4 ms·

>You don't normally have candidates insisting that the election is rigged despite having no evidence to support that assertion. I agree that Clinton's repeated

>You don't normally have candidates insisting that the election is rigged despite having no evidence to support that assertion. I agree that Clinton's repeated conspiratorial assertions that Russia is trying to rig the election is dangerous to democracy.

JoeAltmaier 10y ago
...along with evidence of Russian hacking of elections databases?
- TheGirondin 10y ago
  And? Chinese and Russian state hackers are constantly breaking into US systems. I'm sure American state hackers are constantly breaking into theirs. This is nothing extraordinary. Thank you for validating that Clinton's repeated conspiratorial assertions are dangerous to democracy. It seems like you will doesn't accept the results you don't like, just Democrats have always done when they lose.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    So now evidence is not evidence. Only vague accusations are evidence. Got it.
    - TheGirondin 10y ago
      No, no evidence is no evidence.
learc83 10y ago
So which is it? Claims of vote rigging are dangerous to democracy or they aren't? If they're dangerous, then I can play you audio of Trump making them. Now that we've got that out of the way. Hillary isn't making claims of vote rigging, she's making claims that Russians hacked emails and released them to influence the election. Her claims are backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies.
- TheGirondin 10y ago
  That's not the way hypocrisy works. You don't get to respond with "I know you are but what am I" when being called out it. Her claims the Russians are trying to rig the election for Trump are absolutely not backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies.
  - learc83 10y ago
    Accusing someone of hypocrisy doesn't immunize yourself from claims of hypocrisy. You said "I agree that Clinton's repeated conspiratorial assertions that Russia is trying to rig the election is dangerous to democracy." Answer the question. Do you think claims that the election is rigged is dangerous or not? You can simultaneously believe both candidates are acting dangerously. There is however, a very big difference between the 2 claims. Clinton claims that Russia is trying to influence the election. Trump claims that the election is rigged at the polling booths. >Her claims the Russians are trying to rig the election for Trump are absolutely not backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies. The United State's intelligence agencies issued public statements that they believe DNC emails were hacked by Russia. The emails were then leaked during an election. That's pretty good evidence that they are trying to influence that election. Russia also has a history of propping up right wing parties throughout Europe. Add that in, and she has very strong evidence to suggest the Russians are trying to influence the election. Notice she hasn't said that they've successfully rigged the election. She said they are attempting to influence it. I don't have a problem with Donald Trump saying the media is trying to influence the election in Hillary's favor. I have a problem with him saying the vote is rigged and that the election was stolen. Especially before the ballots have been cast.

JoeAltmaier 10y ago

...along with evidence of Russian hacking of elections databases?

TheGirondin 10y ago
And? Chinese and Russian state hackers are constantly breaking into US systems. I'm sure American state hackers are constantly breaking into theirs. This is nothing extraordinary. Thank you for validating that Clinton's repeated conspiratorial assertions are dangerous to democracy. It seems like you will doesn't accept the results you don't like, just Democrats have always done when they lose.
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  So now evidence is not evidence. Only vague accusations are evidence. Got it.
  - TheGirondin 10y ago
    No, no evidence is no evidence.

learc83 10y ago

So which is it? Claims of vote rigging are dangerous to democracy or they aren't? If they're dangerous, then I can play you audio of Trump making them. Now that we've got that out of the way. Hillary isn't making claims of vote rigging, she's making claims that Russians hacked emails and released them to influence the election. Her claims are backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies.

TheGirondin 10y ago
That's not the way hypocrisy works. You don't get to respond with "I know you are but what am I" when being called out it. Her claims the Russians are trying to rig the election for Trump are absolutely not backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies.
- learc83 10y ago
  Accusing someone of hypocrisy doesn't immunize yourself from claims of hypocrisy. You said "I agree that Clinton's repeated conspiratorial assertions that Russia is trying to rig the election is dangerous to democracy." Answer the question. Do you think claims that the election is rigged is dangerous or not? You can simultaneously believe both candidates are acting dangerously. There is however, a very big difference between the 2 claims. Clinton claims that Russia is trying to influence the election. Trump claims that the election is rigged at the polling booths. >Her claims the Russians are trying to rig the election for Trump are absolutely not backed up by the United State's intelligence agencies. The United State's intelligence agencies issued public statements that they believe DNC emails were hacked by Russia. The emails were then leaked during an election. That's pretty good evidence that they are trying to influence that election. Russia also has a history of propping up right wing parties throughout Europe. Add that in, and she has very strong evidence to suggest the Russians are trying to influence the election. Notice she hasn't said that they've successfully rigged the election. She said they are attempting to influence it. I don't have a problem with Donald Trump saying the media is trying to influence the election in Hillary's favor. I have a problem with him saying the vote is rigged and that the election was stolen. Especially before the ballots have been cast.