|
Not a Step posted:Oh yeah, its bad that Trump and Russia are closely connected as an ongoing issue, but I still don't understand how Russia tampered with the election or what impact that tampering supposedly had. They didn't, as far as anyone can show, fabricate any evidence. Hand wringing about Russia hacking the election always feels like looking for any excuse except Hillary was real bad. they were pretty obviously trying to intervene in the election they obviously didn't swing the result of the election and they probably didn't actually expect Trump to win that doesn't change the fact that russian involvement is bad yes, the emails were real. no, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned about the anonymous Russian-speaking hacker group publicly releasing incriminating information from one political party for free during an election while sending consultants to the other party to work for free. i'm sure it was just motivated by deep concern for the us political system, nothing more the only people who are saying that the russians were singlehandedly responsible (or even primarily responsible) for hillary's loss are the people who were actually on hillary's payroll.
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
babypolis posted:the russia poo poo is a dumb red herring because it doesnt lead anywhere useful. trump wont be impeached over it and even if it was possible trump is so incompetent the alternative of a pence presidency seems even worse. so far the only thing the russia stuff is accomplishing is giving bad dems an excuse for their horrible failure in the past election on the other hand, Mike Flynn the Russia stuff is basically the first thing that's mattered even a tiny bit. it's not gonna take down the Trump presidency, but nothing will. if the Dems want to pass their time with that for a few months while they put together an organization and strategy to throw under the bus in 2018, who cares Not a Step posted:Again, yes, its real bad that a foreign power interfered in an election, although also very ironic that it finally happened to the US. But that interference didn't seem to have any impact and lots of people seem to want to blame the Trump Presidency on the Russians instead of Hillary Clinton being a sentient pile of festering poo poo. who are these "lots of people"? the only people I've seen pushing that angle are high-level Hillary staff and Twitter idiots wearing #ImWithHer t-shirts. but I repeat myself
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:the scope of alleged russian actions to influence the election is so loving tiny and miniscule that any breath wasted on it just feels like sour grapes for losing or trying to distract from the real reasons the democrats lost and this is why the Russia stuff would have completely blown over by now if not for the fact that Trump advisors keep turning up with undisclosed or suspicious ties with Russia if it were just Dem hot air, even the media would have dropped it after a couple of months. but the Trump campaign keeps throwing blood in the water with a) the revelation that they've been going out of their way to hide or deny contacts with the Russians that actually happened, and b) the Trump campaign admitting enough fault to have people stepping down or recusing themselves over it
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
reagan posted:hillary clinton is doo doo and i'm glad she lost. gently caress the cia, too. I don't think candidate Obama was undermining the president there
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
nations interfere in each others' affairs all the time, yes they also try not to get caught, and make a big deal about it if they catch another country doing it
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:I do understand the concern about Russia trying to rig the election, really. Its just weird that people keep wanting to blame the election on Russia for placing a stink bomb when the Clinton campaign tied a noose, anchored it firmly to the stair rail, got a stool from the kitchen, climbed up on it, put the noose around its neck and kicked the stool out from underneath while shooing off any rescue attempts on live television. no one is blaming the election on russia, except for a couple of paid Hillary surrogates and the few weirdos who genuinely think she's a charismatic genius
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:The people trying to use the specter of the RUSSIANS to justify why garbage candidate Hillary Clinton lost still do apparently. who is doing this???
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:How about, for example, the entire mainstream media? pretty sure they're not saying Russians made Hillary lose
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
pence got mad at assange for saying he was conspiring to overthrow Trump This is the weirdest universe
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I don't hate wikileaks because they have a huge reputation of activism and protecting whistleblowers, still reveal important information to the public, and there's been a lot of strange hatred towards them since the first assange accusations gave a leftwards avenue to attack them on doesn't wikileaks also have a reputation for attacking other non-wikileaks leaks and leakers? imo there's no good reason why julian assange is the only person in the world who can operate a secure digital dropbox
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Prav posted:the precedent is clear: do this and your life will be destroyed. who wants to step up? the only destruction assange's life has seen is self-induced
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Yes, Americans during the Cold War shouldn't have been in anti-Soviet hysterics any more than modern Americans should be in anti-Russian hysterics. Are you seriously posting this at me as some sort of own? Are libs hardline Cold Warriors now? Maybe Just maybe America is bad and fucks up other countries for it's own benefit, Russia is also bad and also fucks up other countries for it's own benefit, and if officials in one of those countries were secretly colluding with the other to undermine their own country then it would be super bad
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:liberals.jpg that's a conservative he writes for the Observer now, since he lost his real job for sending dick pics to someone on twitter
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
pffft, look at this liberal trying to distract from Hillary Clinton's awful campaign with his fake news
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:if there's nothing to hide, it's actually way smarter for trump to let the democrats and media hang themselves on a witchhunt that goes nowhere if there's nothing to hide, then they probably wouldn't have hidden it in the first place like, yeah, it's perfectly possible to have innocent, corruption-free talks and business with Russian officials. there's also no reason to leave them off ethics forms or lie to Republican officials about them all this crap about "McCarthyism" and "Cold War 2" sounds exactly like tankie whining about how mean the filthy American scum are to glorious, noble Russia
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:it clearly means trump is a corrupt piece of poo poo, thats obvious. same reason the GOP should listen to what the CBO says: because if an agency is so worthless that it can't even be trusted to do its job, it should be reformed or dismantled, not just ignored
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:The Russia thing would seem less disingenuous if the Democrats were concurrently doing some serious soulsearching about who they are and what they stand for. As it is, it's really obvious the Democrats want to focus on why Trump won instead of why they lost. give 'em a couple more months theyre still working out the details in backroom meetings and stuff
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Gringostar posted:were you as brain dead in 2010 as you are now because dems lost by historic numbers that year after not doing a hell of a lot about income inequality, all the poo poo wall st got away with, and actual long term solutions to healthcare instead of the baindaid of obamacare.. you know the same things that they're still not talking about dems lost in 2010 because they did basically one thing in those entire two years (Obamacare) and then spent most of the election avoiding obama and obamacare for fear of the controversies obama didn't help much by insisting on negotiating austerity with the republicans instead of doing anything at all that might help Dems in the midterms, but congressional dems didn't even want to campaign on what little good obama actually managed to accomplish JeffersonClay posted:I think it would be a bad idea for house candidates to promise they'll be able to pass legislation that they absolutely will not be able to pass in 2018. That strategy would make it more difficult to credibly make the same promise in 2020, when they might actually be able to pass legislation. Don't confuse that with suggesting they shouldn't talk about policy or ideas other than Trump bad. But Trump bad is going to be the focus in 2018 and it should be. why? it worked for republicans. they've been promising obamacare repeal since 2010, even though they didn't have the numbers and the democratic president would definitely veto it people realize that dems aren't going to pass poo poo while they're the minority party with an opposing president. but being able to tell people "here's what we would do if we did have the majority" is really important
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It makes perfect sense for Republicans to run against Obama and his policies when they don't control the executive branch. Their strategy has been to run against Obama and everything he did since he was elected the first time, and as you point out, it worked. The divisions in the Republican party were over "how many people should we gently caress over with this bill, and how badly should we screw them". that's not really a problem a properly written single-payer bill should have
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:As Bernie demonstrated last year, writing a proper single-payer bill that doesn't require raising taxes massively isn't a simple task. Tax the rich you loving idiot
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:the supposed anti-war party— Alienwarehouse posted:the Democrats— ????? is this some kind of joke
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:It is merely defending existing legislation. as it turns out it's pretty hard to pass things when you're the minority in every branch of government
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:Who said anything about pass? It's pretty hard to "advance the nation" without actually accomplishing things
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:also in case it wasn't immediately obvious from the video, the head of the dnc, tom perez, tries to deflect a question about superdelegates and the issues with the dnc primaries by talking about russia superdelegates didn't steal the election
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:for as much democrats moan about the electoral college and how the popular vote doesn't determine the presidential election, they sure as poo poo are hypocritical when it comes to the structure of their own primaries with superdelegates people generally only complain about things that matter
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:lol what? remember all the complaining about the electoral college in 2008 or 2012? me neither it's only when it plays a significant role in leading to an undesirable result that people bitch about it - like when a president you don't like loses the popular vote but still gets to be president
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:Yeah, superdelegates have no influence when the media reports candidate X winning with 350 delegates before a single ballot is cast/caucus caucussed. lol if you think that had a meaningful effect on the primary result
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Inasmuch as they influenced the conversation and helped to frame certain possibilities as inevitabilities (e.g. "don't waste your time with Bernie because the superdelegates are in the bag for Clinton"), they had about as much an effect as Russia did on the general. It's heartening to see that the Republicans care so much about whether or not the Democratic primaries were fair to a candidate that goes against everything they stand for. Real noble of them
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 15:22
|
|