Politics You were duped by the Ruskies.

[BrianFromWA]

She looked not too sharp in the debates. Trump looked like a grammar school bully. It's a shame two party Americans had to choose either one of them. We should have had the question "None of the above" on the ballot.

We did. Only about 6,674,811 of us voted for it.

 

[barfo]

We did. Only about 6,674,811 of us voted for it.

They probably should have labeled it as "None of the Above" instead of "Throw Away Your Vote"

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

They probably should have labeled it as "None of the Above" instead of "Throw Away Your Vote"
barfo

To each their own. I'm not beholden to a letter after someone's name when I vote, and voted for the candidate among the 5 that I wanted to see as President and wanted to get to 5%. If you hadn't wasted your vote on the overall loser in a highly-blue state, maybe we could've had multiple parties and multiple funded debaters in 2020. As it is, good luck with Spartacus/Beto trying to take down orangeman.

 

[CupWizier]

To each their own. I'm not beholden to a letter after someone's name when I vote, and voted for the candidate among the 5 that I wanted to see as President and wanted to get to 5%. If you hadn't wasted your vote on the overall loser in a highly-blue state, maybe we could've had multiple parties and multiple funded debaters in 2020. As it is, good luck with Spartacus/Beto trying to take down orangeman.

Right, because 3rd party candidates have been so successful in the past? Orange man has been doing the country very well for the 2020 election. This weeks snafu will likely take another hit on his chances. Just like the Beatles, the hits just keep on coming, just not in a good way like it was for the Beatles.

Trump will soon be singing



he will look good being Putin's orange puppet, or maybe court jester.

 

[Hoopguru]

Well, to be fair, Bernie isn't a democrat and only ran as a democrat to run for presidency and then when he was eliminated he went back to being an independent. He was basically using the democratic party for financial and exposure purposes. I know you don't like Clinton, but do you think it's fair what Bernie tried to pull? Clinton also has raised millions of dollars for the democratic party, just not for her.

Yeah that seems shaky too.
I guess there are not rules preventing him to run as a dem. I bet though Hillary though he’d be easy Pickens. Plus he endorsed her too.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Right, because 3rd party candidates have been so successful in the past?

You're right...women have a much more successful track record.

 

[CupWizier]

Yeah that seems shaky too.
I guess there are not rules preventing him to run as a dem. I bet though Hillary though he’d be easy Pickens. Plus he endorsed her too.

Well almost 1,000 delegates more, 3.7mil voters and 55% of the vote to 43% isn't really considered much of a race though. Sanders endorsed her so that he could stay in good graces with the democratic party. I have no problem with him running, but run with your political affiliation.

 

[CupWizier]

You're right...women have a much more successful track record.

Well now we know what a business man with no political experience is like as president. Not a very good picture.

In the spirit of Christmas I countered your green font with red font.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Well now we know what a business man with no political experience is like as president. Not a very good picture. In the spirit of Christmas I countered your green font with red font.

Is this like that Sonic/Blazer game the last year there...? That was one of the crappier games I've seen in person...

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

I think that's bullshit. The differences between the two candidates were vast, even if you hated both of them.

McDonalds sucks, and dog shit sucks. But I can differentiate between them, and I know which one I'd rather eat, and the choice leads to very different outcomes.

barfo

NOT NICE calling Hillary dog shit.

 

[jonnyboy]

Link? I don't think that is a proven fact at all. There were some things that one can point to as unfair - debate schedules, etc. - but the fact is that many more people voted for Hillary than Bernie, and debates on different days wouldn't have changed that.



That is definitely true.

barfo

Wikileaks released over 20,000 emails showing clear and distinct bias toward Clinton, and a concerted effort to distance from Sanders. The chair of the DNC was forced to resign because of outrage over the issue. She was literally heckled off stage by her own party members during her departure speech.

 

[CupWizier]

Is this like that Sonic/Blazer game the last year there...? That was one of the crappier games I've seen in person...

Nope, it was in the spirit of Christmas as I clearly mentioned.

 

[barfo]

Wikileaks released over 20,000 emails showing clear and distinct bias toward Clinton, and a concerted effort to distance from Sanders. The chair of the DNC was forced to resign because of outrage over the issue. She was literally heckled off stage by her own party members during her departure speech.

Yeah, but you are overstating the issue. The Democratic National Committee favored a Democrat, true - no big surprise there. And they definitely wanted Bernie to drop out after he'd lost, rather than continuing. I can totally see why Bernie's supporters were upset about it - but it didn't change the outcome.

barfo

 

[barfo]

To each their own. I'm not beholden to a letter after someone's name when I vote, and voted for the candidate among the 5 that I wanted to see as President and wanted to get to 5%.

Same here, except I was aiming for 50% instead of 5%.

If you hadn't wasted your vote on the overall loser in a highly-blue state, maybe we could've had multiple parties and multiple funded debaters in 2020.

When a good candidate runs in a 3rd party, I'll vote for them. But not until.

As it is, good luck with Spartacus/Beto trying to take down orangeman.

Good luck with your Commander-in-Chief in the meantime.

barfo

 

[stampedehero]

We did. Only about 6,674,811 of us voted for it.

Any unknown or The Green or Libertarian parties.

 

[stampedehero]

We always have several parties to choose from. It's just that voters are only really interested in two of the parties.

Since you and I voted otherwise, we would lose due to vast coffers of money these two organizations have and accumulate.

 

[jonnyboy]

Yeah, but you are overstating the issue. The Democratic National Committee favored a Democrat, true - no big surprise there. And they definitely wanted Bernie to drop out after he'd lost, rather than continuing. I can totally see why Bernie's supporters were upset about it - but it didn't change the outcome.

barfo

I could just as easily argue that you are understating. I could also say less decietful (and therfore less effective) tactics were used by "The Russians" themselves. Internet trolling and memes produced by Russian bot farms who's primary goal is clicks - not influencing elections - does not strike me as a vast and effective conspiracy to upturn the American political system. Sounds more like a scapegoat invented by a losing team. These bot farms, which come from many places abroad, not just the country where "The Russians" come from, change their ads according to the media landscape at the time. When there is an election in progress, guess what kind of ads you'll see? Amazing how that works. It's called advertising. Its also worth pointing out that the negative ads were aimed at MULTIPLE candidates from BOTH parties, not just Hilldog. It was a vast, blanketing, click campaign. You dont get more clicks by picking on one candidate, you crank out material to reach the widest audience possible.

Dems lost the election and have been grabbing for straws ever since. It would be the same thing if party roles were swapped I imagine.

 

[jonnyboy]

She foolishly thought it would be enough to let Trump bury himself. She was wrong and cost her dearly.

No, it was "The Russians" remember? Hillary did nothing wrong.

 

[Chris Craig]

No, it was "The Russians" remember? Hillary did nothing wrong.

Whatever man, I have never said she did nothing wrong. She ran a terrible campaign. She should have visited the midwest. Should have spoke and indentified with blue collar workers. Too much talk about the middle and upper class. She should have attacked Trump head on and not thought it would be enough to let him bury himself. She should have talked more about her plan for America, detailed it, make voters believe. She should not have used her own personal server for her work emails even if the policies were not clear. But, she was lazy. She was awkward. She was foolish. She made too many mistakes. And, it cost her the presidency.

 

[jonnyboy]

Whatever man, I have never said she did nothing wrong. She ran a terrible campaign. She should have visited the midwest. Should have spoke and indentified with blue collar workers. Too much talk about the middle and upper class. She should have attacked Trump head on and not thought it would be enough to let him bury himself. She should have talked more about her plan for America, detailed it, make voters believe. She should not have used her own personal server for her work emails even if the policies were not clear. But, she was lazy. She was awkward. She was foolish. She made too many mistakes. And, it cost her the presidency.

Wasn't meant to be a dig at you exclusively, more of a broad statement. All great points I couldn't disagree with.

 

[barfo]

I could just as easily argue that you are understating.

Maybe you could - we'll never know unless you try, will we?

I could also say less decietful (and therfore less effective) tactics were used by "The Russians" themselves. Internet trolling and memes produced by Russian bot farms who's primary goal is clicks - not influencing elections -

What's your evidence that the Russian government was mainly interested in clicks rather than political influence?

does not strike me as a vast and effective conspiracy to upturn the American political system. Sounds more like a scapegoat invented by a losing team. These bot farms, which come from many places abroad, not just the country where "The Russians" come from, change their ads according to the media landscape at the time.

That's like saying "people shoot guns all the time, so obviously Stephen Paddock isn't a murderer"

When there is an election in progress, guess what kind of ads you'll see? Amazing how that works. It's called advertising. Its also worth pointing out that the negative ads were aimed at MULTIPLE candidates from BOTH parties, not just Hilldog. It was a vast, blanketing, click campaign. You dont get more clicks by picking on one candidate, you crank out material to reach the widest audience possible.

That isn't correct unless you are talking about everyone who used social media. The Russkies focused on pro-Trump, anti-Clinton.

Dems lost the election and have been grabbing for straws ever since. It would be the same thing if party roles were swapped I imagine.

There are always sore losers, but the indictments suggest that there's more to it than just whining. Mueller isn't a Hillary Clinton sycophant.

barfo

 

[jonnyboy]

What's your evidence that the Russian government was mainly interested in clicks rather than political influence?

I dont have any because there isnt any, just like there is no evidence the russian government was involved with ANY of these claims. Just abunch of memes and intelligence agencies claiming they have evidence but refusing to disclose it. I wouldn't put it past them, but why can't we just see the proof? And lets just go ahead and say The Russian government was responsible for ALL the memes and Facebook posts....who gives a shit. It didnt steal the election for anyone. There we're a million times more negative memes and facebook posts at the hands of american citizens. Hillary Clinton is a dirtbag and lost the election regardless of memes. You guys are trying to suggest there were enough americans swayed by Russian influence to make Hillary lose an election she would have otherwise won. Not true. Complete nonsense. Shitty excuse.

 

[barfo]

I dont have any because there isnt any, there is no evidence the russian government was involved with any of these claims. Just abunch of memes and inyelligence agencies claimi g they have evidence but refusing to disclose it.

So explain why Mueller would be motivated to indict people without any evidence?

barfo

 

[CupWizier]

I dont have any because there isnt any, just like there is no evidence the russian government was involved with ANY of these claims. Just abunch of memes and intelligence agencies claiming they have evidence but refusing to disclose it. I wouldn't put it past them, but why can't we just see the proof?

You do understand that their is a huge investigation actually going on right now with Russia and our administration don't you? Why would any investigator/prosecutor disclose the evidence while an investigation is going on. The pertinent people know.

 

[julius]

So explain why Mueller would be motivated to indict people without any evidence?

barfo

Because he hates Trump and Hillary obviously is colluding with him to tarnish Trumps good name (and Putins too!)

 

[jonnyboy]

So explain why Mueller would be motivated to indict people without any evidence?

barfo

The indictments were handed down to russian hackers involved in the DNC hack. Wikileaks published that info, which disclosed DNC favoring of Clinton. All this info was true and led to the stepping down of the DNC chair. People deserved to know the DNC cheated other candidates, I'm all for leaks that expose corruption. None of this means The Russian government won the election for Donald Trump. There isnt even proof these hackers we're affiliated with the Kremlin. You guys are mad because Hillary and the DNC got exposed as crooks and you dont think it's fair. Boo hoo. Wikileaks has never been politically motivated, they publish info that exposes corruption at all levels, from any administration.

 

[Lanny]

Since you and I voted otherwise, we would lose due to vast coffers of money these two organizations have and accumulate.

Too much money in the hands of the unscrupulous who fund unscrupulous politicians is another subject.

 

[Lanny]

The indictments were handed down to russian hackers involved in the DNC hack. Wikileaks published that info, which disclosed DNC favoring of Clinton. All this info was true and led to the stepping down of the DNC chair. People deserved to know the DNC cheated other candidates, I'm all for leaks that expose corruption. None of this means The Russian government won the election for Donald Trump. There isnt even proof these hackers we're affiliated with the Kremlin. You guys are mad because Hillary and the DNC got exposed as crooks and you dont think it's fair. Boo hoo. Wikileaks has never been politically motivated, they publish info that exposes corruption at all levels, from any administration.

There's solid proof as has been told by even Republican committee members with access to classified information on the subject. Even the major foreign intelligence agencies concur. It's pretty much just our very stable and genius President along with his most ardent followers who disbelieve our best intelligence. I've heard they've got audio of Russians high five-ing each other following the election. There is so much intelligence that Mueller has used it to indict several Russians.

Meanwhile, Mueller has indicted and convicted other Americans besides just indicting some Russian professional hackers.

 

[barfo]

The indictments were handed down to russian hackers involved in the DNC hack. Wikileaks published that info, which disclosed DNC favoring of Clinton. All this info was true and led to the stepping down of the DNC chair. People deserved to know the DNC cheated other candidates, I'm all for leaks that expose corruption. None of this means The Russian government won the election for Donald Trump.

Whether they actually changed the result of the election is unknowable and thus pretty much irrelevant. It is still a crime, though, even if it was completely unsuccessful.

There isnt even proof these hackers we're affiliated with the Kremlin.

At least some of the people he indicted are GRU officers. Hard to argue the GRU has no connection to the Kremlin.

You guys are mad because Hillary and the DNC got exposed as crooks and you dont think it's fair. Boo hoo. Wikileaks has never been politically motivated, they publish info that exposes corruption at all levels, from any administration.

I think you aren't paying much attention to the evidence, which has led you several times in this thread to make statements that are incorrect.

I also think that Wikileaks is not as pure-at-heart as you'd have us believe.

barfo

 

[jonnyboy]

There's solid proof as has been told by even Republican committee members with access to classified information on the subject. Even the major foreign intelligence agencies concur. It's pretty much just our very stable and genius President along with his most ardent followers who disbelieve our best intelligence. I've heard they've got audio of Russians high five-ing each other following the election. There is so much intelligence that Mueller has used it to indict several Russians.

Meanwhile, Mueller has indicted and convicted other Americans besides just indicting some Russian professional hackers.

Our intelligence is specializes in lying, cheating, murdering, overthrowing small governments and installing puppet dictators. I'd trust the likes of a greasy used car salesman before the scum of the earth CIA. Everything they say or do is to advance an agenda you and I are not beneficiaries of.