4 ms·

>The Russians have no demonstrated ability to do anything dangerous politically, Huh, I dunno I've been watching first hand how russians on social media have b

>The Russians have no demonstrated ability to do anything dangerous politically, Huh, I dunno I've been watching first hand how russians on social media have been stirring up conservative vs liberal shit storms. The election was a close one so any one of a thousand small influences might have shifted it into it's current disastrous state. When people are at a tipping point it doesn't take much.

bryanlarsen 8y ago
"one of a thousand small influences" That's the point. The election was so close there were likely at least a thousand different things that, had they gone slightly differently, would have shifted the election to Hillary. Russian interference accounted for a small number of these, but there were so many more that aren't getting any attention.
- gameswithgo 8y ago
  There are quite a few that have been getting attention. Facebook/twitter/social media has been a hot topic. How the media conducts itself and how much it is trusted has been big. Gerrymandering has been a hot topic. What else do you feel should be getting attention that is not?
  - bryanlarsen 8y ago
    I'd add the Comey interference, but that too has been well covered. There's a lot more, but most if it was fair game / water under the bridge. Interesting in a historical context or to internal party strategists, but doesn't deserve attention in the public context of upcoming elections. So you're right. It does sometimes seem that commentary about Russia dominates, but it probably isn't strangling focus on other important issues.
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    How about the fact that TV news was all-Trump-all-the-time from about July 2015 on through the election? Trump voters are old and unsophisticated (on average; of course there are exceptions); they take their instructions from TV not online sources. No one could have afforded the marketing that "TV journalists" gave Trump for free. They broadcast an empty lectern whenever he took longer than expected in the restroom. Meanwhile all other Republicans, all third party candidates, and Sanders got no coverage. (You might remember a lot of the Sanders campaign, but that was grassroots crowd-driven stuff, not the networks deciding to cover Sanders.) Some reckon it was a sort of pied-piper strategy to ensure Hillary got her weakest possible opponent. I can't believe that even Democrats are that dumb: Trump was uniquely qualified to run against her. Why would she have been afraid to face Jeb or Ted? Did she really think that all that TV coverage was somehow unrelated to the election? The conspiracy theories ignore the main reason that TV news covers Trump all the time: he improves ratings and profits. Millions of morons invited him into their homes when he had that awful reality show, and now they can't get enough of him. He has carefully cultivated the same persona as president and that's just fascinating to people. Those fascinated people are watching a lot of TV news even now. The only candidate who could counter this strength would be someone with her own reality show. One might wonder, given that the TV news organizations continue to make bank with Trump ad nauseum, why we'd expect the results to be any different the next time Trump runs...
    - pathseeker 8y ago
      >Trump voters are old and unsophisticated (on average; of course there are exceptions); they take their instructions from TV not online sources. White people voted for Trump in a majority in both the educated and uneducated categories. People making more than 50k voted more for Trump and people making less voted for Hillary. Trump pulled in more independents than Hillary. Don't repeat the trope that Trumps supporters are 'old and unsophisticated'. It does a disservice to any actual debate and results in completely incorrect analyses of why he won (e.g. your assessment that only tv-watching morons voted for him). https://verdict.justia.com/2018/02/16/trumps-base-broadly-speaking https://verdict.justia.com/2018/02/16/trumps-base-broadly-sp...
      - akhilcacharya 8y ago
        Also the election was decided by ~70k votes in 3 states. All that matters is who was convinced to stay home or submit a blank ballot.
      - jessaustin 8y ago
        That synopsis of my argument is a bit simplistic. The "TV morons" are the reason that he is on TV news all the time. His being on TV news all the time is one of the various reasons he got elected. Thread hypothesis is that such reasons exist in addition to the obvious Russian Army vote-machine hacking, and that it would be good to examine those other reasons. You may disagree, but if so I hope you're not determining Democratic strategy... This "white people" argument looks silly as soon as you do some arithmetic. Whites' preference for Trump was less than nonwhites' preference for Clinton. If either was a bad thing, they were both bad things. In fact, there was nothing wrong with either one of them. Candidates adjust to the electorate. When Don Jr. runs against Chelsea, he'll be saying awful things about someone besides Mexicans. TV news dominance is a contingent thing, not important for the long term. Even now, TV news is almost more important in how it steers the online conversation than in what it directly reports. In the long term, TV news will cease to exist as such, and the desultory performance over the last three years will be one reason why. (again, not the only reason why...) Right now, however, Trump is still on TV...
prolikewh0a 8y ago
>Huh, I dunno I've been watching first hand how russians on social media have been stirring up conservative vs liberal shit storms. I don't know how you jump from organic "shit storms" with a declining economic and social future for a lot of people, to a blanket Russia is doing this. It's exactly what should be happening as we have a racist shit-for-brains in the White House. People are pushing further right and further left and the political atmosphere is exactly what you would expect. Things shouldn't be calm.
- mrguyorama 8y ago
  Many "organic" shitstorms are purposely seeded by russian backed groups, with the express intention of creating anger and, well, more shitstorms
  - prolikewh0a 8y ago
    Good! People should be angry! The system is not working for the majority of people. People should be pissed. Do you have any evidence that all 'shitstorms' are created by Russia? I bet you can't provide evidence that even 0.01% of 'shitstorms' are created by Russia. Apply some Occam's Razor here.

bryanlarsen 8y ago

"one of a thousand small influences" That's the point. The election was so close there were likely at least a thousand different things that, had they gone slightly differently, would have shifted the election to Hillary. Russian interference accounted for a small number of these, but there were so many more that aren't getting any attention.

gameswithgo 8y ago
There are quite a few that have been getting attention. Facebook/twitter/social media has been a hot topic. How the media conducts itself and how much it is trusted has been big. Gerrymandering has been a hot topic. What else do you feel should be getting attention that is not?
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  I'd add the Comey interference, but that too has been well covered. There's a lot more, but most if it was fair game / water under the bridge. Interesting in a historical context or to internal party strategists, but doesn't deserve attention in the public context of upcoming elections. So you're right. It does sometimes seem that commentary about Russia dominates, but it probably isn't strangling focus on other important issues.
- jessaustin 8y ago
  How about the fact that TV news was all-Trump-all-the-time from about July 2015 on through the election? Trump voters are old and unsophisticated (on average; of course there are exceptions); they take their instructions from TV not online sources. No one could have afforded the marketing that "TV journalists" gave Trump for free. They broadcast an empty lectern whenever he took longer than expected in the restroom. Meanwhile all other Republicans, all third party candidates, and Sanders got no coverage. (You might remember a lot of the Sanders campaign, but that was grassroots crowd-driven stuff, not the networks deciding to cover Sanders.) Some reckon it was a sort of pied-piper strategy to ensure Hillary got her weakest possible opponent. I can't believe that even Democrats are that dumb: Trump was uniquely qualified to run against her. Why would she have been afraid to face Jeb or Ted? Did she really think that all that TV coverage was somehow unrelated to the election? The conspiracy theories ignore the main reason that TV news covers Trump all the time: he improves ratings and profits. Millions of morons invited him into their homes when he had that awful reality show, and now they can't get enough of him. He has carefully cultivated the same persona as president and that's just fascinating to people. Those fascinated people are watching a lot of TV news even now. The only candidate who could counter this strength would be someone with her own reality show. One might wonder, given that the TV news organizations continue to make bank with Trump ad nauseum, why we'd expect the results to be any different the next time Trump runs...
  - pathseeker 8y ago
    >Trump voters are old and unsophisticated (on average; of course there are exceptions); they take their instructions from TV not online sources. White people voted for Trump in a majority in both the educated and uneducated categories. People making more than 50k voted more for Trump and people making less voted for Hillary. Trump pulled in more independents than Hillary. Don't repeat the trope that Trumps supporters are 'old and unsophisticated'. It does a disservice to any actual debate and results in completely incorrect analyses of why he won (e.g. your assessment that only tv-watching morons voted for him). https://verdict.justia.com/2018/02/16/trumps-base-broadly-speaking https://verdict.justia.com/2018/02/16/trumps-base-broadly-sp...
    - akhilcacharya 8y ago
      Also the election was decided by ~70k votes in 3 states. All that matters is who was convinced to stay home or submit a blank ballot.
    - jessaustin 8y ago
      That synopsis of my argument is a bit simplistic. The "TV morons" are the reason that he is on TV news all the time. His being on TV news all the time is one of the various reasons he got elected. Thread hypothesis is that such reasons exist in addition to the obvious Russian Army vote-machine hacking, and that it would be good to examine those other reasons. You may disagree, but if so I hope you're not determining Democratic strategy... This "white people" argument looks silly as soon as you do some arithmetic. Whites' preference for Trump was less than nonwhites' preference for Clinton. If either was a bad thing, they were both bad things. In fact, there was nothing wrong with either one of them. Candidates adjust to the electorate. When Don Jr. runs against Chelsea, he'll be saying awful things about someone besides Mexicans. TV news dominance is a contingent thing, not important for the long term. Even now, TV news is almost more important in how it steers the online conversation than in what it directly reports. In the long term, TV news will cease to exist as such, and the desultory performance over the last three years will be one reason why. (again, not the only reason why...) Right now, however, Trump is still on TV...

prolikewh0a 8y ago

>Huh, I dunno I've been watching first hand how russians on social media have been stirring up conservative vs liberal shit storms. I don't know how you jump from organic "shit storms" with a declining economic and social future for a lot of people, to a blanket Russia is doing this. It's exactly what should be happening as we have a racist shit-for-brains in the White House. People are pushing further right and further left and the political atmosphere is exactly what you would expect. Things shouldn't be calm.

mrguyorama 8y ago
Many "organic" shitstorms are purposely seeded by russian backed groups, with the express intention of creating anger and, well, more shitstorms
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  Good! People should be angry! The system is not working for the majority of people. People should be pissed. Do you have any evidence that all 'shitstorms' are created by Russia? I bet you can't provide evidence that even 0.01% of 'shitstorms' are created by Russia. Apply some Occam's Razor here.