4 ms·

I'm opposed to all political advertising period, and would have also considered a Clinton presidency non-optimal, though likely more stable than what we have no

I'm opposed to all political advertising period, and would have also considered a Clinton presidency non-optimal, though likely more stable than what we have now. I'm fine with the down votes, but it should be pretty obvious that it would have been Marco Rubio, or some other sanitary GOP member who got elected if it wasn't for the Russian troll brigade on the internet whipping up a frenzy for Trump. That's my only point

nkurz 9y ago
it should be pretty obvious that it would have been Marco Rubio, or some other sanitary GOP member who got elected if it wasn't for the Russian troll brigade on the internet whipping up a frenzy for Trump You raise a wonderful point. Personally, I don't think a "Russian troll brigade" was singularly more effective than all the other attempts to affect the election, but if there was an influence, it certainly may have been greater in the GOP primary than in the general election. But despite having read an awful lot of election analysis, I don't think I've ever heard anyone else make this point. I've only ever seen the issue framed as Trump vs Clinton, with almost all the proponents of the "Russian hacking" narrative being on the pro-Clinton side. Besides yourself, does there exist a group of pro-Rubio (or perhaps more interestingly pro-Cruz) supporters who believe that Russia successfully influenced the election in support of Trump? Is there somewhere online I could read more about this worldview?
- iamcasen 9y ago
  You know, that's a good question. I read a lot, and I pay attention a lot, so for me dots get connected rather naturally. There isn't much out there talking about russian spamming taking place during the primary. I found this though: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article141746659.html http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress... That being said, my family is loaded with died-in-the-wool republicans, and I remember them all blown away by the fact that trump was winning the primary. None of them could believe it, and they all hated him during the primary! After trump won, and it was him vs clinton, then the narrative switched. They loved trump at that point. It was very chilling. It became clear to me that these folks were heavily influenced by some sort of propaganda because their minds changed like the wind!
UrukParthian 9y ago
You also realize that democrats secretly promoted Trump because they figured he would muck up the Republican primaries and become an unelectable candidate. Not to mention how incredibly ignorant you have to be to not notice how out-of-stock (out of touch but maybe they lack a stock of common sense) coastal liberals are to the real problems and realities of the "silent majority". Blaming Russia is like blaming a soldier for giving a enemy a bayonet stab. Of course after this enemy has suffered grievous wounds from his own side.

nkurz 9y ago

it should be pretty obvious that it would have been Marco Rubio, or some other sanitary GOP member who got elected if it wasn't for the Russian troll brigade on the internet whipping up a frenzy for Trump You raise a wonderful point. Personally, I don't think a "Russian troll brigade" was singularly more effective than all the other attempts to affect the election, but if there was an influence, it certainly may have been greater in the GOP primary than in the general election. But despite having read an awful lot of election analysis, I don't think I've ever heard anyone else make this point. I've only ever seen the issue framed as Trump vs Clinton, with almost all the proponents of the "Russian hacking" narrative being on the pro-Clinton side. Besides yourself, does there exist a group of pro-Rubio (or perhaps more interestingly pro-Cruz) supporters who believe that Russia successfully influenced the election in support of Trump? Is there somewhere online I could read more about this worldview?

iamcasen 9y ago
You know, that's a good question. I read a lot, and I pay attention a lot, so for me dots get connected rather naturally. There isn't much out there talking about russian spamming taking place during the primary. I found this though: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article141746659.html http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress... That being said, my family is loaded with died-in-the-wool republicans, and I remember them all blown away by the fact that trump was winning the primary. None of them could believe it, and they all hated him during the primary! After trump won, and it was him vs clinton, then the narrative switched. They loved trump at that point. It was very chilling. It became clear to me that these folks were heavily influenced by some sort of propaganda because their minds changed like the wind!

UrukParthian 9y ago

You also realize that democrats secretly promoted Trump because they figured he would muck up the Republican primaries and become an unelectable candidate. Not to mention how incredibly ignorant you have to be to not notice how out-of-stock (out of touch but maybe they lack a stock of common sense) coastal liberals are to the real problems and realities of the "silent majority". Blaming Russia is like blaming a soldier for giving a enemy a bayonet stab. Of course after this enemy has suffered grievous wounds from his own side.