3 ms·

Reddit was very pro-Bernie. A huge portion of it was legitimate support, but bots (both pro-Trump and pro-Clinton) pushed the Bernie-Bro narrative, harassing Cl

Reddit was very pro-Bernie. A huge portion of it was legitimate support, but bots (both pro-Trump and pro-Clinton) pushed the Bernie-Bro narrative, harassing Clinton supporters with sexist comments. Russia isn't good enough to convince anyone of something they don't believe. A billion "Mickey Mouse for US President!" messages won't get a cartoon character elected. But they can take things we already believe in, and increase or catalyze those beliefs. For example, a minor preference for Bernie could be fanned into a belief that "you should vote for Trump since politicians suck!". Or, even if nobody is convinced, seeing that rhetoric can get Clinton supporters to turn on Bernie supporters. https://shareblue.com/watching-the-hearings-i-learned-my-bernie-bro-harassers-may-have-been-russian-bots/ https://shareblue.com/watching-the-hearings-i-learned-my-ber... (For the record, I did my best to make this post as apolitical as possible.)

AnimalMuppet 9y ago
Russia is good enough to not try to persuade people to vote for Mickey Mouse. When I played football in high school, in some situations our blocking instructions were, "take him whichever way he wants to go". That is, if the defender tries to go around you to your right, take him right; if he tries to go around you to your left, take him left. Russia could do something similar if, say, it wants to remove support from Hillary: If a voter is somewhat to the left of Hillary, move the voter toward Bernie; if the voter is somewhat to the right of Hillary, move the voter toward Trump. That won't work with a dogmatic "I'm with her!" voter - nothing will. But it could work well enough to prevent a win by a candidate that Russia didn't want to win. But I don't think Russia's real goal was to prevent Hillary from winning. I think Russia's real goal was to undermine faith in democratic institutions. Russia seems scared to death of color revolutions - reasonably enough, since they are revolutions by the people against undemocratic regimes, and despite the presence of elections, Russia is rather undemocratic. Putin therefore wants to undermine the credibility of democracy in other countries, so that Russian citizens look at democracy and see just another empty promise, and therefore don't see any reason to pursue it at home.
- WalterSear 9y ago
  > That won't work with a dogmatic "I'm with her!" voter - nothing will. So they antagonized those voters until they became a toxic force on their own and started convincing others for them.
rdtsc 9y ago
Agreed. Was on /r/politics, /r/news and /r/worldnews and posting anything critical of Clinton or pro-Bernie was immediately down-voted and called names. Even here posted about her husband's "gift" from Qatar for $1M with a link to Wikileaks and got called a Russian shill just the other day. One user started digging through my comment history found my post from 340 days ago to prove that I spoke Russian, therefore I am Russian, therefore I was working for them. Yes, it was pretty creepy. As for Bernie (an unknown leftist old white guy) and Trump (a TV personality) it is more interesting to look at it as a phenomenon. They are both a manifestation of the same thing -- a deep dissatisfaction with the current political establishment. On paper they don't have many common positions, but they do have that thing in common. I think Clinton lost many who would have voted for her because they just weren't excited enough to put their shoes on and go and vote. Mass media and friends were assuring them for months that Trump has no chance of winning. Here is the apparatus she relied on to get her elected which in the end I think was one of the main reasons she lost. It is really saddening to see how the Democrats turned immediately to anti-Trump rallies and the media is talking about how many scoops of ice-creams he eats and continues with their Russian narrative and wasting an opportunity to capitalize on that enthusiasm and energy of Bernie's followers. If you think about, the fascinating there is not that he didn't win, but how close he got despite the media blackout. Not realizing that, and capitalizing on it, will ensure another failure in the future and figures like Trump will keep winning the election.
- bmcfeeley 9y ago
  It's hard to disagree too strongly with a characterization like Russian Shill when you describe a donation to the Clinton Foundation[0] as 'her husband's "gift"'. Perhaps you'd prefer intentionally deceptive? 0: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation/clintons-charity-confirms-qatars-1-million-gift-while-she-was-at-state-dept-idUSKBN12Z2SL https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation/c...
  - wmeredith 9y ago
    Your linked source there says Qatar literally pledged the money for Bill’s 65th birthday and wanted to deliver the check in person. I think the “husband’s gift” description is pretty accurate.

AnimalMuppet 9y ago

Russia is good enough to not try to persuade people to vote for Mickey Mouse. When I played football in high school, in some situations our blocking instructions were, "take him whichever way he wants to go". That is, if the defender tries to go around you to your right, take him right; if he tries to go around you to your left, take him left. Russia could do something similar if, say, it wants to remove support from Hillary: If a voter is somewhat to the left of Hillary, move the voter toward Bernie; if the voter is somewhat to the right of Hillary, move the voter toward Trump. That won't work with a dogmatic "I'm with her!" voter - nothing will. But it could work well enough to prevent a win by a candidate that Russia didn't want to win. But I don't think Russia's real goal was to prevent Hillary from winning. I think Russia's real goal was to undermine faith in democratic institutions. Russia seems scared to death of color revolutions - reasonably enough, since they are revolutions by the people against undemocratic regimes, and despite the presence of elections, Russia is rather undemocratic. Putin therefore wants to undermine the credibility of democracy in other countries, so that Russian citizens look at democracy and see just another empty promise, and therefore don't see any reason to pursue it at home.

WalterSear 9y ago
> That won't work with a dogmatic "I'm with her!" voter - nothing will. So they antagonized those voters until they became a toxic force on their own and started convincing others for them.

rdtsc 9y ago

Agreed. Was on /r/politics, /r/news and /r/worldnews and posting anything critical of Clinton or pro-Bernie was immediately down-voted and called names. Even here posted about her husband's "gift" from Qatar for $1M with a link to Wikileaks and got called a Russian shill just the other day. One user started digging through my comment history found my post from 340 days ago to prove that I spoke Russian, therefore I am Russian, therefore I was working for them. Yes, it was pretty creepy. As for Bernie (an unknown leftist old white guy) and Trump (a TV personality) it is more interesting to look at it as a phenomenon. They are both a manifestation of the same thing -- a deep dissatisfaction with the current political establishment. On paper they don't have many common positions, but they do have that thing in common. I think Clinton lost many who would have voted for her because they just weren't excited enough to put their shoes on and go and vote. Mass media and friends were assuring them for months that Trump has no chance of winning. Here is the apparatus she relied on to get her elected which in the end I think was one of the main reasons she lost. It is really saddening to see how the Democrats turned immediately to anti-Trump rallies and the media is talking about how many scoops of ice-creams he eats and continues with their Russian narrative and wasting an opportunity to capitalize on that enthusiasm and energy of Bernie's followers. If you think about, the fascinating there is not that he didn't win, but how close he got despite the media blackout. Not realizing that, and capitalizing on it, will ensure another failure in the future and figures like Trump will keep winning the election.

bmcfeeley 9y ago
It's hard to disagree too strongly with a characterization like Russian Shill when you describe a donation to the Clinton Foundation[0] as 'her husband's "gift"'. Perhaps you'd prefer intentionally deceptive? 0: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation/clintons-charity-confirms-qatars-1-million-gift-while-she-was-at-state-dept-idUSKBN12Z2SL https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation/c...
- wmeredith 9y ago
  Your linked source there says Qatar literally pledged the money for Bill’s 65th birthday and wanted to deliver the check in person. I think the “husband’s gift” description is pretty accurate.