8 ms·

This. It's documented that the Russian state security apparatus was not seeking (and did not believe it possible) to prevent Clinton from winning. What they wa

This. It's documented that the Russian state security apparatus was not seeking (and did not believe it possible) to prevent Clinton from winning. What they wanted, and got, is mania.

gruez 8y ago
Source?
- iscrewyou 8y ago
  Read NYTimes. Then watch Fox. Repeat. You’ll know what he means.
prolikewh0a 8y ago
Are you sure you're putting blame in the right place and not just falling into some manufactured consent? Every day income inequality gets worse, workers are treated like garbage[1], wages are going down[2] with unemployment going down, people can't afford health insurance and even if they can they will probably still be broken as deductibles and out of pocket costs rise, 80% of all people are living paycheck[3], 50% of all people in USA are defined as poor or low income[4], 80% of the country makes under $65k/year while the value of our money becomes less[5], 1/5 of children are in poverty[6]. I really think this is a natural occurrence to the failures of this corrupt capitalist system that provides for the few instead of the many. Things are shifting left, and it's certainly not because Russia spent $50k on advertisements on Facebook. You can also argue that the UK was a far greater influence with Cambridge Analytica, but it's something people like to ignore. These are absolutely our own policies having this effect. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/30/accidents-at-amazon-workers-left-to-suffer-after-warehouse-injuries https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/30/accidents... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?utm_term=.13c656824069 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t... [3] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck... [4] https://kairoscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Poverty-Fact-sheet-Jan-2017.pdf https://kairoscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Poverty-... [5] https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2016 https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2016 [6] http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- megaman22 8y ago
  Depends on where you are standing. The best metaphor I've seen for the world these days is Scott Adams' about us watching two different movies in parallel at the same time. It's equally possible to look at the same world, and see that business is booming, the stock market is at record highs, employers are hiring and making investments at rates we haven't seen in years. Tension in areas of the world that have been problematic my entire life appear to be on the ebb at the moment. Maybe it's a regional thing... But things are looking pretty fricking awesome over on this side of the fence.
  - gfodor 8y ago
    You can go a long way towards flipping between these parallel universes by logging in and logging out of social media.
  - prolikewh0a 8y ago
    You're looking at things from the side of the elite and I absolutely agree, that side of the fence looks fantastic. Business is booming for the elite, the stock market is almost entirely owned by the top 10%[1] so nobody is really seeing those gains except people who already have plenty, employers are hiring but nobody has really seen a wage increase since the 90's[2] and wages are actually slightly falling[3]. Where's the bargaining power as we close in on full employment? It's nowhere to be found, and conditions are getting worse for the people who do the work. [1] http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-ownership-10-percent-richest/ http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-ownership-10-percent-ric... [2] https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/11/hillary-clinton/debate-hillary-clinton-says-americans-havent-had-r/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?utm_term=.13c656824069 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t...
    - 8y ago
mfarris 8y ago
No. US security agencies have been clear that Russian intelligence interfered in our election to support Trump. Putin admitted just two weeks ago that he wanted Trump to win. Generalized unrest was one goal. Electing Trump, however difficult that might have seemed, was another.
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  >US security agencies have been clear that Russian intelligence interfered in our election to support Trump. Why would you blindly trust intelligence agencies that have been very untrustworthy throughout US history?
  - untog 8y ago
    Because they've provided evidence, and other intelligence agencies and governments across the world have confirmed their claims. At a certain point you start arguing "why believe anything" and that's literally not a conversation worth having.
    - prolikewh0a 8y ago
      They provided 'evidence' for 'weapons of mass destruction' to justify the Iraq war too, and governments around the world confirmed their claims. We now know that to be a lie. Again, why would you trust intelligence agencies that haven't been trustworthy throughout US history?
      - untog 8y ago
        The evidence of weapons of mass destruction was not verifiable by anyone else. Evidence of manipulation on social media is. Is everything stated by an intelligence agency true? No. Is everything false? No. So you evaluate the claims they make. This isn't complicated.
        prolikewh0a 8y ago
untog 8y ago
I'm not sure that's quite right. They wanted mania, and used tactics that would contribute towards a Clinton loss, even if the chances of it were remote. Hence, they heavily pushed Bernie Sanders and the Green Party, and once he became the Republican candidate, Trump. As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any Russian-created content found that supported Clinton, despite the fact that it would have helped contribute to the overall mania.
- equalunique 8y ago
  >As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any Russian-created content found that supported Clinton. Well, there is the Steele dossier, which FusionGPS was paid twice for - once by a Republican PAC, then second by Clinton's Perkins & Coie - before providing it to the FBI directly. You could say that it's MI5/MI6 (once a <three letter agency> operative, always a <three letter agency> operative, amirite?) intel, but the unverified parts of it are from Russian sources.
  - steve_musk 8y ago
    This didn’t become public until after Trump was in office though.
    - equalunique 8y ago
      It was key factor in the previous administration's ability to get a surveillance warrant on Trump's campaign.
      - steve_musk 8y ago
        No it was not. It was part of the evidence presented to the FISA judge by the FBI to obtain a warrant to monitor Carter Pages communications AFTER he left the campaign, and the FBI had been interested in Page before the Trump campaign even existed.[1] The investigation into Trump's campaign and its Russian contacts was NOT started by the dossier. The FBI was not given the dossier until December of 2016. By this time there was no campaign anymore since Trump was president-elect. In fact the investigation had already started months prior when Papadopolous made suspicious comments to a diplomat about the campaign's knowledge of information related to Hillary's emails. [2] [1] https://www.wired.com/story/why-trump-wont-stop-talking-about-carter-page/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-trump-wont-stop-talking-abou... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier

This. It's documented that the Russian state security apparatus was not seeking (and did not believe it possible) to prevent Clinton from winning. What they wanted, and got, is mania.

gruez 8y ago

Source?

iscrewyou 8y ago
Read NYTimes. Then watch Fox. Repeat. You’ll know what he means.

prolikewh0a 8y ago

Are you sure you're putting blame in the right place and not just falling into some manufactured consent? Every day income inequality gets worse, workers are treated like garbage[1], wages are going down[2] with unemployment going down, people can't afford health insurance and even if they can they will probably still be broken as deductibles and out of pocket costs rise, 80% of all people are living paycheck[3], 50% of all people in USA are defined as poor or low income[4], 80% of the country makes under $65k/year while the value of our money becomes less[5], 1/5 of children are in poverty[6]. I really think this is a natural occurrence to the failures of this corrupt capitalist system that provides for the few instead of the many. Things are shifting left, and it's certainly not because Russia spent $50k on advertisements on Facebook. You can also argue that the UK was a far greater influence with Cambridge Analytica, but it's something people like to ignore. These are absolutely our own policies having this effect. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/30/accidents-at-amazon-workers-left-to-suffer-after-warehouse-injuries https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/30/accidents... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?utm_term=.13c656824069 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t... [3] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck... [4] https://kairoscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Poverty-Fact-sheet-Jan-2017.pdf https://kairoscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Poverty-... [5] https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2016 https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2016 [6] http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
megaman22 8y ago
Depends on where you are standing. The best metaphor I've seen for the world these days is Scott Adams' about us watching two different movies in parallel at the same time. It's equally possible to look at the same world, and see that business is booming, the stock market is at record highs, employers are hiring and making investments at rates we haven't seen in years. Tension in areas of the world that have been problematic my entire life appear to be on the ebb at the moment. Maybe it's a regional thing... But things are looking pretty fricking awesome over on this side of the fence.
- gfodor 8y ago
  You can go a long way towards flipping between these parallel universes by logging in and logging out of social media.
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  You're looking at things from the side of the elite and I absolutely agree, that side of the fence looks fantastic. Business is booming for the elite, the stock market is almost entirely owned by the top 10%[1] so nobody is really seeing those gains except people who already have plenty, employers are hiring but nobody has really seen a wage increase since the 90's[2] and wages are actually slightly falling[3]. Where's the bargaining power as we close in on full employment? It's nowhere to be found, and conditions are getting worse for the people who do the work. [1] http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-ownership-10-percent-richest/ http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-ownership-10-percent-ric... [2] https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/11/hillary-clinton/debate-hillary-clinton-says-americans-havent-had-r/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?utm_term=.13c656824069 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t...
  - 8y ago

mfarris 8y ago

No. US security agencies have been clear that Russian intelligence interfered in our election to support Trump. Putin admitted just two weeks ago that he wanted Trump to win. Generalized unrest was one goal. Electing Trump, however difficult that might have seemed, was another.

prolikewh0a 8y ago
>US security agencies have been clear that Russian intelligence interfered in our election to support Trump. Why would you blindly trust intelligence agencies that have been very untrustworthy throughout US history?
- untog 8y ago
  Because they've provided evidence, and other intelligence agencies and governments across the world have confirmed their claims. At a certain point you start arguing "why believe anything" and that's literally not a conversation worth having.
  - prolikewh0a 8y ago
    They provided 'evidence' for 'weapons of mass destruction' to justify the Iraq war too, and governments around the world confirmed their claims. We now know that to be a lie. Again, why would you trust intelligence agencies that haven't been trustworthy throughout US history?
    - untog 8y ago
      The evidence of weapons of mass destruction was not verifiable by anyone else. Evidence of manipulation on social media is. Is everything stated by an intelligence agency true? No. Is everything false? No. So you evaluate the claims they make. This isn't complicated.
      - prolikewh0a 8y ago

untog 8y ago

I'm not sure that's quite right. They wanted mania, and used tactics that would contribute towards a Clinton loss, even if the chances of it were remote. Hence, they heavily pushed Bernie Sanders and the Green Party, and once he became the Republican candidate, Trump. As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any Russian-created content found that supported Clinton, despite the fact that it would have helped contribute to the overall mania.

equalunique 8y ago
>As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any Russian-created content found that supported Clinton. Well, there is the Steele dossier, which FusionGPS was paid twice for - once by a Republican PAC, then second by Clinton's Perkins & Coie - before providing it to the FBI directly. You could say that it's MI5/MI6 (once a <three letter agency> operative, always a <three letter agency> operative, amirite?) intel, but the unverified parts of it are from Russian sources.
- steve_musk 8y ago
  This didn’t become public until after Trump was in office though.
  - equalunique 8y ago
    It was key factor in the previous administration's ability to get a surveillance warrant on Trump's campaign.
    - steve_musk 8y ago
      No it was not. It was part of the evidence presented to the FISA judge by the FBI to obtain a warrant to monitor Carter Pages communications AFTER he left the campaign, and the FBI had been interested in Page before the Trump campaign even existed.[1] The investigation into Trump's campaign and its Russian contacts was NOT started by the dossier. The FBI was not given the dossier until December of 2016. By this time there was no campaign anymore since Trump was president-elect. In fact the investigation had already started months prior when Papadopolous made suspicious comments to a diplomat about the campaign's knowledge of information related to Hillary's emails. [2] [1] https://www.wired.com/story/why-trump-wont-stop-talking-about-carter-page/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-trump-wont-stop-talking-abou... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier