Well Here It Is

FreemanFan said:
I don't think Russia cost Hillary the election. She lost on her own. Russia did not make her keep classified information on a private server in her bathroom. Russia did not make her call one fourth of the American electorate deplorable and irredeemable and Russia did not make her basically ignore swing states like WI, MI and PA. She might have won if she wasn't so busy trying to lose.
Click to expand...

I'll generally agree, but the email scandal certainly moved the needle a healthy amount. And if they directly manipulated the results of voting machines in swing states, that's also huge.

That being said, Bernie would have crushed her.
 
zitothebrave said:
I'll generally agree, but the email scandal certainly moved the needle a healthy amount. And if they directly manipulated the results of voting machines in swing states, that's also huge.

That being said, Bernie would have crushed her.
Click to expand...

The email scandal wasn't a hack though. That was all Hillary and Weiner.
 
And doesn't Russian hacking of emails sort of underscore her email problem?? Seems odd to rail against the Russians on the one hand after having said, "no biggie" on her email scandal.
 
zitothebrave said:
I'll generally agree, but the email scandal certainly moved the needle a healthy amount. And if they directly manipulated the results of voting machines in swing states, that's also huge.

That being said, Bernie would have crushed her.
Click to expand...

The e-mail scandal was her own fault. Nobody forced her to keep classified information on her own private server.

The voting machines were not networked, so how could the Russians or anyone else have hacked them?
 
If you subscribe to the theory that Obama knew, then certainly Hillary knew. If he said nothing, she said nothing.

My argument, lost in the noise, is that no one, including Russia, expected Trump to win. Their goal was to undermine and compromise Hillary. And if Trump had some inkling of that, so what? Did he not jokingly invite Russia to find Hillary's emails during the campaign.

Seems to me that Obama's pacifist nature has him much more accepting of the verdict that these crazed hangers-on. I believe he understands that Trump is the best possible Republican candidate that the GOP could produce and is perfectly willing to work with and advise him.

But what do I know?
 
I find it hard to believe no one here see's the point.
It is not that the hacks cost HRC the election
It is not asking for a do over

the point is, we suffered a cyber invasion by the Russians.
So what do they know, about who ? and how much ?
Do they have blackmailable info on Paul Ryan or Trump for that matter ?
Are they inside the Defense Department or the state Department the Commerce Department or merely the electoral branch ?
My reading has told me they were involved in Congressional - who did they give the information to ? Which candidates got the favor and which ones didn't

This endless, boring silly conversation about why HRC lost and squabbling back and forth is idiotic.
So fr that posters can't distinguish between the Wikileaks postings and the email server.

Compound that with Comey -- which is what Guilliani etal relied on. The publics confusion and reliance on the notion that if the name Clinton was attached backwards baseball cap guy would naturally fall for the worst.

But, how deep does this go? and for how long ?
What happens next ?
that is the conversation I was hoping we could have
 
rico43 said:
If you subscribe to the theory that Obama knew, then certainly Hillary knew. If he said nothing, she said nothing.

My argument, lost in the noise, is that no one, including Russia, expected Trump to win. Their goal was to undermine and compromise Hillary. And if Trump had some inkling of that, so what? Did he not jokingly invite Russia to find Hillary's emails during the campaign.

Seems to me that Obama's pacifist nature has him much more accepting of the verdict that these crazed hangers-on. I believe he understands that Trump is the best possible Republican candidate that the GOP could produce and is perfectly willing to work with and advise him.

But what do I know?
Click to expand...

Actually they both said something in October HRC in a debate where Trump boldly said it was some 400 lb guy sitting on his bed.
But hey, most here didn't watch the debates reasoning they already knew what was going to happen and be said

Obama blew the Somali Pirates out of the water without a hint and joked at the correspondence dinner the night before they took out binLaden
Obama is not a pacifist but a cold blooded pol SOB

Actually you know a lot and should contribute more on this side.
Even if you are wrong 3/4 the time :)
 
cajunrevenge said:
Click to expand...

Really stuck out to me that quote about how the people should be coming together and rallying behind the President Elect.

Guess the liberals didn't get that message. I've seen mostly anger and hatred toward President Elect Trump from liberals. Like him or hate him, it's time to unite as a country. No more crazy Russia conspiracies(57), no more desperate attempts to keep President Elect Trump from becoming President.

It's over! Time to give him a chance and hope he's a successful President.
 
Hey Einstein, there is no one trying to keep him from becoming POTUS - so why do you keep trotting out that tired troupe ?

I asked about going forward . As in 2017 regardless ofwhat the Presidents name or party affiliation. -- why does your Neanderthal brain refuse to move forward -- perhaps you have nothing to say?

No, let me make that a statement, you have nothing to say
 
57Brave said:
Hey Einstein, there is no one trying to keep him from becoming POTUS - so why do you keep trotting out that tired troupe ?
Click to expand...

Wow. You need to step away from your Russian conspiracies and step back into the real world. Apparently you didn't see the change.org petition? Or the people rallying at state capitols in a hopeless effort to sway the electoral college votes?

C'mon son. Step your game up.
 
57Brave said:
Obama is not a pacifist but a cold blooded pol SOB
Click to expand...

Seriously.

1200.jpg
 
Tomahawking4life said:
Really stuck out to me that quote about how the people should be coming together and rallying behind the President Elect.

Guess the liberals didn't get that message. I've seen mostly anger and hatred toward President Elect Trump from liberals. Like him or hate him, it's time to unite as a country. No more crazy Russia conspiracies(57), no more desperate attempts to keep President Elect Trump from becoming President.

It's over! Time to give him a chance and hope he's a successful President.
Click to expand...

This is always said, and virtually never done, by either dominant ideological group in this country.

There was absolutely no broad coalescence around President Obama after he was elected, either in 2008 or 2012; there was about a two-hour post-mortem amongst the Republicans, and thereafter plans to undermine his policy agenda were immediately drawn up. The legitimacy and authenticity of not just President Obama's election, but his very status as a citizen, were still being floated pretty furiously until about eighteen months ago, whereupon President-elect Trump birthed new distractions for that set of folks. There was no "rallying behind", no "getting the message" by the right—just "mostly anger and hatred".

And that's fine, if that's how we want the discourse to be; but the goose and the gander get to play by the same rules. One can't moan and seethe vitriol throughout one party's term in the White House, then turn around appeal to Decency and Decorum once their favored candidate is in the office. Otherwise, we'll just keep sliding down each others' gullets in a grand tu quoque ouroborus.
 
57Brave said:
yes, seriously.

Never has been a pacifist - never claimed to be a pacifist
Click to expand...

That was my whole point. "Seriously," as in, "Seriously, this idea that President Obama's two terms have been characterized by pacifism is a joke."
 
jpx7 said:
This is always said, and virtually never done, by either dominant ideological group in this country.

There was absolutely no broad coalescence around President Obama after he was elected, either in 2008 or 2012; there was about a two-hour post-mortem amongst the Republicans, and thereafter plans to undermine his policy agenda were immediately drawn up. The legitimacy and authenticity of not just President Obama's election, but his very status as a citizen, were still being floated pretty furiously until about eighteen months ago, whereupon President-elect Trump birthed new distractions for that set of folks. There was no "rallying behind", no "getting the message" by the right—just "mostly anger and hatred".

And that's fine, if that's how we want the discourse to be; but the goose and the gander get to play by the same rules. One can't moan and seethe vitriol throughout one party's term in the White House, then turn around appeal to Decency and Decorum once their favored candidate is in the office. Otherwise, we'll just keep sliding down each others' gullets in a grand tu quoque ouroborus.
Click to expand...

It goes both ways. Absolutely no effort was made by the Obama Administration to work together with both sides of the aisle so to speak and unite this country. In fact, it could be pretty easily argued that this previous Administrations policies and agendas divided this country quite significantly.

That makes it even more important that the nation rally around President Elect Trump regardless of who you voted for. I personally didn't vote for him, but he has my support. It's ridiculous for liberals to be acting like they are before President Elect Trump has even taken office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top