5 ms·
No, Russia did the whole hacking thing so that Americans would question the legitimacy of their election. It's kind of something Russia does to nearly every Eur
by thehardsphere 10y ago
No, Russia did the whole hacking thing so that Americans would question the legitimacy of their election. It's kind of something Russia does to nearly every European country also.
What makes it special in the American case is the way in which Hillary Clinton lost the election. She lost big enough to unambiguously have lost (unlike Gore in Bush v. Gore), but did not lose with a large enough margin to produce an easily identifiable single reason for losing. Thus, every single explanation for the loss seems somewhat valid.
So, like anybody who is faced with choosing between "this my own fault" and "someone else screwed me", Democrats are choosing option B. What makes it hilariously ironic is that being angry the election was "stolen by Russia" is exactly what Russia wants. So if they care about not playing into Russia's hands, they would have to stop complaining about "Russia hacking the election." But they can't do that because they're not ready or able to say "we lost this election because what we're offering isn't sufficiently appealing to more than half the country for reasons X,Y,Z" (whatever those are).
- nl 10y agoI think both readings of the motivation of the Russian hacks are reasonable and both may well be true. I think it is terrible that the Democratic party isn't facing up to the problems in their own party that led to that outcome. They have list the House, the Senate and the Presidency. Something is wrong and it isn't just Russian hacking.
- hackuser 10y ago> the Democratic party isn't facing up to the problems in their own party that led to that outcome They aren't? I read plenty about it.
- pg314 10y agoI'm not sure I agree with your premise that Russia was only involved to undermine the legitimacy of the election. Do you think Russia didn't care which candidate won? That they don't prefer Trump (who has links with and has made overtures to Russia during the campaign) over Clinton (who has taken a tough stance on Russia)? It is ridiculous to suggest that people should stop demanding that the Russia connection be investigated because it would be playing into Russia's hand. If anything, not investigating will keep the questions swirling, undermining the legitimacy of Trump's presidency.
- nl 10y agoOne possible outcome of Clinton winning would have been a fracturing of the Democratic party into the Sanders wing and the Clinton camp. An unpopular president with a fractured party would have been fine for opponents of the US.
- thehardsphere 10y ago> I'm not sure I agree with your premise that Russia was only involved to undermine the legitimacy of the election. Do you think Russia didn't care which candidate won? That they don't prefer Trump (who has links with and has made overtures to Russia during the campaign) over Clinton (who has taken a tough stance on Russia)? I'm sure that Putin in particular may have favored Trump over Clinton because he is alleged to have a personal vendetta against Clinton, but I don't think it matters that much in Russia's decision to mess around in our politics. Hillary was also only "tough on Russia" in contrast to a self-contradictory isolationist like Trump (who may flip his stance if he's persuaded by the people he has chosen to surround himself with besides Flynn). It's not like she was going to challenge Russian geopolitical shinanigans more aggressively than the previous administration. > It is ridiculous to suggest that people should stop demanding that the Russia connection be investigated There's a difference between wanting questions about Trump's connection to Russia investigated and using said questions and possible answers to them which are only tenuously supported by evidence as the centerpiece of a "Resistance" strategy. The first option is perfectly fine. The second option is playing straight into Russia's hands, and has the additional negative effect of desensitizing people to actual misdeeds of the Trump administration when they're finally revealed.
- linkregister 10y agoWhich Democrats publicly stated that the election was stolen? And do they represent the party or its opinion writ large? Sec. Clinton notably asserted that the election was legitimate. Note that many prominent Republicans also agree that Russian interference in the U.S. campaign is unacceptable while asserting that the election results stand.
- thehardsphere 10y agoJust off the top of my head, John Lewis has stated explicitly that he feels that Donald Trump is "illegitimate" and has cited Russian associations as the reason. Several others have made the claim that "Russia hacked the election" which I think is meant to imply that Russia stole the election for Trump without actually saying it. At the very least it's extremely misleading.
- linkregister 10y agoI agree that those who have made the claim that Russia "hacked the election" are being dangerously misleading / lying.