3 ms·

> Maybe Russia did something or NOT but I still haven't seen any evidence up to now. The Wikipedia article[1] is a good place to start, and to my eye seems fa

> Maybe Russia did something or NOT but I still haven't seen any evidence up to now. The Wikipedia article[1] is a good place to start, and to my eye seems fairly comprehensive. Many users of Reddit have also done quite a good job of periodically summarising the state of the investigation and evidence when these discussions have arisen, e.g. [2]. As a side note, I believe you were genuinely interested in the topic, but constant use of "where is the proof?" in the face of readily-available evidence and high-profile reporting is a tactic so commonly employed by pro-Russian state astroturfers that it has become the subject of ridicule[3]. This has unfortunately poisoned the discussion pool a little so it may be useful to keep in mind in case the topic is broached in future. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... [2] https://np.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/5hhn4t/cia_assessment_says_russia_was_trying_to_help/db0zali/ https://np.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/5hhn4t/... [3] http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/proofster http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/proofster

RobertoG 9y ago
It seems to me, that, even accepting Russian interference, to say that the interference was strong enough for explaining the results, instead of other factors, is just ridiculous, and the burden of proof should be in the proponents of that theory. It seems to me, that people all around 'the West' is angry because 'the establishment' have failed then. Instead of changing their ways 'the establishment' have decided to find a scapegoat and, in fact, blame the system. When democracy don't give the results we want, we are not so democrat anymore. The result of this discourse, the subtext, is: "see what they voted? how they dared to vote outside the program? you can't trust voters anymore". That sounds like a very dangerous message to me. By the way, as a non American, I think that the irony of USA complaining about interference on internal electoral processes is really high.

RobertoG 9y ago

It seems to me, that, even accepting Russian interference, to say that the interference was strong enough for explaining the results, instead of other factors, is just ridiculous, and the burden of proof should be in the proponents of that theory. It seems to me, that people all around 'the West' is angry because 'the establishment' have failed then. Instead of changing their ways 'the establishment' have decided to find a scapegoat and, in fact, blame the system. When democracy don't give the results we want, we are not so democrat anymore. The result of this discourse, the subtext, is: "see what they voted? how they dared to vote outside the program? you can't trust voters anymore". That sounds like a very dangerous message to me. By the way, as a non American, I think that the irony of USA complaining about interference on internal electoral processes is really high.