|
Hillary lost by a razor-thin margin of like 30k votes in 3 states, so confidently saying "[X] had no effect on the outcome" is just dumb as hell; with a loss that narrow, the odds are good that every single thing contributed. Hillary lost due to a perfect storm of factors: her huge unfavorability, some big campaign blunders, Russian interference, the Comey letter, voter suppression, the media's insistence on a horse race, and widespread apathy from the certainty she'd win. Change any one of those, and she wins. Of course she was a bad candidate and that set a low baseline, but the sheer aggregate of outside forces working against her helped push her down to a narrow loss instead of a narrow win.
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
TheScott2K posted:If your retirement is decades away and your 401k is made of fairly diversified funds (as opposed to, say, company stock) that's pretty much the opposite of what you should be doing. If you're not at least maxing out the employer contribution, you're leaving money on the table.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You do know what the punishment for these things in Saudi Arabia is right? You do know that you said it was "a bunch of informants" and have now completely switched to a completely different topic, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:They didn't exactly have to go far to find evidence of Hillary being a massively corrupt war criminal I don't want to get backed into some corner where I'm defending Hillary Clinton's record. I was trying to make a point more about the likely incorrect/conspiracy-level stuff that was fired at her that may or may not have come via Russian Interference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:wikileaks went down before Assange though, when one of the members got bought out by BoA and deleted everything they had, if I'm remembering that correctly. that wasn't how i remembered it, although it's possible there's something i missed https://www.wired.com/2011/08/wikileaks-documents-destroyed/ https://www.smh.com.au/technology/wiki-war-3500-unpublished-leaks-destroyed-forever-as-assange-hits-out-20110822-1j5gw.html https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-bankofamerica-wikileaks-idUSTRE77L55P20110822 My takeaway from the articles more or less matches what I remembered, with one addition that may be what you're remembering, or maybe there was further info on it? - Wikileaks leaks the Manning stuff, before this whole chain of events - One of Wikileaks' major dudes / cofounders gets disgruntled (ostensibly, if we assume he's not an agent of the imperialist pigs) with Assange being an rear end in general and with his lack of sufficient redaction of things in the Manning leak in particular (which is incidentally the first thing that made me go "uh maybe Assange is a dick" and start paying more attention to intra-Wikileaks drama, and also get called an imperialist pig for expressing skepticism of Assange) - dude eventually leaves and destroys a portion of wikileaks' unleaked files on his way out, ostensibly because he doesn't trust assange to protect the sources, also possibly because he hates assange and is very mad - assange accuses him of being an agent of the FBI, CIA, Mossad, and Wired Magazine, as per this article and linked statement: https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/cutline/julian-assange-lashes-ex-wikileaks-employee-deleted-files-211246280.html So unless there's independent corroboration of Assange's accusations of a dude he hates who he drove out of Wikileaks like all the other good contributors to Wikileaks, my response to the Assange accusations of DDB being an agent of [all the imperialist pigs who hate Julian Assange's stalwart commitment to the truth] is going to remain a hearty lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
This is a bit off topic, but is there are reason why Vox isn't really trusted around here?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:You do know that you said it was "a bunch of informants" and have now completely switched to a completely different topic, right? True, and I'll give you that. Guess Wikileaks is good now? Or are we going to pretend that they haven't been a Russian puppet for ages now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1064593913636417542 https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1064594819752837120
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Russia spent something like 15 million dollars in advertising. Hillary spent a billion. Russian propaganda didn't demonize Hillary, decades of GOP propaganda did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:This is a bit off topic, but is there are reason why Vox isn't really trusted around here? i don't think it's more distrusted than other publications when it does news, just when it tries to be on the left but sucks at it
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
eke out posted:it's weird how when you purposefully post knowingly-incomplete, admittedly "dismissive" examples something in order to minimize it, then repeatedly move the goal posts and quibble over definitions (because you only use the passive construction to avoid the "leaked by who?" part that cuts against you) i haven't moved the goal posts once eke out and aren't you tired of embarrassing yourself with the quibbling over whether or not the DNC leak was a leak or not? first you tried to claim that only someone who gave in to russian propaganda would call it a leak, then you tried to claim that only seth rich truthers would call it a leak, and now you're trying to say I called it a leak cause I don't believe russia hacked the DNC and i'm trying to hide that or something. it's pretty sad
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:I personally attribute all the gains made by democrats in suburban districts to trump blowing up the SALT deduction. HENRYs and other assorted rich people absolutely hated that and it definitely sealed the deal for the GOP in IL-14 and other wealthy areas outside major cities. I certainly had a weird feeling of double think canvassing in the subdivisions of IL-14 and talking about how the Democrat is going to fight to lower their taxes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
Oh was this the thing where Assange said they deserved to die as "collaborators?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:11
|
|
It wasn't during the Manning trial. They dumped a huge boatload of Saudi leaks that basically outed tons of rape survivors and gays in Saudi Arabia.
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Of course she was a bad candidate and that set a low baseline, but the sheer aggregate of outside forces working against her helped push her down to a narrow loss instead of a narrow win. HRC has zero chin as a political candidate, she's always been a zero-conviction neoliberal shapeshifter, so anything you say about her can land because it all seems plausible. Weak candidates with zero conviction and no real core morality are very vulnerable to outside attacks, because a weak candidate has no intrinsic push-back against external definition. HRC ran away from defining herself the entire campaign and buried her policies under 25 feet of neoliberal means testing (not that anyone believed she was going to do any of it, anyway)
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Rigel posted:If these 16 no's hold, then Pelosi will not be able to be elected speaker with Democrat votes alone. Ben McAdams seems liable to lose so lol at him. I hope he wins bc gently caress Mia Love but his opinion doesn't mean poo poo rn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:If I recall correctly there is a distinct possibility this ends up with a speaker from the minority party.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Russian propaganda didn't demonize Hillary, decades of GOP propaganda did. The GOP could scream about Bernie for 30 years and it wouldn't do a drat thing, ask yourself why third-way Dems are so vulnerable to GOP smears. Also again I have to point out that 15 million in Russian crap over 2 years is absolutely trivial compared to decades of the multi-billion-dollar GOP Outrage/Noise Machine
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:I certainly had a weird feeling of double think canvassing in the subdivisions of IL-14 and talking about how the Democrat is going to fight to lower their taxes. The good news is that when the deduction is restored by the democrats in a grand, bipartisan manner IL-14 will comfortably go back to voting for diet CHUDs and other rogues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:This is a bit off topic, but is there are reason why Vox isn't really trusted around here? Vox is basically the media equivalent of  mixed with slick Silicon Valley presentation, I wouldn't characterize them as unreliable on a factual basis per se but they are the epitome of trying to position yourself as having no ideology as ideology, if that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:This is a bit off topic, but is there are reason why Vox isn't really trusted around here? allow Vox founder Ezra Klein to explain to you in his own words why Paul Ryan is a man we need to take seriously, and it's time to admit Hillary Clinton is an extraordinarily talented politician. if you are circumspect enough to not openly scream racial slurs, and are willing to make noises about the deficit from time to time, Vox is going to fall over itself to suck you off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
eke out posted:i don't think it's more distrusted than other publications when it does news, just when it tries to be on the left but sucks at it They seem to have a lot of click-baity headlines, more than other news organizations
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i haven't moved the goal posts once eke out first, russian propagandists did create an entire campaign about it was a leak. second, seth rich truthers still believe it's a leak. third, you've spent all of your last posts arguing with stickman and myself about how no one can make me say the word hacks i'm just, like, a poster, man but it feels like you're just straight-up trolling at this point by saying "i haven't moved the goal posts" then continuing to do that very thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1064593913636417542 The possibility of the death penalty for what they see as "killing a fetus". "We have to kill women in order to save baby lives" is definitely "pro-life" "logic".
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1064593913636417542 I would like to see what US politics looks like 5-10-15 years after something like this gets implemented by the SCOTUS....
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:True, and I'll give you that. Guess Wikileaks is good now? Or are we going to pretend that they haven't been a Russian puppet for ages now? No WikiLeaks is bad but you don't show that by making up lies about how exposing the crimes of the US and its puppet states totally killed thousands of people (whattabout...) E: I should clarify I meant "you" generally not you specifically VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Nov 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The GOP could scream about Bernie for 30 years and it wouldn't do a drat thing, ask yourself why third-way Dems are so vulnerable to GOP smears. I think this is extremely optimistic, and assumes that most people are like ideological leftists - i.e. at least attempting to have some kind of coherent opinions - rather than simply too busy or too disinterested to follow politics and forming their opinions based on what they hear and what their peers/loved ones think. I think you could credibly argue that it wouldn't work as well on Bernie, given the recent example of Obama - who was viciously demonized as Hillary was but none of the scandals really stuck in the same way - but I don't think you can credibly argue it "wouldn't do a drat thing."
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:HRC has zero chin as a political candidate, she's always been a zero-conviction neoliberal shapeshifter, so anything you say about her can land because it all seems plausible. Weak candidates with zero conviction and no real core morality are very vulnerable to outside attacks, because a weak candidate has no intrinsic push-back against external definition. HRC ran away from defining herself the entire campaign and buried her policies under 25 feet of neoliberal means testing (not that anyone believed she was going to do any of it, anyway) That's part of it, for sure. In that sense, having Trump as an opponent was uniquely bad because he was an endless barrage of low-blow kicks while she was (barely) primed for a fencing duel with the likes of Jeb. For me, the moment when I really felt 'oh god she's going to blow this' was when she apologized and walked back the deplorables comment, when anyone candidate with a lick of instinct would've doubled-downed on it ("Goddamn right I think the KKK is deplorable"). But on the other hand, she was up against a uniquely loathed opponent who was also running a terrible campaign. So all the little things actually made a huge difference precisely because both candidates were widely detested and running badly. If the Comey letter had been about Trump, he would've lost; if the Russians had hacked his campaign and leaked his dirt, he would've lost; hell, if the polls had showed a dead heat, he would've lost. In a world where the Dems had run a strong candidate, it wouldn't have mattered, but in this one, it really did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The GOP could scream about Bernie for 30 years and it wouldn't do a drat thing, ask yourself why third-way Dems are so vulnerable to GOP smears. Also I guess ignoring all the dark money? That seems weird too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:The possibility of the death penalty for what they see as "killing a fetus". Since murder doesn't have a statue of limitations, that would mean any woman who had an abortion would be up for the death penalty. Thus there would be no more "moral abortions".
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The GOP could scream about Bernie for 30 years and it wouldn't do a drat thing, ask yourself why third-way Dems are so vulnerable to GOP smears. Bernie was a fringe candidate until 2016, Hillary has been prominent since the 90's and has a vagina. And pointing out that russian propaganda was nothing compared to decades of GOP Outrage bullshit is correct, that's what I said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I think the idea (which I think Condiv would agree with but correct me if I'm wrong) that "Russian interference probably happened and matters in a narrow sense but doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things when you look at the problems we're facing" is actually a fairly reasonable argument. We have ten years to reorganize the global economy, we're not going to accomplish that by pinning our hopes on a Republican former FBI head maybe nailing a Republican president for flagrant corruption when we also have a Republican Senate. Trump's entire brand is basically corruption as it stands and he's demonstrated a roughly ~38% supporter floor, and while it will be really funny to see all the stupid crime poo poo he's been up to it isn't going to be what brings him down nor what fixes our actual structural problems. I think this is a coherent argument that you are free to disagree with. Look dude, like 90% of the posts about Russian interference, even in this thread, include a line about how Hillary was unpopular, how she didn't campaign well enough, and how it was her fault she lost. I think the Mueller investigation is going to do jack poo poo to Trump. He's gone after Trump's less-powerful lackeys but I highly doubt anything substantive will result from the investigation and if it does no one in a powerful position will legitimately suffer major consequences for it, unless those consequences are purely political. But that's how investigations of this nature are. We're going to fire Mueller and free up enough time and money to fix the planet all of a sudden? We can't try to improve the economy without shuttering the investigation? Why get upset about the existence of this investigation? It is clear that this is an extension of the 2016 primary battle. Russian interference is Hillary's 'excuse', focusing on the interference allows democrats to 'ignore Hillary's flaws' etc. That's what creates a personal opposition to the investigation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
eke out posted:first, russian propagandists did create an entire campaign about it was a leak. second, seth rich truthers still believe it's a leak. third, you've spent all of your last posts arguing with stickman and myself about how no one can make me say the word hacks i'm just, like, a poster, man i'll ask you the same thing i asked stickman: do you think i don't think russia hacked the DNC? quote:but it feels like you're just straight-up trolling at this point by saying "i haven't moved the goal posts" then continuing to do that very thing look, i don't know why you think you're making a good argument by quibbling over the specific words I used, but my position from the very beginning has always been that I don't think that hillary lost cause of russian meddling, but rather because her campaign was incompetent. i haven't changed that at all
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:You do know that you said it was "a bunch of informants" and have now completely switched to a completely different topic, right? Both happened though? People like Vital Signs make completely disingenuous bullshit arguments about the absence of evidence being evidence of absence but both groups were 100% endangered by these acts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:It's really weird that you're focusing on the dollar amounts and not the hacked information released in a politically motivated way to disguise the source, backed up by a network of bots to create authenticity. I'm focusing on the dollar amount because that gives you the relative proportions of what we're talking about. I took the Russian disinformation seriously. Then I saw completely factual American-based fact journalism referred to as "Russian trolling" because it was critical of Dems. I followed some of the "Russian bot troll" accounts and saw that they had a couple dozen followers, many of which who were fellow Russian bots. Did it make an impact? Yes. A very very very small impact, because there wasn't a lot of it and it wasn't engaged with. You know what was? Neera fuckin' Tanden getting a million impressions and tens of thousand retweets on her disgusting neoliberal smears. Jarmak posted:People like Vital Signs make completely disingenuous bullshit arguments about the absence of evidence being evidence of absence but both groups were 100% endangered by these acts. He didn't say they were "endangered", he said they were "most likely killed", a 100% falsehood that couldn't even pass a kangaroo court. Maybe take a remedial reading course and stop defending a liar? Thanks. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Nov 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
as mr. The Russian Investigation Is A Dead End, though, I will gladly say i'm for it mostly because it was a major contributing factor to getting rid of Jeff Sessions. it is an investigation you pursue on grounds of gently caress That Guy, and no other reasons, because you don't need a better one. as the massive electoral punishment Republicans received for their constant screaming about Benghazi demonstrated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:It's really weird that you're focusing on the dollar amounts and not the hacked information released in a politically motivated way to disguise the source, backed up by a network of bots to create authenticity. no one can prove that russian propaganda has ever convinced anyone of anyth---- https://twitter.com/MMrsjosephm/status/1062910055085981696 https://twitter.com/Irwoodstock56/status/1061276547703848961 https://twitter.com/BritainChurch/status/1062824518845194242 https://twitter.com/jaraparilla/status/1063397370019274757 https://twitter.com/bucketoftea/status/1063388370712301568 https://twitter.com/KarenMonsour12/status/1061699952336924673 https://twitter.com/ChrisSellors/status/1060736569412177921
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
Casey Finnigan posted:Look dude, like 90% of the posts about Russian interference, even in this thread, include a line about how Hillary was unpopular, how she didn't campaign well enough, and how it was her fault she lost. i think they will find poo poo, enough that the house might impeach. but its loving 75% against that trump will get convicted by the senate. but clinton's loss is mostly her fault. that being said, the dems need to push good progressive ideas as well as trump corruption poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:as mr. The Russian Investigation Is A Dead End, though, I will gladly say i'm for it mostly because it was a major contributing factor to getting rid of Jeff Sessions. It's an investigation you should pursue because Trump committed a crime and then committed other crimes to cover up that crime. Edit: The investigation won't be a failure even when it doesn't end up with Trump being impeached. It will be good when it's revealed prominently the extent to which he is a criminal (given the fact that he is a criminal is already obvious).
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:I'm focusing on the dollar amount because that gives you the relative proportions of what we're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
eke out posted:no one can prove that russian propaganda has ever convinced anyone of anyth---- oh wow. i didn't realize that russian propaganda made 7 people not like the democrats. no wonder you think it cost them the election in 2016
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 20:25
|
|