4 ms·
I hate that he used the "Russians are coming" argument, but at the same time, he probably wouldn't have gotten even 1/4 of the attention if he just said "our vo
by mtgx 10y ago
I hate that he used the "Russians are coming" argument, but at the same time, he probably wouldn't have gotten even 1/4 of the attention if he just said "our voting machines aren't secure and anyone in the world, including our own government, could hack them."
He's playing on the Russian fear, which is what the Democratic party is really pushing right now (by the way, isn't this something the Republican party used to do - what's happening here?!). If this leads to a ban on electronic voting machines, then the methods may be excused by the outcome, but I have a feeling that's not going to happen, so this just ends up helping one party over another politically.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- CPLX 10y agoYour argument might make sense in the abstract, but I think Bruce has a uniquely credible position with which to comment on the relative dangers posed by Russian hacking specifically.
- lawpoop 10y ago> He's playing on the Russian fear, which is what the Democratic party is really pushing right now (by the way, isn't this something the Republican party used to do - what's happening here?!). During the USSR times, the project of Russia as a communist country was to be egalitarian and inclusive. It was a terrible place to live, but in the most abstract sense, lefties could identify with that goal, while righties saw it as fundamentally going against the social order. Thus the threat of "Russians" became a gloss for helping the poor, taxing the wealthy, minority rights, women's rights, etc. Now that Russia is an oligarchy, the basic social structure appeals to righties, and has become a boogeyman to lefties. "Russians" are now a gloss for gangster/crony capitalism, oligarchs, etc.