4 ms·

As a non-American, I haven't understood why this issue is about Russians to start with. Aren't there many countries who donated large sums of money to American

As a non-American, I haven't understood why this issue is about Russians to start with. Aren't there many countries who donated large sums of money to American politics [1]? Also if Russian adverts are having such a huge effect on American politics, why are Russian adverts different to political adverts bought by non-Russians? Any advert is obviously bought with the intent to swing the election in favor of company purchasing that advert - likely for malicious intent by many. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clinton-presidential-campaign-charity.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clint...

ssijak 9y ago
Well, if for example Saudi king donates you tens of millions of dollars to your campaign [1] and you win thats perfectly fine, but you lost and then 500k of funny ads bought by some bogus/fake companies is in your words why you lost. Not even funny. And saying facebook is part of it is even more stupid. On the other hand I never understood why for US citizens it is perfectly fine for political persons to receive millions in donations from corporations. Where I come from that is considered bribery by default and that politician would be in problem. [1] https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime-and-other-gulf-tyrannies-donate-millions-to-the-clinton-foundation/ https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime...
- ern 9y ago
  Well, if for example Saudi king donates you tens of millions of dollars to your campaign I feel compelled to fact check this. There article you linked to discusses the Clinton Foundation, not the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
imron 9y ago
> I haven't understood why this issue is about Russians to start with The democrats needed someone to be a scapegoat for their loss, and it was more convenient to look outward rather than inward.
- ern 9y ago
  I’ve asked this question before, but doesn’t it arouse ones curiosity that the Russians spent money on the ads? Why would they have done that if they didn’t believe it would have made a difference to the election?
  - em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
    > "Why would they have [spent money on the ads] if they didn’t believe it would have made a difference to the election?" Because, even though it likely didn't make a difference in determining the election winner, it has successfully created a lot of internal fighting in America. Very effective and such a low cost!
ern 9y ago
why are Russian adverts different to political adverts bought by non-Russians? There is some measure of transparency in politician donations and ads. However a foreign government covertly working to influence an election would be interpreted as a hostile act in most countries (and yes, the fact that US does this does smack of hypocrisy). Incidentally, your link doesn’t mention foreign donations to the election campaign of the candidate in question (these things are carefully monitored in most first-world democracies), and if there was any evidence of money being funneled from the foundation to the election campaign, I’m sure it’d have been front page news already.
- RyanZAG 9y ago
  So the difference for you is that Russians purchasing adverts is a hostile act, but Russians giving donations to organisations controlled by one of your politicians would not be a hostile act? I have to say I can't begin to understand this line of thinking - I'm guessing it may just be cultural differences though. Both actions are legal under your election laws though, correct?
  - ern 9y ago
    Political ads influence voters. Donations to a foundation linked to a politician may (or may not) influence that individual politician, just as another politician’s overseas business interests may (or may not) influence that politician’s decisions. But they are separate issues for informed voters to judge, since there is some measure of transparency in those activities. And, it is, in fact, illegal for foreign entities to donate to political campaigns. I’m guessing it may just be cultural differences though Yep. I am aware that in many countries, private political funding is entirely opaque, campaign finance laws are non-existent, and the lines between party and campaign, and party and state are non-existent. Fortunately the United States is not (yet) one of those countries.
    - RyanZAG 9y ago
      I don't understand. So you have no problem with those donations to foundations run by your political candidates? Also while you stated that donations to political candidates is illegal, is it illegal to buy adverts for political candidates as a foreigner? I was under the impression it was not, but that adds an interesting twist. Who would be held guilty in this case? Would the USA government try to use extradition treaties to get a foreign national onto USA soil if they bought adverts for a candidate?
smsm42 9y ago
> if Russian adverts are having such a huge effect on American politics The key fact to understand here is it did not, and literally zero evidence was shown that it had any effect at all. There is evidence the ads were run, but that's it. All the talk about "huge effect" is pure speculation which has no base in any observable fact.

ssijak 9y ago

Well, if for example Saudi king donates you tens of millions of dollars to your campaign [1] and you win thats perfectly fine, but you lost and then 500k of funny ads bought by some bogus/fake companies is in your words why you lost. Not even funny. And saying facebook is part of it is even more stupid. On the other hand I never understood why for US citizens it is perfectly fine for political persons to receive millions in donations from corporations. Where I come from that is considered bribery by default and that politician would be in problem. [1] https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime-and-other-gulf-tyrannies-donate-millions-to-the-clinton-foundation/ https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime...

ern 9y ago
Well, if for example Saudi king donates you tens of millions of dollars to your campaign I feel compelled to fact check this. There article you linked to discusses the Clinton Foundation, not the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.

imron 9y ago

> I haven't understood why this issue is about Russians to start with The democrats needed someone to be a scapegoat for their loss, and it was more convenient to look outward rather than inward.

ern 9y ago
I’ve asked this question before, but doesn’t it arouse ones curiosity that the Russians spent money on the ads? Why would they have done that if they didn’t believe it would have made a difference to the election?
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
  > "Why would they have [spent money on the ads] if they didn’t believe it would have made a difference to the election?" Because, even though it likely didn't make a difference in determining the election winner, it has successfully created a lot of internal fighting in America. Very effective and such a low cost!

ern 9y ago

why are Russian adverts different to political adverts bought by non-Russians? There is some measure of transparency in politician donations and ads. However a foreign government covertly working to influence an election would be interpreted as a hostile act in most countries (and yes, the fact that US does this does smack of hypocrisy). Incidentally, your link doesn’t mention foreign donations to the election campaign of the candidate in question (these things are carefully monitored in most first-world democracies), and if there was any evidence of money being funneled from the foundation to the election campaign, I’m sure it’d have been front page news already.

RyanZAG 9y ago
So the difference for you is that Russians purchasing adverts is a hostile act, but Russians giving donations to organisations controlled by one of your politicians would not be a hostile act? I have to say I can't begin to understand this line of thinking - I'm guessing it may just be cultural differences though. Both actions are legal under your election laws though, correct?
- ern 9y ago
  Political ads influence voters. Donations to a foundation linked to a politician may (or may not) influence that individual politician, just as another politician’s overseas business interests may (or may not) influence that politician’s decisions. But they are separate issues for informed voters to judge, since there is some measure of transparency in those activities. And, it is, in fact, illegal for foreign entities to donate to political campaigns. I’m guessing it may just be cultural differences though Yep. I am aware that in many countries, private political funding is entirely opaque, campaign finance laws are non-existent, and the lines between party and campaign, and party and state are non-existent. Fortunately the United States is not (yet) one of those countries.
  - RyanZAG 9y ago
    I don't understand. So you have no problem with those donations to foundations run by your political candidates? Also while you stated that donations to political candidates is illegal, is it illegal to buy adverts for political candidates as a foreigner? I was under the impression it was not, but that adds an interesting twist. Who would be held guilty in this case? Would the USA government try to use extradition treaties to get a foreign national onto USA soil if they bought adverts for a candidate?

smsm42 9y ago

> if Russian adverts are having such a huge effect on American politics The key fact to understand here is it did not, and literally zero evidence was shown that it had any effect at all. There is evidence the ads were run, but that's it. All the talk about "huge effect" is pure speculation which has no base in any observable fact.