5 ms·

I really don't see how you can include the Russia investigation on that list. The rest is raw fear-mongering.

TaylorAlexander 9y ago
The Russia stuff has always seemed like fear mongering to me. It’s a big scary enemy messing with our political system. But is what’s happening actually new? And is what’s happening as significant as the news makes it out to be? Or is it another distraction with all the rest?
- adventured 9y ago
  China previously bought its way into several of our Presidential elections. There was a small fraction of media obsession with that story compared to Russia now, for obvious reasons. 2007 LA Times: "Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown." http://www.latimes.com/la-na-donors19oct19-story.html http://www.latimes.com/la-na-donors19oct19-story.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_fi... https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/chinese-illegally-donated-bill-clinton-reelection-campaign-media-downplayed/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/chinese-illegally-don...
  - abritinthebay 9y ago
    The obvious reasons being “it was not really much of a story”, FYI
- BookmarkSaver 9y ago
  "But is what’s happening actually new? And is what’s happening as significant as the news makes it out to be?" I mean, you should be able to answer those questions, otherwise you've put yourself into a tautilogical little bubble ("There is nothing new/just fearmongering, so I don't need to pay attention to it. I didn't pay attention to it, so I didn't hear anything new". Return to step 1) "The Russia stuff has always seemed like fear mongering to me. It’s a big scary enemy messing with our political system." Are you saying that countries don't really mess with other countries political systems? Because they do it all the time (including and maybe especially the US). This basically reads like you saying that "bad/scary news isn't real, because I've decided that bad/scary news sounds like 'fear mongering' and couldn't possibly affect me". I mean, war is a thing. People and countries do hostile things to each all the time, often disastrously. Reporting on this isn't fear mongering.
  - gt_ 9y ago
    I don’t think they are trying to delegitimize it. They questioned if we can even consider it new, and if it’s the problem we should be prioritizing. Both good questions, but either way, cleaning up our government and economy is the most important step in reforming our vulnerable campaign system and electoral process. I can’t tell what it is you propose but let’s discuss it later.
  - threeseed 9y ago
    > Are you saying that countries don't really mess with other countries political systems? Because they do it all the time (including and maybe especially the US). The interference that Russia has done is unprecedented in the modern era. There are dozens of election every year. Please provide some evidence of that extent of interfence happening "all the time".
    - rangibaby 9y ago
      Well, just in regards to Russia, the US managed to get a $10 billion lifeline to Yeltsin's government at a VERY convenient moment just months before the 1996 election.
      - acct1771 9y ago
        Please elaborate on your meaning, here.
    - rdtsc 9y ago
      > The interference that Russia has done is unprecedented in the modern era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... Interference that Russia has done with its internet trolls is nothing compared to bombings and assassinations that US has been doing. If you look at South America you'd have to apply blacklist filter to see which countries US didn't mess with.
      - VVyattPrentice 9y ago
- threeseed 9y ago
  Of course it is significant. There is the real possibility that if Russia didn't interfere in the Brexit referendum and the US election that alternative outcomes could've happened. Both decisions were down to single percentage points. If Trump isn't elected then you have the possiblity of the US joining the TPP, taking a leadership role with the Paris climate change accord, no massively expensive tax cuts etc. Those are fundamental decisions that effect every single American.
  - mc32 9y ago
    I'm for climate agreements when everyone carries a relative burden, but no way would I support the TPP or anything like it. That's just a continuation of the WTO but on a bigger more nefarious scale (corps having say in local laws.) Globalization has already done quite enough hollowing out and selling out our blue collar workers. We don't need the same with more vigor.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  You had a presidential election where the populist favorite candidates were Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Short of Kardashian candidates, that’s about as whacked as you get.
- jimbokun 9y ago
  The “Russia Stuff” fits right into the class war. US placed sanctions on wealthy Russians through Magnitsky act, which they didn’t like, so Putin ran an intelligence operation to get someone elected more likely to overturn it. This is still about putting the interests of the wealthy first. They see each other as peers and allies regardless of nationality.
rdtsc 9y ago
> I really don't see how you can include the Russia investigation on that list. I really don't see how you wouldn't. "Russia" investigation I think includes not just the investigation itself but the insinuations and rumors around it. The time and money spent talking about it, writing about it and so on. It started with the Russians hacked our elections idea. As in KGB agents in the bushes in Wisconsin with laptops twiddling bits on voting machines. Remember the Stein's recount. /r/politics was abuzz with everyone sure how it will be discovered and Trump will swap places with Hillary next Tuesday. https://patch.com/michigan/detroit/hillary-clinton-could-still-win-2016-presidential-election https://patch.com/michigan/detroit/hillary-clinton-could-sti... except in the end it gave Trump 3 more votes. Then it went to Trump colluded with Putin. And how at the G20 they were exchanging secret coded hand gestures between them: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/07/20/trump-appears-to-gesture-at-putin-orig-tc.cnn https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/07/20/trump-appears... Then Comey's hearing. People took the day off to watch Trump's collusion being exposed. /r/politics talked about him being impeached next Tuesday again. It turns out that Trump was mean to Comey and nothing else happened. Then it was the piss "dossier". That surely would impeach him next Tuesday after it came out. Except that it didn't. Notice how the goal post keeps moving every time and how it's always "next Tuesday" when the impeachment is coming. This is not unlike the doomsday cults where the day comes and then you'd think, finally the followers will see it was a scam and go home. But in a counter-intuitive way many stay and become even more zealous. In the end some Russians were indicted because they were internet trolls. Half supported Trump while others supported BLM, Muslims for America, Bernie Sanders and Hillary. Even organized an anti-Trump protest in New York. I was invited and almost attended that one. It's sure good thing to catch those and worth a few weeks of reporting, but not a whole a year of hysteria? Didn't all the media companies, the blogs and the journalists who should have known better play into the Russians plan to destabilize and demoralize the country. It looks like they did. Did they "collude" as well perhaps? Are they secret agents, maybe? (/s) The saddest part is really the opportunity cost. Some were working on fixing the DNC, there is effort in flipping some legislative seats in Congress with good results. But a lot more could have been done had the effort not been wasted on the "Russians".

The Russia stuff has always seemed like fear mongering to me. It’s a big scary enemy messing with our political system. But is what’s happening actually new? And is what’s happening as significant as the news makes it out to be? Or is it another distraction with all the rest?

adventured 9y ago
China previously bought its way into several of our Presidential elections. There was a small fraction of media obsession with that story compared to Russia now, for obvious reasons. 2007 LA Times: "Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown." http://www.latimes.com/la-na-donors19oct19-story.html http://www.latimes.com/la-na-donors19oct19-story.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_fi... https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/chinese-illegally-donated-bill-clinton-reelection-campaign-media-downplayed/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/chinese-illegally-don...
- abritinthebay 9y ago
  The obvious reasons being “it was not really much of a story”, FYI
BookmarkSaver 9y ago
"But is what’s happening actually new? And is what’s happening as significant as the news makes it out to be?" I mean, you should be able to answer those questions, otherwise you've put yourself into a tautilogical little bubble ("There is nothing new/just fearmongering, so I don't need to pay attention to it. I didn't pay attention to it, so I didn't hear anything new". Return to step 1) "The Russia stuff has always seemed like fear mongering to me. It’s a big scary enemy messing with our political system." Are you saying that countries don't really mess with other countries political systems? Because they do it all the time (including and maybe especially the US). This basically reads like you saying that "bad/scary news isn't real, because I've decided that bad/scary news sounds like 'fear mongering' and couldn't possibly affect me". I mean, war is a thing. People and countries do hostile things to each all the time, often disastrously. Reporting on this isn't fear mongering.
- gt_ 9y ago
  I don’t think they are trying to delegitimize it. They questioned if we can even consider it new, and if it’s the problem we should be prioritizing. Both good questions, but either way, cleaning up our government and economy is the most important step in reforming our vulnerable campaign system and electoral process. I can’t tell what it is you propose but let’s discuss it later.
- threeseed 9y ago
  > Are you saying that countries don't really mess with other countries political systems? Because they do it all the time (including and maybe especially the US). The interference that Russia has done is unprecedented in the modern era. There are dozens of election every year. Please provide some evidence of that extent of interfence happening "all the time".
  - rangibaby 9y ago
    Well, just in regards to Russia, the US managed to get a $10 billion lifeline to Yeltsin's government at a VERY convenient moment just months before the 1996 election.
    - acct1771 9y ago
      Please elaborate on your meaning, here.
  - rdtsc 9y ago
    > The interference that Russia has done is unprecedented in the modern era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... Interference that Russia has done with its internet trolls is nothing compared to bombings and assassinations that US has been doing. If you look at South America you'd have to apply blacklist filter to see which countries US didn't mess with.
    - VVyattPrentice 9y ago
threeseed 9y ago
Of course it is significant. There is the real possibility that if Russia didn't interfere in the Brexit referendum and the US election that alternative outcomes could've happened. Both decisions were down to single percentage points. If Trump isn't elected then you have the possiblity of the US joining the TPP, taking a leadership role with the Paris climate change accord, no massively expensive tax cuts etc. Those are fundamental decisions that effect every single American.
- mc32 9y ago
  I'm for climate agreements when everyone carries a relative burden, but no way would I support the TPP or anything like it. That's just a continuation of the WTO but on a bigger more nefarious scale (corps having say in local laws.) Globalization has already done quite enough hollowing out and selling out our blue collar workers. We don't need the same with more vigor.
Spooky23 9y ago
You had a presidential election where the populist favorite candidates were Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Short of Kardashian candidates, that’s about as whacked as you get.
jimbokun 9y ago
The “Russia Stuff” fits right into the class war. US placed sanctions on wealthy Russians through Magnitsky act, which they didn’t like, so Putin ran an intelligence operation to get someone elected more likely to overturn it. This is still about putting the interests of the wealthy first. They see each other as peers and allies regardless of nationality.

rdtsc 9y ago

> I really don't see how you can include the Russia investigation on that list. I really don't see how you wouldn't. "Russia" investigation I think includes not just the investigation itself but the insinuations and rumors around it. The time and money spent talking about it, writing about it and so on. It started with the Russians hacked our elections idea. As in KGB agents in the bushes in Wisconsin with laptops twiddling bits on voting machines. Remember the Stein's recount. /r/politics was abuzz with everyone sure how it will be discovered and Trump will swap places with Hillary next Tuesday. https://patch.com/michigan/detroit/hillary-clinton-could-still-win-2016-presidential-election https://patch.com/michigan/detroit/hillary-clinton-could-sti... except in the end it gave Trump 3 more votes. Then it went to Trump colluded with Putin. And how at the G20 they were exchanging secret coded hand gestures between them: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/07/20/trump-appears-to-gesture-at-putin-orig-tc.cnn https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/07/20/trump-appears... Then Comey's hearing. People took the day off to watch Trump's collusion being exposed. /r/politics talked about him being impeached next Tuesday again. It turns out that Trump was mean to Comey and nothing else happened. Then it was the piss "dossier". That surely would impeach him next Tuesday after it came out. Except that it didn't. Notice how the goal post keeps moving every time and how it's always "next Tuesday" when the impeachment is coming. This is not unlike the doomsday cults where the day comes and then you'd think, finally the followers will see it was a scam and go home. But in a counter-intuitive way many stay and become even more zealous. In the end some Russians were indicted because they were internet trolls. Half supported Trump while others supported BLM, Muslims for America, Bernie Sanders and Hillary. Even organized an anti-Trump protest in New York. I was invited and almost attended that one. It's sure good thing to catch those and worth a few weeks of reporting, but not a whole a year of hysteria? Didn't all the media companies, the blogs and the journalists who should have known better play into the Russians plan to destabilize and demoralize the country. It looks like they did. Did they "collude" as well perhaps? Are they secret agents, maybe? (/s) The saddest part is really the opportunity cost. Some were working on fixing the DNC, there is effort in flipping some legislative seats in Congress with good results. But a lot more could have been done had the effort not been wasted on the "Russians".