know they rely on our military right? Lol

I'm sorry dude but he's desperately trying to mend the divide sowed by those who came before him. He's American that loves his country and his American neighbor, who even if they may not see eye to eye on every issue they at least meet halfway in good faith.

Trumps base though? Look at the language you use. Irredeemable deplorables no doubt.

Rely on our Military for what tho? Like i'm gonna be like a teenage snot and go "yea but why??"...

Bro talking like he wants people to pay for our military bases - Hello? We are the ones who strategically placed them around the world, in their back yards for strategic purposes. Play a quick game of Risk and you'll see who really benefits from having bases spread out around the world. This is political science 101. They didn't ask for our Military bases, we put them there, for us.

I know this country has troubles. I feel like we need to improve education, we need to improve our general standard of living, I believe community is more important than consumerism. I believe there is a solution to the shootings and opioid problems. And it's not tough love, it's not more force. I believe there's an end to terrorism. I'm not a democrat - I'll tell you that, there's a third party that needs to be born. One that respects the quality of life both before an individual is born AND after, not either or.

The language I use is for people that lap up Hannity. He has done so much to damage this country. Fox and friends? They destroy common ground. Our president will do everything for his base. He acts like he is 100% successful because he panders to his base.

The only place he's moved the needle is backwards. I don't believe progress should come at the cost of identity and tradition. I believe in improving lives for all of us, just the way we are. It's not a zero sum game. There is enough to go around several times over - people act like someone has to lose for someone else to gain. Except - hey, we can harvest sunlight and wind, we can grow plants forever, we can continually produce, and produce we do. But someone takes it all. They either prevent us from doing it, or they take the profits and they don't spread it around. It doesn't make the world better place. They take and take and take, and our president is one of them. He's only in it so he can take. This is a fact.Nearly everything he has signed his name to is a conflict of interest, because he benefits immensely from the policies he creates.

It's like he's playing the banker in monopoly, inventing the rules so that he ends up with all the cash in the bank, at the cost of everyone playing the game.

Honestly I agree with everything you're saying. I also recognize while the geopolitics are complicated, we'd be better off on many levels without so much force deployed around the world.

I'm not a Fox News type and I mostly hate their whole network. I think citizen media is doing a far better job, guys like Styxhexenhammer666. I look at the big and small picture at the same time though and I'll tell you what I saw/see.

There's all these people in the middle who aren't really political and don't want to be and would agree with just about everything you said. Then you've got your politically aware and active in either side. The problem is, the left is better at organizing support and they're more committed to their cause. That is to say, despite claiming to be into diversity they only mean it skin deep. The politically active left are wholly uninterested in diversity of ideas. Universities aren't looking around saying to themselves gosh we need more conservatives in the humanities department. A study was done at Brown recently that showed in 1965 their journalism department comprised of 4 liberals to each conservative. Today it's 65 to 1.

So you see this divide accelerates and metastasizes. 90% of media out there today is leftist, and not casually. These people aren't like Edward R. Murrows and Walter Cronkites of yesterday. They've got an axe to grind and they've got an agend to serve.

As a conservative, the problem I saw was that too many people just wanted to be left alone and keep to themselves or otherwise felt browbeaten by leftists who would socially ostracize them from their communities or their workplace. Personally, I'm the leave me to myself type so I get it, but that leaves the door wide open for the politically active left to just run roughshod over everyone. That's how we ended up with Bill Nye trying to convince us there's no such thing as gender and Canada signing law that compels particular language with bill C16.

I don't personally think Trumps platform is radical at all, and I came to believe his rough and assertive tactics are not only fine, but completely necessary. I'm telling you my dude, the people throwing a fit about Trump were turning a blind eye to the path they found themselves on. I gave an interview to the Japanese press election night and I told them this. That the left should be thanking their lucky stars this correction came in the form of Donald Trump, all said a fairly moderate guy. Because if he'd lost, what was absolutely coming after trump they were not going to like and neither would I. If the left continues to play identity politics, they will conjure a demon on the right that will not lose that game.

Very well said, unfortunately you might as be talking to a doorknob.

Do you really believe all that stuff? You have to be pretty dense to think Trump isn't a racist piece of shit. Isolationist? His entire platform was isolation and stopping globalism...Trump turned on the elites? You realize he just gave corporations, you know the entities that are owned by the elites, 1.5 trillion dollars over 10 years. We could have healthcare and education for that much money, instead the elites just get richer and the wealth inequality gap gets larger. I can't believe you really think Trump turned on the elites. He's by far the most spoiled narcissist I've ever seen.

I don't understand how you people put up with his lying, weren't you raised to not trust liars? It's crazy how many people weren't raised right in this country. Trump just ain't right, you're better than him.

It isn't new. What's new is the ability to Taylor newsfeeds, stories, and ads based on what someone searches for on the internet, comments on, or even says aloud. That has allowed sites like Facebook to rile people up beyond belief. They know exactly what buttons to push.

I've been saying for years that Eric Hoffer's The True Believer should be required reading in High School, because this is exactly the sort of shit he wrote about. I don't understand why this book has seen a sort of renaissance as of late given the political climate.

Teach people to understand what propaganda is. Refusing to do so is tantamount to admitting you intend to brainwash them. It's simple as that. There's no good reason otherwise.

The only shocking thing is how simple and easy it is and the size of the audience foreign entities can reach without even having to step foot in your country.

This is literally made possible by the Internet and the fact that it's completely taken over all forms of communication.

A wise man once wrote that the internet has been a boon to Free Speech by ensuring every man has a voice that can reach the entire audience of the world. It has proved to both a blessing and a curse.

Since when does America have the moral authority to complain about election meddling? I mean come on!

You don't need to have moral authority to not want the terrible things you do to others done to you.

A robber may lock his home tighter than his victims.

This is legitimately one of the strangest talking points I've seen. In what world is it fine for someone to do something objectively wrong, just because America has done it too?

I think the "talking point" is trying to get people who are screaming about Russian influence to step back and look at the bigger picture. These same people aren't mad that the US does simliar things to other countries or that Israel or Saudia Arabia does simliar things to the US. The "talking point" is supposed to get people to ask themselves why they care now? And it's because CNN and the like has told them to be mad about it now.

He knows that, but he spends his time here ignoring the bigger picture and rambling on about Russia. We have a lot of those lately.

That's just it. We've known for awhile now that our own government meddles in other countries elections. We also aren't so stupid as to believe that if Russia's doing it other countries aren't. So why the fascination with Russia? That's the thing for me that I can't shake. They've literally been spoon feeding us this shit ever since Hillary implied during the debates that Trump was colluding with Putin. It's just entirely too much.

Oh jeez, it couldn't be people care now because their country is on the receiving end. Just like other country's citizens don't really give a fuck that Russia is spreading propaganda in the US, probably laughing joyfully about it really, but they care when the US did it to them.

There's no big picture to speak of, your talking point is just nonsense for the people too stupid to think logically.

because a group of Americans that want to go online to talk and post about Saudi Arabian corruption shouldn't be seen as a big deal lol

They don't. America has little moral authority on any issue.

This is all blatant political theater full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Brexit happened with a monarchy

We've become a nation that's obsessed with finding someone other than ourselves to blame

A-Fucking-Men!

This is how wars start. Blame a foreign outsider for your own crippling internal problems.

Or maybe the clintons are yhe democrat's bush family and no one wanted them. She lost to obama for the same reasons she lost to trump.

What you said and splitting the populace into smaller factions so they fight within themselves I agree with and it brings in the deep state, which wants to enslave anyone and everyone. "United we stand, divided we fall"

I'm guilty of it too, I am diametrically opposed to to the Lefts/Liberals views as they are to my views. This brings in "who is right, who is wrong" which I don't feel like getting into, but we're obviously a very divided nation.

They have divided us, now do they conquer us or have us do it ourselves by starting a civil war?

I don't think it effected the election, honestly. It's not like we ourselves weren't already doing those things en masse

*affected

It’s not easy. It’s constant and covert. It’s extremely hard to catch a lie in the dark.

My question is, if Hillary won, would this even be an issue? Would the DNC still be using the pre-election talking point of "An election can't be hacked or manipulated"? Remember when the MSM was going wild cause Trump suggested there could possibly be election hanky panky involved? I guess what it boils down to is, this all a means to a political end, is it? And if that's the case, our government is playing the American people more than the Russia government is.

Yeah - I don’t know why a conspiracy thread is pushing the ultimate mainstream narrative that muh Russians are these master manipulators who are controlling all of us like puppet masters.

The real conspiracy imo is that the establishment is conspiring to delegitimize a duly elected president at any cost by pushing the narrative that he is a Russian agent. Following the most recent Mueller indictment that showed the Russians supporting many different candidates as far back as 2014, the narrative is now that Trump’s “denial” of their interference amounts to treason.

Trump poses a direct threat to the establishment to the status quo, and delegitimizing him is way more preferable to these people than offering truly progressive candidates that can win elections.

I don't think it's the true members of the conspiracy sub. We know better than to buy what we're being spoon fed. It's the new tactic of bots and shills making it appear this way. It wasn't like this until a couple of months ago. We're still here though. And we aren't buying the Russia is a boogeyman story.

Do you have a badge of honor for veing the "true" member of this sub? What an arrogant prick

Should only one kind of conspiracy be discussed in this sub? Since this is more of a mainstream conspiracy it should be pushed aside? It does not have any merit? I didn't know this sub was closed off to different views

It’s not closed off to different views I just think that “conspiracy” implies a theory that contradicts the widely-accepted viewpoint. The view that OP is expressing is extremely widely held.

It's not widely accepted. There are still so many who think this a joke theory or propoganda. I got accused of being a shill for even discussing it

Oh please - head over to r/politics and check it out

Oldmonk90 works for correct the record... Please ignore his gaslighting

Why would it not be an issue? If russia didn't face any consequences this time they will just try again next time.

Companies would buy those spots if advertising on FB worked lol

what like the billions they make by selling advertising to companies?

Sure, companies buy the spot to advertise, but is it effective?

That’s how advertising works. At the last election I. The uk I was gobsmacked to hear someone who I had assumed to be reasonably clever say that they’d read this post on social media which they said was the first thing they’d seen that was unbiased and just common sense. I had seen the same post and it was clearly biased, misrepresented facts and designed to persuade to one side of the vote. I didn’t think they should change their view or otherwise, I was just surprised they couldn’t see it wasn’t unbiased. I think the issue is that adults who vote genuinely don’t consider : - is this source valid? - is this source trying to persuade? - is this source representing facts without bias or manipulation?

The untruths I heard from people, who had read them them and believed to be truth was quite disheartening

I also think that people DO know they are being manipulated but choose to allow it because it fits their own narrative. It gives them permission to believe what they want to.

we have the same problem with our conservative party. The richest cabinet of all time. Jeramy hunt tearing down our NHS so it can be sold of to virgin and the like to pave the way for American insurance companies. Any one else failing to meet target after target would be fired but JH, fuck it, lets put him in charge of social care as well. The only way he keeps his job is if what he is doing is intended. And nobody is talking about it.

That is some twisted logic. Do unto others as you would have them do it not you. If you don’t want YOUR elections tampered with them DON’T tamper with others elections.

You deserve it is the final refuge of a narcissist.

It is easier to fool someone than it is to convince someone that they've been fooled!

That’s why a lot of Trump voters still refuse to admit they might’ve made a mistake.

Depends are you suggesting everyone should have voted for Hillary who rigged her primary? It isn't much of a mistake when she was literally the worst candidate ever. It was an obvious choice between the two to vote for Trump. Calling it a mistake is beyond ignorance and stupidity. I rather have Trump than Hillary any day would vote for Trump again if it was a choice between him and her.

You can always vote third party

I did, but boy am I glad Hillary still lost.

Well thats your opinion. Im sure the hundreds of thousands that voted based on false information may have wanted a clean election.

What form of false information? Personally if you wanted to find out about each candidates policies they were on each of their own official websites. Unless their own websites are false info as well not sure, but it seems false information is every where including your own if we want to use your own words.

But as JFK has said freedom of press is to allow free flow of information and allow for people to decide what is true or not. It seems people voted for Trump. Unless you disagree with JFK.

Read the fake ads the Russians bought.

May 10, 2016 ?Donald wants to defeat terrorism . . . Hillary wants to sponsor it?

?Hillary Clinton has already committed voter fraud during the Democrat Iowa Caucus.?

August 10, 2016 ?We cannot trust Hillary to take care of our veterans!?

?Hillary is a Satan, and her crimes and lies had proved just how evil she is.?

Sorry about formatting but thats the copy paste from indictments.

You are assuming everyone went out of their way to read policy notes from candidates websites. Most people, and most likely more susceptible, just listened to what the ads said on their facepage. This is the same argument this sub makes against the MSM, that they lie and you need to find the truth for yourself but most people won't. Same applies here, they see fake news from facebook, assume its true and their opinions are changed. These people aren't R or D but are probably just fence sitting until the week of the election as most do not truly care. Obviously hard R's weren't swayed but its about that middle ground that maybe had an opinion changed based on a lie that Hillary ate abortions or committed voter fraug or is "a satan."

There were just as many if not more goofy internet ads and articles about Trump during the election.

We are all constantly bombarded with terrible ads if we are on the internet and by experience get pretty damn good at ignoring most of it.

And those ads need to be approved by the campaign or PAC and are subject to FEC rules before hand. These were illegal ads from another country that could do and say whatever they wanted with no accountability. Sure we are bombarded by things but that doesn't mean we should have unregistered people bombarding us with no accountability.

The most terrifying thing to me is that the Democratic party has decided that they would rather keep pushing the red scare message rather than moving forward and getting back to fighting for the middle class.

Between the campaigns, all the PACs and dark money spending that happened last election, this ad spend amounted to a pimple on a gnats ass. From what i've seen, most of the spending didn't even happen until after the election.

Would you lose sleep at night if you heard that a US intelligence agency helped placed manipulative social media ads in other countries? You know that happens right? Hell they even do it to us now.

I also know that we bomb other countries but I'd still be pissed if someone bombed us. We can't just let people push us around when we spend trillions on a military and homeland security while forfeiting healthcare, its retarded.

So you are really trying to conflate facebook ads with acts of murder?

What if electing a certain candidate leads to more war?

I imagine your chain of assumptions must be endlessly long and to you a small and poorly made ad buy = murder.

Far be it for me to try and convince you otherwise.

You realize it is an ad that effects the choosing of the head of the military right? Like, as an extreme example, if you vote for Hitler knowing the future, you are essentially killing millions.

You even left out all the shady deaths and deals surrounding her and Bill!

People ignore that sadly. It's all about Trump going to prison based off unverified information with no due process or real justice. Hillary will always be free she could do a sschool shooting and no one here will blink an eye about it, but Trump could sit there and do nothing and he should go to prison to some people here.

Why are you assuming Hillary is guilty of anything? She hasn't had any due process. Trump isnt guilty of anything either for the same reason.

Difference is information and accusations on Trump are unverified mostly blind hatred. We literally have legal documents that has been posted on this subreddit about Uranium as well as Wikileaks email leaks that would would give her a death sentence easily under the rule of law.

Documents aren't due process. Due process begins with an indictment or an arrest.I get what you're saying but don't just throw words around without knowing what they mean.

Wow bro. Mad cuz you're wrong, or is it that you know Hillary gamed the system?

Even IF she ever made it to trial, she'd be acquitted. She holds too much power, and knows too much.

I was shocked to learn that the GOP and DNC are private corporations, and can do whatever they want in selecting a candidate. It is true the DNC primary was rigged, but it was not ilegal. Oh, and Hillary was an awful candidate.

she was literally the worst candidate ever

So you think that you came to this conclusion without any help from Russian or Republican propaganda? If so, then you should easily be able to list the reasons why

Even before Trump even entered and started his campaign I supported Ben Carson.

As for Hillary and conspiracy sake.

1. JFK Jr dies in a plane crash when he was in lead against Hillary.
2. Hillary kicked off investigation team for water gate.
3. Hillary making fun of on video of a 14 year old for being raped by a 40 year old man she defended as a lawyer.
4. Hillary connections to Soros and Rothchilds even strong connection to Clinton Foundation founding and pedophile Jeffery Epstein

I can list more if you like, but Hillary is trash. If you want to defend that is fine with me. I don't even defend fact Trump can be a brash hypocrite, but at least the man can hit the dime on corruption more often than not. I remember JFK was not a perfect man himself with similar accusations to Trump. JFK has info of affairs with other women, accused of Russian collusion, etc both JFK and Trump are very much a like one is more private about it other is more public, but overall the same.

Hillary on other hand is a special kind of trash I won't let this Russian garbage to ignore that fact because people want to tip toe around the Rothschild because hate Trump.

As for Hillary and conspiracy sake.

1) JFK Jr hadn't even announced his candidacy when he died

2) This is just plain false: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/06/the-zombie-claim-that-hillary-clinton-was-fired-during-the-watergate-inquiry/?utm_term=.4fb34f14468d. You're literally falling for chain email and facebook meme level stuff here.

3) Is this what you're talking about? https://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/clintons-1975-rape-case/

4) The Clintons support similar causes to Soros and the Clinton Foundation does a lot of good around the world. Not sure what your specific beef is here.

I can list more if you like, but Hillary is trash. If you want to defend that is fine with me

So your entire reasoning for disliking her are a bunch of debunked conspiracy theories that have been pushed hard by Russian trolls? You don't see the irony?

I don't even defend fact Trump can be a brash hypocrite, but at least the man can hit the dime on corruption more often than not. I remember JFK was not a perfect man himself with similar accusations to Trump. JFK has info of affairs with other women, accused of Russian collusion, etc both JFK and Trump are very much a like one is more private about it other is more public, but overall the same.

How fucking dare you try to equate Trump with JFK. JFK served the American people for his entire life. Trump has only ever served himself

You should probably just stop talking before you further expose yourself comrade

Lol you link me to MSM sources. Hi pro system bot, but in all seriousness I will equate Trump to JFK. There are photos of JFK Jr and Trump together plenty of times before JFK Jr death want to know why? JFK and Trump had very similar characters. Brash, quick to anger and both had it in for the ladies. There are plenty of books on JFK on his affairs with other women. There are plenty of books on JFK being pissed off at other people in similar ways Trump has been. The biggest similarity is both has called out the deep state, both have called out the intelligent communities and both have been accused of Russian collusion because they both are threats to the system. Keep defending the system as hard as you can it will come crashing down soon I promise you that and I look forward to it and will relish when Hillary, Soros, Rothschild, Bush, Obama all go down in history as the worst most corrupted individuals in history.

Lol you link me to MSM sources.

Name some sources that you would take

There are photos of JFK Jr and Trump together plenty of times before JFK Jr death want to know why? JFK and Trump had very similar characters. Brash, quick to anger and both had it in for the ladies.

JFK Jr. =/= JFK

There are plenty of books on JFK on his affairs with other women. There are plenty of books on JFK being pissed off at other people in similar ways Trump has been.

Do you really think that's why people don't like Trump?

The biggest similarity is both has called out the deep state,

What deep state? Who is in the deep state?

both have called out the intelligent communities

Source?

and both have been accused of Russian collusion because they both are threats to the system

Source?

Keep defending the system as hard as you can it will come crashing down soon I promise you that and I look forward to it and will relish when Hillary, Soros, Rothschild, Bush, Obama all go down in history as the worst most corrupted individuals in history.

I love that I started this conversation by trying to get an honest answer as to why you thought Hillary was the worst candidate in history and it spiraled into you foaming at the mouth and spouting nonsensical, half-baked conspiracy theories with no proof of any kind.

You should go back to playing Russian roulette with your buddy Rothchild.

Which Rothschild would that be?

Your on /r/Conspiracy and know none of this? Well this is clearly a troll bot.

You don't know any of it either. As far as I can tell you're getting all of your info from incredibly biased and debunked sources

Calling voting for Trump a mistake is like saying it wouldn't have been a mistake to vote for Hillary instead. I mean, if that's the angle your leaning at.

It really doesn't matter which of those clowns went into office.

Whatever keeps your fragile ego intact.

I voted for Gary Johnson wise ass.

So in other words you bought into the propaganda that both sides are the same and voted for a guy who's own running mate barely supported him.

So in other words you bought into the propaganda that both sides are the same

Prove to me they aren't. Otherwise, you just bought into the propaganda that they aren't the same.

I'm sorry you don't pay enough attention to notice the obvious differences between the two parties. Instead, you decided to fall for obvious foreign propaganda. And, because you value your own ego over this country, you're refusing to admit your mistake.

We would've hung traitors like you back in the good old days.

I'm sorry you don't pay enough attention to notice the obvious differences between the two parties.

Oh please. What kind of schoolyard shit is this? Look, I get the obvious differences between the left and the right just fine, but when it comes down to compromise - in case you haven't been paying much attention for the last 30 to 40 years - both sides have been growing increasingly bullish. You can hear it in the way they communicate, it's poisonous and often loaded to rile up their supporters. Both sides play that game for sure and they do it very well thanks to the 24/7 news cycle and every god damn person having constant updates in the palm of their hand.

And, because you value your own ego over this country, you're refusing to admit your mistake.

You sound like your trying to indoctrinate me into some cult.

One side repeals clean air and water regulations.

One side votes to remove people from healthcare.

One side votes to defund public education.

One side voted for the tax bill.

One side repealed net neutrality.

One side supports Trump.

One side puts up pedophiles in Senate races.

One side is strongly supported by Nazis, Klansmen and other whites supremacists.

Don't pull the "teams" card. Hillary if anyone is a perfect example of someone who blatantly flip flops "team" values. Her position(s) on gay marriage?

I'm not talking about Hillary, just laying out the positions of one party.

And I don't pretend to mean that the other side is perfect, or worthy of idolization.

I'm not talking about Hillary, just laying out the positions of one party.

You're talking about Hillary.

And I don't pretend to mean that the other side is perfect, or worthy of idolization.

Okay, good.

I'm not talking about Hillary, just laying out the positions of one party.

You're talking about Hillary.

No. I'm talking about political parties. You mentioned Hillary, I clarified that I wasn't talking about her.

So are you implying I should've voted "party line" simply as a means to combat Trumps votes?

It really doesn't matter which of those clowns went into office.

Didn't vote Clinton, but...

Pretty sure we'd still have net neutrality with Hillary, would still be viewed as the leaders of the free world/NATO, there wouldn't be special tax breaks for people who own golf resorts (wtf?), the president wouldn't be taunting a nuclear bar on their twitter account with insane shit like "my nuclear button is much bigger," sanctions bipartisanly passed against Russia for election meddling would actually be enacted, etc, etc, etc.

We'd probably be at war with Iran tho.

Huh? Trump is the one that's been against the Iran Nuclear deal.

You'll see some strange things get upvoted. Some people claim to believe Russia was being altruistic as a Hillary presidency would have meant a definite WW3!

Iran deal isn't the end all be all of diplomacy. Nor does it really stop them from getting the bomb.

Look into the uranium one stuff. Hillary played a big part in all of that.

Honestly, I don't think that it matters who is president. The president CAN be a dictator, with all the powers they've accumulated over the years (thanks a lot Lincoln!), but, they'd be killed if they did anything tptb didn't want. #jfk

Pretty sure we'd still have net neutrality with Hillary

Maybe.

would still be viewed as the leaders of the free world/NATO,

And then means/does what exactly?

there wouldn't be special tax breaks for people who own golf resorts (wtf?)

Oh yes there absolutely would be. That bullshit has been going on for years. It's just that until now it no one in Washing has wanted to weaponize that fact against the president.

the president wouldn't be taunting a nuclear power on their twitter account with insane shit like "my nuclear button is much bigger,"

Oh well no shit. Anyone would be more stately than Trump in that regards.

sanctions bipartisanly passed against Russia for election meddling would actually be enacted, etc, etc, etc.

If Hillary won, any conversation about Russian meddling would have ended after a couple weeks, days maybe.

You don't think the tax breaks specifically for golf resort owners are directly related to Trump? You think Hillary would have enacted that policy, really? Like she has some affinity for golf course owners specifically?

OK.

Um, I think it's a good thing when America is looked to as the leader of the free world and respected as the leader of NATO for many reasons. Don't feel like delineating all of them here and now but they're not cryptic.

If Hillary won, any conversation about Russian meddling would have ended after a couple weeks, days maybe.

Nah, the FBI were on this case for a while. It would have played out.

Think what you want though. I'm not going to quarrel over the internet about possibilities. I've got things to do.

Um, I think it's a good thing when America is looked to as the leader of the free world and respected as the leader of NATO for many reasons. Don't feel like delineating all of them here and now but they're not cryptic.

You don't have to list them all. Just throw me a bone. It should be easy if it's not cryptic.

Nah, the FBI were on this case for a while. It would have played out.

If the FBI had been on this case for awhile why are we hearing about it after the fact? Don't you think someone should have sounded the alarm maybe before the elections?

I've got things to do.

Oh please. Look, if you don't want to respond or back up your argument then don't do it. It's not a big deal, it's just the internet - like you said. But don't pull that bullshit "it's not cryptic but I don't wanna reply and I've got other things to do" because now you're just pussyfooting your way out of the conversation.

Obama promised hacking our elections was impossible (while having Trump spied upon).

Why do you believe "Obama had Trump spied upon?"

You don't have to list them all. Just throw me a bone. It should be easy if it's not cryptic.

Being the leader of any group has its advantages. If you want to know who the leader of a group of businessmen is, it's the guy that says, "Well, I think it's about time we go for lunch, let's head over to X restaurant."

The leader of the group steers the ship. Being accepted as the leader of NATO and The Free World we were the ones expected to dictate the course of the ship. We're not choosing restaurants though. We're talking about international united policy about what nations should be shunned, invaded as a united front, defended from aggressors.....this should all really be obvious stuff, man.

We're considered a fucking clown show now. Trump says Jerusalem is Israel's capital. Every country I can think of thought this was a really inflammatory and simply stupid thing to do. It made Zionists and his base happy, bc they think it'll get Jesus here quicker, but the international community facepalmed. Just like they facepalm when our leader tweets out his bullshit or gets caught paying off pornstars. It's a disgrace (btw if any Trump people read this, I know how to set up completely untraceable LLCs....could have saved you, and the rest of us, a lot of embarassment).

Again, this is all just off the top of my head stream of consciousness writing.

If the FBI had been on this case for awhile why are we hearing about it after the fact?

I can assure you, the FBI, at this very second are investigating things you and I have no clue about, and will likely know nothing about until if/when they bring charges.

See, they don't want to tip off the people they're investigating by alerting them, or the general public for that matter.

Good question though. /s

Don't you think someone should have sounded the alarm maybe before the elections?

Obama warned Trump about hiring Flynn

https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/08/politics/obama-trump-michael-flynn/index.html

But don't pull that bullshit "it's not cryptic but I don't wanna reply and I've got other things to do"

I apologize. Everything I've stated seems incredibly self-evident to me. I assumed any critical thinker could have puzzled it out for themselves.

We're considered a fucking clown show now.

As someone from a foreign country, I can pretty much confirm this. The American president has a pretty big affect on how the American people are perceived.

Trump is like a rancid fart in a crowded elevator. We didn't elect him, but we're stuck suffering through him along with everyone else.

Obama warned Trump about hiring Flynn

Oh I was thinking more like the people voting.

this should all really be obvious stuff, man.

Oh I got that. I had hoped you had something else up your sleeve. I just think you're taking the whole "leader of the free world" thing a little too idealistically for 2018. It's just not the reality of things anymore. If anyone, China will eventually claim that throne, but right now things are in far too much flux for that captain of the ship fantasy to fly.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/obama-russia-hacking-trump-214976

They may as well have said fuck all. US Intelligence made the "announcement" the same night Trumps "Grab 'em by the Pussy tape leaked". Your article even says strong supporters of Clinton’s campaign argued—some at the time, many more in the wake of the former secretary of state’s shocking November election defeat—that the Obama team should have done more to publicize the hacking for what it was: a heavy-handed Kremlin intervention on behalf of one side in America’s presidential election.

The article, that I'm sure you read, goes on to say that Obama and company basically decided making a big deal of it would sully voter confidence.

I assumed any critical thinker could have puzzled it out for themselves.

Oh stop. Don't be like that.

The New York Times was hip to The Russian Troll Farm, at least, as early as 2015. I'd like to think that the FBI is just as competent, or, if not, at least a couple of their agents would have read the paper of note and told their overlords about it.

Hindsight's 20/20.

China will eventually claim that throne, but right now things are in far too much flux for that captain of the ship fantasy to fly.

I don't think China will ever be considered that. Who considers China an example of the "free world"?

I just think you're taking the whole "leader of the free world" thing a little too idealistically for 2018.

Every country in NATO, at least, used to consider the US the leader of the organization. Strategically, that was advantageous. It is no longer the case.

The article, that I'm sure you read, goes on to say that Obama and company basically decided making a big deal of it would sully voter confidence.

The big problem was they couldn't get a GOP higher-up on board to come out publicly against Russia. The Obama administration looked down on slamming the Kremlin for election meddling unless it was a bipartisan statement. Why was the GOP unwilling? Why has Trump still not enacted bipartisan sanctions? I can't say for certain, but it's troubling.

free world

Like I said, it doesn't mean shit.

It is no longer the case.

Right. Like I said, doesn't matter.

Why was the GOP unwilling? Why has Trump still not enacted bipartisan sanctions? I can't say for certain, but it's troubling

Totally agree.

Agree to disagree then.

I believe it would be advantageous for America to be looked to as the leader of a military alliance (NATO) that it's a member of.

Fair enough. GG.

Um, I think it's a good thing when America is looked to as the leader of the free world and respected as the leader of NATO for many reasons.

Well, than you might not like how some people from other countries look at the roles America want to play and the social implications they have on a global scale. Not only in the war department but also education, media and entertainment have also changed a lot in my home country due to influence from America and some consorts.

The current wave of political correctness sweeping the world is for instance just an example and we can all se the implications for everybody involved. Can't you see some are trying to divide Humanity on all levels. It is not only America to blame though, everybody is responsible, but the influence from the America is huge compared to the influence of many others.

Could there be a reason for this?

Could there be a reason for this?

America has been the cops of the world for a long time.

Whether or not there's a longterm strategy for Americanization of the planet is beyond the scope of the post, but you can get a Coke and a Big Mac damn near anywhere now.

My point was if you're going to be in an organization like NATO, being looked to as its leader, not its clown, is inarguably advantageous.

America has been the cops of the world for a long time.

They have been playing this role for a while now, but are you sure that everybody agrees it was all "right" what has been done?

How many conflicts have now been started over false excuses and where did most of the "evidence" and/ or agression came from?

I am not only attacking only America though, most of the UN is corrupt and part of the same game.

I don't think it's morally correct. I'm not sure what you're trying to cinvince me of.

I am not trying to convince you of anything, i just pointed to my perspective on the UN or NATO and the role America and some others play and have played.

I do not think these social constructs are now used to the benefit of all Humanity but to the benefit of a few.

Why wouldn't there be tax breaks for golf courses?

The new tax plan only RETAINED existing tax breaks. Retained!!!!! As in, they were already there. Did Hillary specifically say she would close that loophole?

This reminds me of the "Trump declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel" bullshit. He only announced that he wasn't going to extend a waiver to a law made in 1996 with wide bipartisan support to move the embassy. And then... a couple days after the announcement... he signed another 6 month waiver. But nobody knows that because it doesn't fit the evil Trump narrative.

Trump Recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital and Orders U.S. Embassy to Move

President Trump on Wednesday formally recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, reversing nearly seven decades of American foreign policy and setting in motion a plan to move the United States Embassy from Tel Aviv to the fiercely contested Holy City.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/06/world/middleeast/trump-jerusalem-israel-capital.html

One Tax Loophole Untouched So Far: The Trump Golf-Course Break

The golf-course deduction in particular has drawn scrutiny before in Washington from both sides of the aisle. Former President Barack Obama included restrictions on the deduction in his budget for at least three years. In April, Republican Senator Jeff Flake listed the golf course deduction in a report he wrote entitled, “Tax Rackets: Outlandish Loopholes to Lower Tax Liabilities.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-09/one-tax-loophole-untouched-so-far-the-trump-golf-course-break

Would Hillary have restricted the deductions that so greatly benefit Trump as Obama did? Why wouldn't she, if not get rid of the, as the Republican put it, "racket" altogether?

I posited we'd have net neutrality under Hillary. A "maybe" response got upvotes.

Obama passed regs specifically protecting net neutrality, but she would do something radically different? Why?

The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995

On June 5, 2017, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution.... by 90-0.... reaffirm[ing] the Jerusalem Embassy Act and called upon the President and all United States officials to abide by its provisions.

This was a unanimous vote, including all Democrats that went on to denounce Trumps declaration. Hypocrites!

And of course, it was all bluster, and you are falling for it.

And can you be sure that Hillary wouldn't have moved the embassy to Jerusalem?

I didn't comment on net neutrality, but since you are pushing that narrative, you should know that "Comcast and its fellow cable and wireless providers gave more money to Hillary Clinton (nearly $358,000) than to any other presidential candidate." Number 2 on the list got $66,000.

So I'd have to agree with that "maybe" assessment and go ahead and give that guy an upvote.

Sorry to fuck with your worldview with facts.

Sorry to fuck with your worldview with facts.

I know that would, for reasons I don't really understand, delight you if that were the case, but it's not the reality.

Oooh.....Comcast gave Hillary Clinton nearly 358,000!!! Wonder what they did for Obama?

But his fundraising efforts were dwarfed by head Comcast lobbyist David Cohen, a Democratic bundler who raised $1.44 million for the president’s reelection campaign in 2011 and 2012, and $2.22 million since 2007, according to internal documents obtained by the New York Times.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/198350-comcast-time-warner-execs-have-been-big-obama-supporters

Still, Obama protected net neutrality after receiving, what, 8 times as much as Clinton?

As for Jerusalem, you want to act like this is entirely about the embassy and not that he publicly recognized it as its capital breaking with 7 decades of US foreign policy.

Your unmerited smugness is a bad look.

Do you realize that net neutrality as a legal order has only been around since April 2015? So scary to think that we have gone back to the internet dark days of 2014. Has anything for you actually changed since the repeal? Other than Google filtering and Facebook deleting anything that doesn't fit a far-Left narrative?

I support the idea of a free and open internet. And maybe something sinister can come of the repeal. But as of now, it seems it is just scare mongering. Reminds me of the Right warning us that universal health care means 6 month waits for surgery and death panels.

Obama on Israel's capital:

"Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided."

Or, at least when he is pandering to his Jewish lobbyists.

There's a sub about net neutrality. Maybe /r/netneutrality actually. I asked them about this and they gave me a long list of abuses companies did before net neutrality and why it's such a serious threat.

If you're sincerely interested I'd give the place a visit, as I was skeptical as well.

Have you seen what the internet looks like in, for example Portugal which has no protections in place?

https://78.media.tumblr.com/e5dd42d396684a2607b5d301ea1b05be/tumblr_inline_oztj0glhSZ1qz8dvz_500.jpg

Maybe something sinister won''t come from it. Maybe. It is purely for the benefit of corporations, however, not average citizens. That's never good.

This is the truth. Hillary was for a wall before Trump started talking about it. She is a corporate shill. The difference was that she was polished enough to not put in on display in front of everyone.

If Hillary was president right now, things would not be same.

Just the immature tweeting alone shows the difference.

Less immature tweeting.

More global NeoCon wars with no criticism coming from the Left.

Lots more bombings and boots on the ground under Trump than Obama, dude.

In President Trump’s first year as commander-in-chief, U.S. military activity intensified in nearly every theater of war he inherited, a VICE News review of publicly available information on military operations shows.

3.000 more troops in Afghanistan.

In Iraq and Syria:

n 2016, Obama gave the military the green light to accelerate its campaign on ISIS “on all fronts,” and under Trump the campaigns took on new speed and ferocity. In August, U.S. jets dropped more munitions on the two countries than in any other month in the last three years of fighting, according to Air Force Central Command.

Deployments in Syria tell a similar story. U.S. troop counts sextupled on Trump’s watch More Bombs, More Boots, More Casualties: Trump's first year as commander in chief

https://news.vice.com/en_ca/article/8xvn8v/more-bombs-more-boots-more-casualties

I believe all Presidents are war criminals on one level or another.

ISIS claims zero areas of control in Iraq and nearly none in Syria. I believe that is largely due to Trump cancelling arms deals with Syrian"opposition groups". So I'll give him credit on that.

But overall, he was handed a global conspiracy playbook with plans that have been in place for many decades. Just more of the same.

It would be absurd to think it this war situation would be any better under Hillary. She was all about starting this Syria lie and overthrowing Ghaddafi despite his years long compliance with UN brokered nuclear disarmament. She is more ingrained and connected to the Neocons than nearly any other politician.

You're missing the point retard

Retard is one of my favorite words, so thank you Fergie. But the real point here is that WHOEVER gets voted into office, the culture of corruption and secretive politics still continues. We need to be more transparent in government, and I think the first way we do this is FINALLY get someone who disassociates themselves with the right vs left/ Democrat vs republican mentality and is just a man/woman of the PEOPLE. It’s always been about the people, but as the masses grew the “people” who really knew what was up began to shrink. Government gets too big, people don’t get involved. We need our Country back

One of my favorite things about Sanders was that he had a net worth commensurate with what a civil servant of his age would have. That's tragically rare and a testimony to his honesty and integrity.

You can disagree with his principles but the man believes what he says and isn't on the take. He doesn't have a "foundation" that Russians give millions to, isn't in the billionaires club motivated to make his buddies rich, etc.

That's exactly what a completely conquered Hillary supporter would say!

For something to be a mistake it must have been a bad idea

Why would they say them voting for him was a mistake, when he has followed through with a lot of what he promised too?

Trump or Hillary fcking Clinton... mmmm?

Tough choice here// s

https://trumptracker.github.io

Has he?

Obviously.

So many of those are so ridiculously arbitrary you could never define when they were achieved, and from a quick look its also not up to date. To name a few, I'd say he has started taking care of our military and he has cut taxes. Shit website.

The promises that are non quantifiable aren't listed as completed or failed though, so the site is still reasonable for comparing his record on quantifiable promises.

Some presidents might make far less promises than others but the impact is of high significance. Some might just be spraying and praying with their promises.

Some are responsible and know what they are doing, some are populist liars, if he "spray and prays" with his promisses he's a populist shithead that shouldn't be in politics

Case in point

It wasn't a mistake, he was a much better candidate and is an awesome President.

It only took two comments for this to become political.

A bunch of stupid Americans telling other stupid Americans they're stupid. That's the real problem.

There is no winning when the game is broken.

Agreed.

Easily? Really? What third world shithole country are you from motherfucker?

So what’s the big deal then? Why all fever pitch stories atm why not mention the many many times the USA have done similar things like France 2012 election

I called so much of this just by noticing strange patterns early on.

Here's my theories

http://mad.science.blog/2017/12/31/utopia/

http://mad.science.blog/2018/02/05/utopia-2-sociological-death/

Welcome to any country who holds tech. We are on our way to dystopian future

irrelevant discussion.

the American public was NOT subverted, this is Mueller theater. He is justifying his existence, and a friendly grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. All he has (from theindictments) is a group of shitstirrers. He doesnt even have hard evidence they are russian government, and knows he will never have to present any, the accused are all out of reach.

So if we take the indictments at face value and just agree with the assumptions the SC made, a bunch of agitators have attempted to cause political chaos. SO?

isnt that what happens already every day? George Soros does it as a long running hobby. Is HE registered as a "foreign agent"? If not, where is HIS indictment? And he is the tip of the iceberg. If its all of a sudden a crime for non US citizens to conduct online and offline political demagoguery that is otherwise legal, what statute is being broken? the indictments are literally saying creating shill reddit profiles=identity theft, when shariablue does that every day

Uh they used people's identities to open bank accounts, that's actual identity theft.

ok didnt see that. if so, agreed that is a legit crime. but the same theory applies, Mueller knows he never has to prove that, just allege it in the indictment.

This entire thread is a testimony to how well their plan worked. Good job everyone.

Ain't that the truth...=(

It was her turn! Everyone I disagree with is brainwashed!

PrussianBot

oops

I was actually just thinking about this the other day! As Americans, we definitely have no culture at large or unified vision. I think a big part of that could also be our extreme capitalism - the most unified culture we have is through marketing, franchises, etc. Memes. Things that inherently move quickly and are gone, and very focused on the individuals experience. Makes for a bad storm when you get people who recognize that, and understand how to take advantage of it.

That's the mindset of infinite expansion. Always consuming in search of a future cessation. You can't taste the food in your mouth when you're thinking about your next meal.

I don’t think that you understand that this is the first time in human history where this type of thing was possible. We didn’t know how to defend against it because we’ve never really had to before. I’m sure that we will learn though.

No your allowed to be nationalists others are just going to call you stupid. What are you even talking about, you want to be a victim so badly

There's been a meme for awhile now that Correct the Record doesn't work on Sundays. This exact topic has been downvoted in all the other threads about "Russian Influence", but today it gets the attention is deserves, and the overall trend of the comments is rational discussion? This can't be a coincidence.

Religion is not being pushed away by science. And it’s not just religion, really. Creativity, free thought, the idea that an individual is a part of the society - the very thing that helped us survive, the very essence of humanity is being replaced with vacuity. With individualism. With egocentrism. Divide et impera.

Don't legitimize it. 0.0001% of posts (or less) by "Russian Trolls" mean absolutely nothing.

It's not like Trump saying "just grab em by the pussy" was buried. it was a lead story, for days. People saw that, heard it, and decided to vote for him anyway (including women).

You can't tweet your way to that level of stupid...it has to already be there.

я робот .... Oops... you got me & the other +60 MILLION bots that elected GEOTUS 45...

If you think your country can so easily be subverted with ads and social network manipulation, you must take a long look at what you're doing wrong as a nation your own premise.

It’s a ploy to but more regulations/limits on the citizens/us and less on intelligence and government. It’s bullshit in my eyes.

What stance are you taking ?

if you thought the manipulation actually did anything substantial.

The populace is always in the dark but less and less now that we have the internet. At least we have a better chance of educating ourselves on things vs being spoon fed all news by the teevee with three literal channels like when I was a kid. More deep politics is being uncovered for thise who care to search and read. 50 years ago the whitehouse used the fact that their populace was in the dark about the soviets to scare the shit out of us , tho they secretly knew the truth. The more things change the deeper and more conplex the politics. The narratives are not 4-6 story lines or agendas like when I was a kid... know it’s a bazarro world of complexities and dark deep politics with thousands of tentacles and tertiary manipulations. Really appreciate your thoughtful posting btw.

Tho remember that Reddit is fickle and not a proper representation since each response can be skewed a bit depending on the subreddit you’re asking the questions in. I know you know that but just saying. Ask the same question in 15 -20 different subreddits and I’d be interested in that graph of data.

I agree as that’s what’s always been done. Take a few bad events and create policy around it to limit citizens and give government more power.

We are doing…meth.

I don't know how else to say that this is intentionally or unintentionally a poorly thought out call for authoritarian ethnic nationalism.

Which is kind of an absurd call in the US because the point of a federalist system is to use the heterogeneity of states in tandem with a united federal interest to address international or national concerns. An inherent division (the separation of powers) is fundamental to the structure of the country.

Authoritarian states like Russia and China have issues like tenement building collapses and crazy civil rights violations but they just shoot people who complain about it. They have issues like Chechnya ignoring federal law and the literal, rapid cultural genocide of subgroups.

Of course the KGB, a spook agency from an authoritarian country would think heterogeneity is a poison pill and push that strategy - the same way the CIA thought media-bombing commies was the way to subvert their national stability. Everybody is biased in that they seek solutions from their own cultural perspective

If you want to vote for the exsanguination of minorities and try to set up an ethno-state, go for it, but there will always be heterogeneity until you go full Borg and rewrite everyone to think exactly the same and have automatically networked experiences. In the meanwhile, heterogeneity actually makes the US stronger because it decentralizes avenues of vulnerability - it's just that bipartisan politics has always subverted a necessarily inclusive federal position and the information age no longer permits citizens to unite against the spectre of "other". In other words, it's time for the office of President to realize its initial conception and be a unifying force of all groups instead of an idolized figurehead of whatever crowd of colored shirts voted them in.

I also want to point out that attempting to ham-fistedly stamp out dissidence will lead to more political vulnerability as other actors will then capitalize on an increasing sense of victimization and panic to push their own agenda - see: Holocaust (Jews et. al), American Revolution (France et American Rebels), Vietnam War (Viet Cong and Villagers), ISIL, NRA, etc etc.

Every time National Socialism departs from a premise of monoethnic authoritarianism (which, again, intentionally or unintentionally, you are proposing), you get either bad PR which leads to international coalitions against you, or mass killings, which lead to the foundation of an authoritarian state that's still riddled with issues (perhaps even more) but looks "better" from the outside-in.

The irony of this is that it's the sort of thing that ethnic supremacists are probably down for, but calls for cultural equality from current minority groups can easily bbe read as a desire to assimilate into the cultural majority through the abolition of socio-economic barriers that create exactly the divisions you are worried about - Russia doesn't need to do shit, inner-cities and meth parks do enough on their own to divide the US.

They actually helped the democracy. People should be well informed in order to maintain the democratic society.

The ads were bought after the election, brah.

“Not likely to have affected the outcome of the election”

-Robert Mueller

Source? I haven’t seen Mueller say that. And I’ve seen many examples of ads and Facebook groups during the election.

http://imgur.com/JlJlYEB

Excuse me, it was actually Rod Rosenstein, Muellers boss.

Here’s the CNN article, which is of course 100% toilet journalism, but it’s just them directly quoting Rod Rosenstein who was on camera at the time.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/02/16/politics/mueller-russia-indictments-election-interference/index.html

And it’s not like Russia is hiding it, they are pretty much trolling from their official accounts.

https://twitter.com/Russia/status/965108891255263232

It’s education. We’ve become a nation of morons

Thanks for this post. As I Canadian I find the US to be an absolute laughing stock. I'm getting really tired of their politics seeping into our media and news every night and day... Hope Canadians don't fall for the same bs.

Sweetie I'm not as familiar with Canadian politics as I'm sure you are, but you guys got your own shit too. Your government just paid millions to an ISIS fighter who killed folks in the name of jihad. I think it's best if you cleaned up your room before making comments about others affairs.

Thanks for starting off with condescension sweetie...

I am well aware of Canada's problems... Didn't say we were perfect. All I am saying is from the outside the U.S. is kind of a joke. I don't want it in Canada. Get out of your bubble. Instead of being offended get out of your bubble.

It goes so much more beyond this.

http://mad.science.blog/2018/02/05/utopia-2-sociological-death/

http://mad.science.blog/2017/12/31/utopia/

Common culture, heritage and beliefs are disparaged in "proposition nations" and lately border on Crimethink.

Believers in the modern civic religion of Narrative Worship are as evangelical as those of the old-fashioned kinds.

And even if it was, you deserved it

Now we're there

According to some posters this thread, it's very easy to do it to other countries too, the US does it all the time, and that's why we should all lie down and take the propaganda from Russia like good boys and girls because US citizens have no moral authority to be concerned about the Russian government covertly interfering in US elections. It's not a "new idea" so there's no reason to make a big deal, except those who want to create a "Russian meddling" scare.

Again: it's okay for Russia to meddle in the US election, it's probably not effective, if it's effective, it's the US citizen's fault. The US does the same to Russia so we should all calm down and except it without making a big deal.

No one has said we should take it lying down. People just aren't as dumb as you'd like to think and aren't as surprised by it as some. The point is if Russia's doing it so are other countries. Why the focus only on them? It's obvious propaganda about propaganda.

I am talking about the Russia and all the propaganda BS and the whole TRUMP is russia puppet blah blah... The amount of propaganda going around insane. You are not ehlping by getting offended by every little thing and jumping to conclusions. I said I see it canada and I don't want it. You are being offended for no reason. Relax, don't take things so personally. Take some of your meds or maybe go see your doc and change your perscription.

Not in those exact words. Except that that every quoted phrase in that post came from this thread. And your deflections is not effective either. If we shouldn't take it lying down, what have you suggested that we do to stop it?

But oh no, other countries are doing it too, so why focus on Russia, we need to be talking about those countries instead. It's "PROPAGANDA ABOUT PROPAGANDA", we need to be talking about the propaganda by the US media and China and 400 pounds guy in the basement maybe, not the Russian.

Hahaha, I'm sure you aren't surprise, but there were sure a lot of posters saying there's zero evidence of Russian interference in the US election before the indictment came down. Do you think they were surprised by the indictment? I'm sure not despite their inability to see any evidence before Friday.

Yes, 13 internet trolls swayed the outcome of the election

if they were doing this for 50 years... https://youtu.be/bX3EZCVj2XA

I would have needed to avoid near endless shilling on the part of CTR/Soros/Shareblue to get to anything "Russian". But hey that doesn't count lol

At this point it is obvious that some people can't function after defeat.

Uh-huh...ALL COUNTRIES are subverted by their leadership, and/or advertising. WTF???

The OP seems to start from a point of view that Humanity is generally starting from a point of decency. Look at how Humanity has treated it's only viable homeworld, and the creatures who cohabitate it. What is a Nation that is manipulatable doing wrong? Well for starters it's populated by humans.

Try telling that to the left. They are so blue pilled they really think that Putin and Trump are in bed working to destroy the united states. All the evidence, in fact the only evidence shows that Hillary and Obama were working to undermine the united states. Up is down and left is right nowadays.

The amount of anger and hostility you are met with buy the left and the right when you try to do some critical thinking on your own is crazy. Its all out war between sides

we need more nationalism.

I blame our education system

When your taught to not think for yourself but to instead parrot information, you tend to get a very stupid base population.

Is that why you used your instead of you're?

Fast typing and a lack of care caused that

Nah it's because your Russian so your English is bad... I've actually read responses like that already it's getting sad when bad grammar makes you a Russian shill.

Hey if someone's argument is so bad and lacks anything but gut feeling the I can see why it's the only thing they would argue. These spinless losers are killing amurica.

America wasn't subverted by Tweets and Facebook posts. Poverty and social justice chose this election, Trump's rhetoric targeted groups that mainstream society had rejected completely, meaning poor white people. Democrats (except Sanders) don't want to lift a finger to help somebody who's white, and Republicans don't want to lift a finger to help somebody who's poor, Donald Trump had access to a huge voting bloc that the rest of the political spectrum had turned their backs on.

we had a common king, a common religion, a common national identity. Now we don't have kings, religion is being pushed away by science, which, ironically, is a new religion, and you're not allowed to be a nationalist because you're literally Hitler if you do that.

I think you hit the nail on the head there.

I know it's not this simple, but I really believe that promoting Individualism to the degree that schools and pop culture have been for the last few decades has absolutely contributed to the mess we're finding ourselves in today.

Simply put, people have their heads up their asses and aren't willing to collaborate. You see symptoms of this failure all around: Unions are shit, governments (local, and big) are shit, community is practically a concept from yesteryear and is only being revived as a tool for tech companies to further blur the lines between home and work for their employees.

America is fundamentally broken on both an institutional level and a social level and frankly I'm not sure if it can ever really be fixed. At least not without a few more decades of radical social change. We have to change the paradigm on which we raise the next generation of children. Rather than raising them on reckless fantasies (you can do and be anything you want) and telling them that each are unique and should strive to express their uniqueness.

The common identity is supposed to be that we are all human, and then our smaller group is Americans.

Your comment about Hitler and science becoming a religion shows your bias pretty obviously.

So I guess I would ask you why your side has lost its moral compass?

What happened to the moral majority?

What happened to family values?

Is it possible that far less has changed than you suggest, and the truth is the rich n powerful are operating on the same basis they always have?

You mention the 60s as if there was social unity but in truth life was just as divided as it is today AND we had a significant portion of our populace had no voice.

I agree with you completely that we need to find common good and we need to start thinking of our nation in long term aspects instead of short term gains.

religion is being pushed away by science, which ironically is the new religion

Stopped taking this post seriously right there. You clearly don’t understand what differentiates a religion from scientific research.

I don't think that OP necessarily agrees with that statement. I just think that he is referring to people who say science is a religion.

The same people who promote religion as truth are promoting the idea that science is a religion though.

I know... I was just saying that he was referencing them, not endorsing.

And also if the society has the collective memory of a flea, where a news story or reddit post can be washed away by the next big headline - it needs to be analyzed

We are living in strange times instead when Russian bots sound more like red blooded Americans than most democrats.

This is something that has nagged at me for a while now.

Nobody is suggesting that the outcome of the election is a result of election fraud (i.e. changing actual votes).

What politicians / media / anti-trump people are really saying is that the Russians were really good at influencing voters. Better than themselves. That you, the voter that actually holds the power to cast a vote, is a stupid person.

This is what democracy and freedom of speech looks like. If you authoritarianism, go to Russia.

"Furthermore, every man is responsible for his own faith, and he must see it for himself that he believes rightly. As little as another can go to hell or heaven for me, so little can he believe or disbelieve for me; and as little as he can open or shut heaven or hell for me, so little can he drive me to faith or unbelief. Since, then, belief or unbelief is a matter of every one's conscience, and since this is no lessening of the secular power, the latter should be content and attend to its own affairs and permit men to believe one thing or another, as they are able and willing, and constrain no one by force."

The FBI is such a shit show, They just wanted the headlines. Why even waste the $$ on charging these people when you know russia wont give us snowden they sure as shit are not going to give us their own for political goals

👏🏾🙌🏽👏🙌🏽👏🙌🏽👏🙌🏾

Long time stalker of this sub and never commented, until now. It's pretty simple actually, the main stream media and Hillary along with her supporters are sore losers. It's just that simple, of course Russia has muddled in the election, just like we meddle with the entire world. But Russia doesn't elect an American president, the nation does and now Trump represents them. And the left is so butt hurt they lost they would rather fight tooth and nail then too accept the fact. The democrats is the party of acceptance and tolerance my ass, most offended type of people there are.

This became clear to me when it was shown again and again that the candidate who spent more money would typically win.

New age McCarthyism that's all it is

This is just a distraction to keep people from focusing on the broken system and it has been since the beginning.

Same as it's ever been. The elites have been doing this since civilization began, we repeat history over and over.

The left going full McCarthyism is one of the most interesting things I've seen with this.

A combination of factors made US an easy target for manipulation... Rejection of science and evidence-based decision making, and blind-eye to folks like Alex Jones taking advantage of the fragile Free Speech rights, and corporate takeover of politics - and most importantly society valuing aggression, greed and money over compassion and wisdom.

/conspiracy should really have a better understanding of propaganda

It's the culture of opinions over facts and anti-intellectualism that leaves us vulnerable to it.

Our country is routinely subverted by a foreign power via campaign contributions and coordinated MSM propaganda campaigns. This manipulation was resulted in several wars and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of refugees. Israel manipulates the US government 100 times more effectively than Russia's wettest dream.

Its russia meddling and hacking. Because they want to lock down the internet. And they need an excuse for multitude of reasons. Outside enemy help the enemy within remain. Outside enemy help justify the absurd military spending budgets, for that military industrial complex. Help justify billion dollar election campaign, and their losses. Keeps people wasting their energy and directing their hate towards the outside enemy rather than focus on the rot within. Lastly, US diplomacy has always been, america first, meaning allies are either beneath US or not allies at all. Hence rising economic power of russia and china is a huge threat, and one US cannot compete with on an economic scale, it will sabdue with military force. Hence the talk about using low yeild nukes(like somehow justifying war).

It isn't. Its being subverted by the Deep State attempting their soft coup with the media propaganda plus the sham investigation.

Propaganda doesn't have much to do with intelligence.

And to be honest, from the outside there's a lot of propaganda in the US, the whole flag thing, saying the pledge of allegance each morning, singing the national anthem at every chance, rabidly defending the constitution, fox news (although anything Murdoch does tbh).

Just because you recognise propaganda, doesn't make others stupid for not seeing it.

this is stupid, "you need to examine youself for having common and known human vulnerabilities"

Only needed to fool 80,000.

More people that should be arrested and indicted:

1. All the dreamers and other illegals

2. Canadian MP Niki Ashton

3. Christopher Steele

All of these people are foreign agents who influenced American elections without registering as a foreign agent as per the foreign agents registration act.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act

^{HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 150521}

I think part of the problem is that America is so large that people can easily live in their bubbles and let their ignorance and bigotry fester. A lot of Americans never travel or visit another country.

The Republican Party has also done an excellent job of brain washing the majority of the white poor and middle class into believing they are one of them. My aunt for example sake. Was a nurse. Had some sort of event or injury to her back. Allegedly she can’t stand for more than 8 hours a day. She pretty much just hangs out all day and posts ignorant shit on FB now. But if you met her would think she was a perfectly able woman. But she is a staunch Trump supporter. Middle age white women living off disability hates the idea of free healthcare.

Can’t tell you how many poor whites I know buying into the idea that more taxes keeps businesses from growing and expanding more jobs. No what’s going on is that the rich elite get their tax break and horde their fucking money and not invest it back into America.

They’ve done an excellent PR campaign in equating socialism into communism. But if anyone actually subjectively looked at it. Communist Russia was a corrupt mask. It was never communism to begin with. It was a facade.

What we are starting to see and hopefully for the better is society confronting itself with real questions that will determine our future as a nation and race of people.

One day technology will drive healthcare costs to a minimum. But will the right thing be done and actually make it affordable, free? Or will people continue to be fucked in the ass?

Trump won because he fed off people’s hatred and bigotry. Despite Russia’s involvement he got way too close to fucking begin with. People believe what they want to believe and today they can find any article with spin on it to back it up.

This is what you get when you constantly gut education

Your premise is BS.

Come on over and try to take the US and see what happens. All we need is a common enemy and we will fuck you up son.

just wait till the dollar will crash down to mexico levels and it will. than you will see the real nature of americans by fucking up eachother.

I bet you would love that you evil fuck. 1 billion guns cocked and loaded. Come on over suka

I don't believe the deep state/media fooled most people from conversations with customers from all over the world & United States.

Basically the media paints a picture of consent of the people.

They portrayed Trump as a populist peoples candidate so they could ignore the socialist who raised the most amount of individual donations for a presidential candidate ever (over $200 million).

It extinguished more eyeballs from seeing the socialist & also kept Clinton scandals out of the news.

People see it & the trick is that they start saying "See all these people are idiots for electing Trump!!!!"

What they don't talk about is how deep state made sure to make it legal to propagandize it's populace in 2013 & then using it in an election.

If you think TPTB didn't know there was heavy interest in socialism building before 2015 you aren't paying attention.

They know the most popular thoughts trending at anytime & they use it against you.

Just like Noam says 'Manufactured consent'.....it's an illusion to get you to think "most other people are not like me" otherwise how could we end up like this.

It makes people feel disempowered.

The media put Trump in office and people got suspicious hence Russia hysteria/propaganda.

Science is NOT a religion. Religions are, by their very nature, opposed to change. Science is self-correcting, and so changes all the time.

The Fox News feedback loop is a great place to start looking.

Why are people calling it propaganda without having even seen the comments? Anything a Russian says online is propaganda now?

Let's look at limiting the rights of people stupid enough to fall for Russian propaganda.

why limiting rights? its just a question of education

Participation in treason due to poor judgement. There's precedent from the end of the civil war.

The human ape isn't that intelligent and social complexity creates niches for the psychological and intelligence differentials inherent to our species to manifest as subcultures, and the ape-driven stupidity of these subcultures gets amplified by communications technology to confuse and manipulate even dumber minds as part of a game-theory driven clusterfuck. The complexity also explodes vectors of corruption and makes accountability impossible. These are emergent phenomena of a system that was not set up carefully enough, which much have immunization and checks and balance systems to emerge in a scaling way along with the complexity. The founding fathers had no concept of complex system, evolution, emergent phenomena, neuroscience, the fact we don't have free will, etc.

That's the actual answer in summary.

There are a number of reasons this strategy if dividing the American populace into opposing has worked. It starts with the proliferation of for profit news outlets, which constitute the majority of news media that Americans consume. People think they’re learning what’s important without realizing that those companies only publicize the stories they want pushed in the way they want to push them.

Worse, those companies have presented biased entertainers as legitimate news reporters, and people buy it, largely because they received a poor education and lack critical thinking skills, but also because the majority of this country is made up of poor people who think they deserve more than the next guy. They’re easily manipulated and, consistent with human nature, resort to tribalism as a source of comfort. People like knowing other people feel the way they do and like being able to point to some “other” as the source of their problems. More often than not, some other group.

Since at least the early 90s, conservative entertainers like Limbaugh, and then later Hannity, Jones, Beck, and many others have waged a very, very successful propaganda war and recruited millions of angry people to their side of the table. Millions of angry white people either scared or pissed at the changing face of America formed up on one side of the table, and starting with Gingrich’s Contract with America, began actively hating anyone who didn’t agree with them and stopped reaching across the aisle. Liberals reacted as you would expect and former their own tribe. What they lacked in persuasive authoritative personalities, they made up for through their simple ability to control the vast bulk of the news being aired and publicized through their control of most major media sources.

So, for about 25 years now, we’ve had two opposing teams who not only refuse to talk, but refuse to LISTEN, choosing to only pay attention to their team’s “news sources,” which are 100% biased propaganda riddled with lies and half truths. Of course those same people would fall for fake stories and narratives pushed by Russian trolls or whoever was actually behind it. It didn’t matter what the story was, whether it was true, or where it ultimately started, as long as it was pushed by the reader’s team’s media source, it was true. And it’s still going on and not going to stop. Read the NYT every morning and watch Hannity every night. You’ll think you’re going insane because nothing you’ll read will match up with anything you see on tv.

If you can easily be subverted with ads and social network manipulations, you must take a long hard look at what you're doing wrong as a person.

This sort of thing has a long history of theory and execution;

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.” - Edward Bernays, the father of modern consumer advertising, public relations, and propaganda. First paragraph of his 1928 work Propaganda

If Rural Americans weren’t so uneducated and learned about propaganda in school like most liberals have this wouldn’t even be an issue but when you have large amounts of uneducated people, then propaganda becomes an effective tool. That’s why it works so well in countries where the population isn’t allow to go to school like North Korea or other Middle East authoritarian countries.

Just look at how insane the posts are in T_D, no educated people would fall for any of that fake news/propaganda. Look at this sub, people are willing to believe Sandy Hook never happened despite all the videos and pictures. It takes a special kind of stupid to be that gullible. Corporations have a field day with the uneducated. The NRA spends tens of millions putting out propaganda. Corporations spent tens millions getting Trump elected and look what they got in return, instead of healthcare and education, Trump decided to give 1.5 trillion with t to corporations. If you want to be a real conspiracy theorist and not just an Alex Jones level nutter, follow the money. Always follow the money and keep an open mind that sometimes your intuition might be wrong.

This sub ignores all the evidence based juicy conspiracies about Trump and instead trot out complete non-sense like Sandy Hook being a hoax. Trump will get indicted and you morons will be the only people surprised, despite supposedly being on top of conspiracies.

Just do me a favor, when Trump is indicted, try to change your ways and start using evidence and always follow the money. Also, try to be less nutty, right this sub if filled with people nuttier than squirrel poo.

Great post, I hope it gets through to people. I'm not big on the Russia angle but I don't doubt that a relatively small number of people online have the ability to sway public opinion. Whether Russian or not, the internet had a decisive factor in the election. I find it says much more about the public than about those posting things online. In addition unless someone was posting blatantly false things online I fail to see what the issue was. If you're too dumb to properly research political candidates and issues then you should not be voting. I don't want those people voting.

Aristotle and the ancients predicted this. Democracies that get too large are often ungovernable for a variety of reasons. It's an unpleasant thought but we might need to make our society less democratic in order to survive and remain competitive against other nations.

The Soviet Union was arguably more successful at fomenting revolt in the 60's. Honestly, the fact this has all been so public and spectacular makes it much less impressive. Vlad is a smarter cookie than Trump, but he has the same pride going before the fall if he underestimates Western society like so many despots before him.

The world runs on social networks and the internet. What you say is not easy to accomplish, and you seem to think that the internet is far less important to humanity than it actually is.

Before the can be a national identity, the people first need to trust the government. Lack of faith in the state is a large part of why people look elsewhere for their identity. Who wants to identify with a state that won't identify with them?

I voted for Trump in hopes of keeping Hillary out of the White House and I'm OK with that.

How fucking weak is America to let “Russian bots” get trump elected and spread his anti Clinton. If the Russians were trying to divide us they would try to get people going against Trump who is now our president. Not try to support him and put us at odds with Obama and Hillary who already lost and our long gone. Fuckers don’t make sense

While true, I believe this shits epic right now. If I watch an hour of CNN and then watch an hour of Fox I legit get two entirely different stories. And while I admittedly haven't been following politics for awhile, I've never seen it this polarizing.

You really should read the indictment. You are grossly mischaracterizing what was fine by the Russians. They were running a massive operation with hundreds of employees. It had a graphics department, an IT department, managers who supervised the performance of employees. They made trips to the US to learn out political culture so they could find weak points to target.

For you to call it “trolling for lolz” shows you either don’t really know what was done, or you are trying this minimize it.

This wasn't trolling on the internet for the lolz. This was a coordinated effort by Russian operatives to effect the election. The dummies who ate this shit up and spread the fake posts around twitter and FB aren't being arrested because what they did wasn't a crime. The people who knowingly and intentionally attempted to influence the election with fake news and propaganda are being indicted because that is a crime.

Critical thinking would be a nice start.

Perhaps you should make a more salient point in the future, despite the fact that it appears we generally agree.

Ain't that the truth...=(

It was her turn! Everyone I disagree with is brainwashed!

You can always vote third party

For some reason, they decided to impeach the Clintons over something minor.

That's because they couldn't find evidence of anything else. 100 million to find out our President got a blowjob. Thanks party of fiscal responsibility!

This is the logical result of our capitalist system. I don't know how you would expect otherwise without regulation of how news corporations present their messages.

Searching for answers does not build problem solving skills. Mayhap search engines dumb down the population.

The Mueller investigation is concerning -- but they did bring home at least some bacon. For comparison, at this point in the Ken Starr Whitewater investigation, we were about 1/3 of the way in. That search turned up zip.

Well thats your opinion. Im sure the hundreds of thousands that voted based on false information may have wanted a clean election.

You even left out all the shady deaths and deals surrounding her and Bill!

we have the same problem with our conservative party. The richest cabinet of all time. Jeramy hunt tearing down our NHS so it can be sold of to virgin and the like to pave the way for American insurance companies. Any one else failing to meet target after target would be fired but JH, fuck it, lets put him in charge of social care as well. The only way he keeps his job is if what he is doing is intended. And nobody is talking about it.

So in other words you bought into the propaganda that both sides are the same and voted for a guy who's own running mate barely supported him.

Ok, there’s no allegation. There’s no allegation yet.

First of all, these are alleged crimes. Secondly, they haven't alleged that they were directed by Russia. And lastly, I don't, nor do I have any reason to trust guys like Rosenstein, Mueler, Clapper, or anyone like that.

He's saying that its implausible that they were trying to do anything other than troll, if the accusations are even true.

I was shocked to learn that the GOP and DNC are private corporations, and can do whatever they want in selecting a candidate. It is true the DNC primary was rigged, but it was not ilegal. Oh, and Hillary was an awful candidate.

That's not an "everyone agrees with me" argument. It's a "when even Trump is now saying that he sees there is evidence of Russians meddling in the election there must be something to the indictment." Do you think Trump would have said he agreed with the charges if he looked at the indictment and thought it was bullshit? Of course not. He'd be saying "This is just another stage of the witch hunt by the FBI!!" Instead of that he is now having to admit that there's something there. And if Trump is saying that after actually looking at what the FBI saw I'm going to go ahead and believe him more than I listen to Assange who saw nothing and is talking out of his ass.

But as far as the "Russians were just trolling, lol!" argument. Why the hell would people in Russia decide to "troll" a foreign election? And why would they troll in a way that was specifically targeted to hurt on candidate and help another? That sounds like that trolling had an intended purpose. Almost like it wasn't just "trolling" which is why there were indictments that even Trump can't scoff at.

Obviously.

Trump Recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital and Orders U.S. Embassy to Move

President Trump on Wednesday formally recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, reversing nearly seven decades of American foreign policy and setting in motion a plan to move the United States Embassy from Tel Aviv to the fiercely contested Holy City.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/06/world/middleeast/trump-jerusalem-israel-capital.html

One Tax Loophole Untouched So Far: The Trump Golf-Course Break

The golf-course deduction in particular has drawn scrutiny before in Washington from both sides of the aisle. Former President Barack Obama included restrictions on the deduction in his budget for at least three years. In April, Republican Senator Jeff Flake listed the golf course deduction in a report he wrote entitled, “Tax Rackets: Outlandish Loopholes to Lower Tax Liabilities.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-09/one-tax-loophole-untouched-so-far-the-trump-golf-course-break

Would Hillary have restricted the deductions that so greatly benefit Trump as Obama did? Why wouldn't she, if not get rid of the, as the Republican put it, "racket" altogether?

I posited we'd have net neutrality under Hillary. A "maybe" response got upvotes.

Obama passed regs specifically protecting net neutrality, but she would do something radically different? Why?

So many of those are so ridiculously arbitrary you could never define when they were achieved, and from a quick look its also not up to date. To name a few, I'd say he has started taking care of our military and he has cut taxes. Shit website.

I agree conservative isn't the same thing but if someone is a Neo-Nazi I don't believe in their free speech.

I do not think you are “conceding the point” I just think you are, in bad faith, trying to deflect our discussion. Issues surrounding Trevor Noah do not affect whether Russian operatives tried to sow mayhem in the American political system, which is he topic we have been discussing. Sorry, I am done now.

WTF are you talking about? Of course I did. You were talking about "Americans". I corrected you. Don't get mad.

Has "Donny Jonny" been indicted? You fool. Quit while you're ahead, because you're way out of your depth here.

Do you realize that net neutrality as a legal order has only been around since April 2015? So scary to think that we have gone back to the internet dark days of 2014. Has anything for you actually changed since the repeal? Other than Google filtering and Facebook deleting anything that doesn't fit a far-Left narrative?

I support the idea of a free and open internet. And maybe something sinister can come of the repeal. But as of now, it seems it is just scare mongering. Reminds me of the Right warning us that universal health care means 6 month waits for surgery and death panels.

Obama on Israel's capital:

"Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided."

Or, at least when he is pandering to his Jewish lobbyists.

she was literally the worst candidate ever

So you think that you came to this conclusion without any help from Russian or Republican propaganda? If so, then you should easily be able to list the reasons why

Wow bro. Mad cuz you're wrong, or is it that you know Hillary gamed the system?

Even IF she ever made it to trial, she'd be acquitted. She holds too much power, and knows too much.