3 ms·
So, what, we're gonna decide what's "suitable" for normal people to see? Half of mainstream society, respectable people with respectable jobs, just spent 4 yea
by free_rms 6y ago
So, what, we're gonna decide what's "suitable" for normal people to see?
Half of mainstream society, respectable people with respectable jobs, just spent 4 years engaged in a conspiracy theory about Russians and Cambridge Analytica which has quietly fallen apart into "nevermind, we just biffed the election is all".
But if one had said that in, say, 2017, they'd be accused of being a Russian bot. Bias passes everywhere.
- lern_too_spel 6y agoThe Russians engaged in a campaign to disrupt the US elections. That is not in dispute. They were effective in this by hacking the DNC and Podesta and by using thousands of troll accounts to pretend there was anything scandalous in that data. Cambridge Analytica had negligible role in affecting the election. That was just a privacy scandal for Facebook.
- free_rms 6y agoYou've identified the only claims that hold up. Compare to the crazy rhetoric and insinuation we saw for years, and it's clear people were way ahead of themselves.
- lern_too_spel 6y agoSome people insinuated that Trump worked with the Russians to get their help, but the consistent message that came from his cast off associates and from journalists with access like Woodward was that he was too stupid to set anything like that up. I don't think anybody reasonable ever believed otherwise. The Russians didn't give a damn what Trump wanted. He was simply a useful buffoon that they could use to disrupt the election, and they succeeded beyond their wildest hopes.