This is irony, right? · Page 2

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

RMAN4443
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#21

It's an interesting question.
I honestly don't know whether what the russians did had any impact on the election itself.

but it did impact our country. did you watch the cnn attempted interview with the woman who had a pro-trump facebook page that was essentially funneling social media from the russians? When confronted with it she denied it, called the interviewer fake news and stormed off.

Your disbelief that people wouldn't be influenced by "BS info on social media? That we're all FREE to fact check?" is sadly wrong. People are free to fact check, yes. People don't want to fact check.

victor809 wrote:

http://checkyourfact.com/2017/06/28/fact-check-did-obama-know-about-russian-meddling-and-do-nothing/

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#22

http://checkyourfact.com/2017/06/28/fact-check-did-obama-know-about-russian-meddling-and-do-nothing/

RMAN4443 wrote:

This has been addressed multiple times.

Yup Obama should have done more. He was in between a rock and a hard place because he would have been skewered if he did more than the things he did do (Expelling diplomats, sanctions etc) but this isn't about his well being or how it impacts him at the time. He was President and I expect them to take it on the chin if need be for the better of our country. Shame on him.

Now Trump is President. I have the same expectations. But obama is no excuse to me.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#23

You posted that twice. But it isn't a very good "fact check" site....

delta1
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#24

http://checkyourfact.com/2017/06/28/fact-check-did-obama-know-about-russian-meddling-and-do-nothing/

RMAN4443 wrote:

yep, he did...maybe not the extent and the scale that is known now...

and that is the genesis of the famous con "smoking gun" quote found in the right's targeted FBI agent's text message: " Obama wants to know everything." Obama was not talking about Hillary's emails...he was talking about Russian interference...

But because the bulk of the intel on the Russian issue was learned so close to the elections, Obama had to keep his mouth shut to avoid tilting the process...imagine what would've happened if Obama revealed to the nation a month or so before the election, "the Russians are interfering in the election...they are out to make sure Hillary isn't elected, and are helping Trump..." That would've left quite a mark...

sorta like Comey's memos...

Edited by user 8 years ago | Reason: Not specified

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#25

So...
I'm ok with blaming obama for not acting when the report came out in aug 2016.

That's fine.

But... obama did nothing from Aug 2016 to Jan 2017... About 5 or 6 months... he put some sanctions in place, but that's about it.

We are now at Feb 2018. Trump has had in excess of 12 months. The information the FBI found in Aug 2016 didn't go away. What idiot would focus on the 5 or 6 months that obama did nothing, rather than the 12-13 months that trump has done nothing, with the same information, and a 5 month lead up, AND even additional investigation?

Kawak
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#26

Hypocritical - Which way is the wind blowing...

Just last week Barack Obama accused Donald Trump of “whining” about the presidential vote being rigged. But when he ran for president in 2008 he sang a different tune as he warned of a rigged election.

During a town hall a questioner asked:

I would just like to know what you can say to reassure us that this election will not be rigged or stolen?

Obama responded half-jokingly (I think), “Well, I tell you what, it helps in Ohio that we got Democrats in charge of the machines.”

He continued:

“But look, I come from Chicago, So I want to be honest, it’s not as if it’s just Republicans who have monkeyed around with elections in the past. Sometimes, Democrats have, too.

Whenever people are in power, they have this tendency to try to, you know, tilt things in their direction. That’s why we’ve got to have, I believe, a voting rights division in the Justice Department that is nonpartisan, and that is serious about investigating cases of vote fraud, [and] is serious about making sure that people aren’t being discouraged to vote. That’s why the voting rights legislation that was passed a couple of years ago to help county clerks make sure that the machines were in place that were needed, are important. That’s why we need paper trails on these new electronic machines so that you actually have something that you can hang on to after you’ve punched that letter – make sure it hasn’t been hacked into. Those are all part of the process of making sure that our democracy works for everybody.”

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#27

https://boingboing.net/2011/10/31/third-person-effect-an-excerpt-from-you-are-not-so-smart.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism

There are a lot of ways that information provided through social media (which we unconsciously attribute to be a group we are part of) will have much greater impact than actual facts

victor809 wrote:

So you were swayed, comrade?

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#28

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/us/politics/russia-propaganda-election-2016.html

The headline reads:
The Propaganda Tools Used by
Russians to Influence the 2016 Election

Is the NY Times "credible"? Not in my estimation. But most liberals cite this as a news source.
The headline says the Russians INFLUENCED the election.

Since Trump won that would mean they influenced it in favor of Trump.

So.
Which one of you liberals were swayed by Russian meddling?

Because it either happened.
Or it didn't.

Here's what I see:
The left were so 100% positively sure that Trump did SOMETHING nefarious with the Russians (or vice versa) that they kept saying "But Russia".
Over.
And over and over again.

But when pressed for specifics, they literally don't know.
It's always a generalization or a diversion for the next Russia-du-jour scandal.

They don't know what it is, but they hate it.

And there is a lot of gray area. I get it.
But to deny that there has been 14 months of "Russia got Trump elected"??
Don't embarrass yourselves.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#29

I'm not a good target. (this is itself a bias, to think things affect others but don't affect you... but what can I do, we all live with biases)
I hate memes... liberal or conservative. If you haven't noticed I subscribe to the concept that if you can state something in a single sentence, you're oversimplifying the problem and likely incorrect. You can try making that into a meme if you want... it might be ironic.

But the russians likely impacted democrats as well. If anyone bothered to watch the CNN vid I referenced, there was an interview with an occupy organizer who believed he was being contacted, and who considered it a risk to both sides. But CNN is an evil MSM... so I guess no one watched. They created a violent black rights group too... probably so they could post stuff on that and then link it to right wing sites and claim "look! the blacks are being evil!".

I think the main intent was dissent. I do think that it worked much better on one side than the other (this could be a bias). But just from personal experience, the couple conservative friends I have on facebook post more dumb political memes than all my liberal friends combined. Even now with the orange f$$ktard in office. My liberal friends frequently post links to articles, but not memes, not not "calls to arms"... none of the crap that apparently was being promoted through social media.

I don't know what the hell you're even trying to get at. You seem to be applying additional strawman arguments that I didn't make.
Additionally, you don't seem to understand what "influenced" means.. the russians could have influenced the election in favor of clinton, and trump could still win... or vice versa. Influenced doesn't mean anything more than "had an impact on"...

The russians are treating our population like a banana republic. That is becoming more and more clear. I have no idea what the ultimate goal was, nor do I know if anyone in office was directly involved. But if you're cool with some unknown percentage of our population protesting/voting/acting in some way due to propaganda (and opposition propaganda) generated and disseminated by a foreign government, that's you.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#30

The Kenyan King has spoken. Bow like the surrender monkeys you are.

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#31

Yea, I give up splainin' it to ya, but thanks for making my point...

Kawak wrote:

real slowly this time...

you didn't explain twice, you reposted something you misunderstood.

two bad scenarios regarding elections, both very dangerous if true, yet mutually exclusive versions of tampering:

story 1- busloads of people driven state to state voting illegally, people voting more than once locally, illegals voting who should not be voting... actual votes being cast

story 2- Russians influencing opinions and trying to cause divisions in America (like c-bid forums)...but not actually casting votes.

you get one guess to show you understood what Obama was addressing in the link you posted.

(hint, not story 2)

delta1
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#32

cons............descend much?

SteveS
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#33

This is irony, right?

MACS wrote:

Irony is the opposite of wrinkly

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#34

cons............descend much?

delta1 wrote:

Stupid is as stupid does , Sir!

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#35

Not that I've seen. As a matter of fact the mainstreams have been very careful to avoid saying just that. You may paraphrase however you like but I've not seen that from anyone credible. Until I do your premise is off. They do and should report on Russian meddling and the investigation however. It's uncomfortable at times how far they go to say there is no proof it swung the election, but mentioning the investigation and proven russian efforts results in folks putting words in their mouths.

Even with the dossier I think they bent way over backwards to not report on the contents or their veracity. Some of the contents have since been proven and then reported.

Buzzfeed etc excepted. The treated it like wikileaks.

teedubbya wrote:

I haven't seen Russian meddling credited with winning the election for Trump either. Wouldn't believe it if I had.

But I have been saying consistently for months and months that it won't end up about actual votes, but about actual bought and paid for influence ...and there has been evidence of that since the primaries ended.

anyone that believes various forms of sending messages does not influence people's decisions at all has been a better target than most...decisions that range from what they find appealing in a mate to brands of food, to clothing choices, to...

hence the trillions spent on surveys leading to advertising and marketing campaigns.

wanna coke or a pepsi? why? oh yeah, the taste...HA! good one!

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#36

Tail posted what he thinks says that lol.

I don’t think he’s being intellectually honest though because it doesn’t.

Half of what drafter says comes from putin. Soon he’ll be speaking Russian without knowing he is.

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

8 years ago

#37

I've heard and read things for over a year that claim Russia tilted the election towards Trump.
They influenced the election.
They meddled in the election.
They interfered with the election.

But here you all are still claiming this was never an issue.

Holy crap.

OK. The NY Times isn't credible.
How about NPR?
https://www.npr.org/2018/02/21/587614043/fact-check-why-didnt-obama-stop-russia-s-election-interference-in-2016

Russia. Election. Interference.

WTF do you think that is referring to?

How about the Guardian?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/robert-mueller-russians-charged-election

Headline: Mueller charges 13 Russians with interfering in US election to help Trump

It's the fuqing HEADLINE.
How can anyone sit there and say "Nope. Never heard that russia influenced the election. Preposterous."

How can anyone deny that this has been the narrative since the election?