4 ms·

The most ironic part of the Clinton camp using the term "rigged" is that the original use of the term was by Bernie Sanders against Clinton during the primaries

by sverige 10y ago

The most ironic part of the Clinton camp using the term "rigged" is that the original use of the term was by Bernie Sanders against Clinton during the primaries. His claims were proved by the emails that were released by Wikileaks. But somehow this has become a discussion of whether the Russians were behind it, rather than the uncontested content of the emails showing the Clinton campaign's malfeasance. It has also morphed into a large percentage of the population believing that Russia hacked voting machines and vote tallies, for which there is absolutely no evidence. This furthers the agenda of deligitimizing the election results.

toss1941 10y ago
Classic distraction strategy. It's sad watching people on facebook/twitter even believe one word from the White House and the MSM about Russian hacking. Putin isn't a nice person, but even so the facts simply don't support the government's claims. If you ask me, they went with the Russian angle because of how ruthless Putin seems to be, and they thought it would be easy to sell. It was with a lot of people, it seems, that or they were all too eager to believe a lie.
- matt_wulfeck 10y ago
  And now we look petty and they look magnanimous for not opting for an in-kind response. I don't know how long it will take us to rebuild our humint network but I'm assuming it won't be easy to identify all of the new spies coming in with new and improved methods.
lern_too_spel 10y ago
How were Sanders's claims of Clinton rigging the elections proved by the emails released on WikiLeaks?
- Natsu 10y ago
  I didn't follow the Sanders campaign closely enough to be able to identify the more relevant items, but looking at the Wikileaks data gave me the impression that he was a token candidate who they controlled with various bits of leverage (e.g. when they cut him out of the DNC voter systems). There was also that time when they staged violence at the Trump rallies and blamed it on Bernie supporters. Refer to the controversy regarding Zulema Rodriguez & co.; she was also later tied to the 'Trump Ducks' thing via a photo credit, which was said to come straight from Hillary. Here's a list of some of the findings from the leaks, though not all are relevant to this - http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
  - lern_too_spel 10y ago
    How was Sanders a token candidate controlled by the DNC? My memory of the primaries is far different, with Sanders suing the DNC over access to NGP VAN (which the DNC had cut off until the Sanders campaign showed they had deleted their copies of Clinton's data), loudly complaining about the DNC following the existing rules at the Nevada Convention (http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff... http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff...), and generally loudly making unfounded allegations of rigging. If Sanders was a token candidate, whom would you consider a big name Democrat worthy of challenging Clinton not as a token opponent? > There was also that time when they staged violence at the Trump rallies and blamed it on Bernie supporters. The DNC did not stage violence at Trump rallies and blame it on Bernie supporters. You're probably thinking about http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/project-veritas-action-robert-creamer-donald-trump-rallies/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/project-veritas-actio..., who incited Trump supporters to violence, which is different from pretending to be a violent Sanders supporter. Zulema Rodriguez also had nothing to do with "rigging the primaries."
    - Natsu 10y ago
      Elizabeth Warren is probably the top of the list. I also remember various questionable vote counting during the caucuses, but I'm basing this on what Bernie supporters were saying at the time, so you might be right about it being inaccurate. I wasn't personally paying much attention yet, as I'd already assumed Clinton had the nomination in the bag. I am thinking of that incident and there's a lot going on in that one. You can see Bernie supporters getting blamed here, though: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-supporters-divided-trump-protests http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-supporters-divided-trump-...
      - lern_too_spel 10y ago
        > I also remember various questionable vote counting during the caucuses. The caucuses were heavily skewed in Sanders's favor. Caucusing requires a large time commitment, which favored Sanders supporters over the poor minority Clinton voters. You're probably thinking about the Nevada Convention, which I explained in my previous comment. > I wasn't personally paying much attention yet, as I'd already assumed Clinton had the nomination in the bag. She certainly had it in the bag, which makes the claim that she would resort to rigging the primaries even more ludicrous. She got almost 30% more of the popular vote than Sanders. Despite the media wanting to make the race seem close and interesting, it was obvious to even a casual observer like you that it was a landslide. > You can see Bernie supporters getting blamed here, though: The people quoted in that article are actual Bernie supporters.

by sverige 10y ago

toss1941 10y ago

Classic distraction strategy. It's sad watching people on facebook/twitter even believe one word from the White House and the MSM about Russian hacking. Putin isn't a nice person, but even so the facts simply don't support the government's claims. If you ask me, they went with the Russian angle because of how ruthless Putin seems to be, and they thought it would be easy to sell. It was with a lot of people, it seems, that or they were all too eager to believe a lie.

matt_wulfeck 10y ago
And now we look petty and they look magnanimous for not opting for an in-kind response. I don't know how long it will take us to rebuild our humint network but I'm assuming it won't be easy to identify all of the new spies coming in with new and improved methods.

lern_too_spel 10y ago

How were Sanders's claims of Clinton rigging the elections proved by the emails released on WikiLeaks?

Natsu 10y ago
I didn't follow the Sanders campaign closely enough to be able to identify the more relevant items, but looking at the Wikileaks data gave me the impression that he was a token candidate who they controlled with various bits of leverage (e.g. when they cut him out of the DNC voter systems). There was also that time when they staged violence at the Trump rallies and blamed it on Bernie supporters. Refer to the controversy regarding Zulema Rodriguez & co.; she was also later tied to the 'Trump Ducks' thing via a photo credit, which was said to come straight from Hillary. Here's a list of some of the findings from the leaks, though not all are relevant to this - http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
- lern_too_spel 10y ago
  How was Sanders a token candidate controlled by the DNC? My memory of the primaries is far different, with Sanders suing the DNC over access to NGP VAN (which the DNC had cut off until the Sanders campaign showed they had deleted their copies of Clinton's data), loudly complaining about the DNC following the existing rules at the Nevada Convention (http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff... http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff...), and generally loudly making unfounded allegations of rigging. If Sanders was a token candidate, whom would you consider a big name Democrat worthy of challenging Clinton not as a token opponent? > There was also that time when they staged violence at the Trump rallies and blamed it on Bernie supporters. The DNC did not stage violence at Trump rallies and blame it on Bernie supporters. You're probably thinking about http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/project-veritas-action-robert-creamer-donald-trump-rallies/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/project-veritas-actio..., who incited Trump supporters to violence, which is different from pretending to be a violent Sanders supporter. Zulema Rodriguez also had nothing to do with "rigging the primaries."
  - Natsu 10y ago
    Elizabeth Warren is probably the top of the list. I also remember various questionable vote counting during the caucuses, but I'm basing this on what Bernie supporters were saying at the time, so you might be right about it being inaccurate. I wasn't personally paying much attention yet, as I'd already assumed Clinton had the nomination in the bag. I am thinking of that incident and there's a lot going on in that one. You can see Bernie supporters getting blamed here, though: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-supporters-divided-trump-protests http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-supporters-divided-trump-...
    - lern_too_spel 10y ago
      > I also remember various questionable vote counting during the caucuses. The caucuses were heavily skewed in Sanders's favor. Caucusing requires a large time commitment, which favored Sanders supporters over the poor minority Clinton voters. You're probably thinking about the Nevada Convention, which I explained in my previous comment. > I wasn't personally paying much attention yet, as I'd already assumed Clinton had the nomination in the bag. She certainly had it in the bag, which makes the claim that she would resort to rigging the primaries even more ludicrous. She got almost 30% more of the popular vote than Sanders. Despite the media wanting to make the race seem close and interesting, it was obvious to even a casual observer like you that it was a landslide. > You can see Bernie supporters getting blamed here, though: The people quoted in that article are actual Bernie supporters.