POLL: If Russia were to interfere in November...

It has to do with your standards, which you just made clear. It only matters if it's not your guy, thanks for clearing that up.

 

Having grown quite tired of the persona you present here and the lack of discussion and debate it allows for I have decided to take advantage of the ignore function in order to increase my enjoyment and the experience this forum provides.

Have A Nice Day

 

It doesn't mention the 18 countries.

 

Yes you're right I meant Interventions.

so 18 separate incidents some maybe the same country over multiple elections.

 

Posting memes or releasing hacked TRUE corruption of the DNC isn't interfering. Its not like they sent in waves of illegals who actually vote in the elections to shift the numbers. Or hack the machines that were supplied by Soros. Sorry, but with everyone on the internet, you will from now and forever have someone that sees something from some international agencies. Its like anytime a liberal talks about how "great" socialism is working in Denmark cause of something they saw on FB, that is outside interference, but I don't see any investigation into Denmark for swaying our elections.

 

Regularly. You don't read much do you? MSM supplies all of the info you need?

 

I had quoted (with quotation marks) Cerebrus in his Post #14. Take it up with him. My own criticism was tightly focused on the FBI and nowhere else.

 

Well if they put an add in the tuesday newspaper calling one of the candidates a 'jerk' I hardly think that would be a big deal. If they hacked polling stations in all the swing states and actually installed the manchurian candidate, that would be a big deal.

So more specificity is required.

 

I thought that might be the problem.

 

The last time being?

 

I suppose it would be reasonable to base it on the form of the interference that Russia was identified as being involved in, in 2016.

 

Then what could the motive have been?

What machines?

What do you mean?

Wait, who is swaying your elections in Denmark?

 

Better question,
When does the US NOT to it?

 

Identified by whom?

If they coopt one of our candidates with dirt on another candidate in exchange for sanctions as some 'identify', that would be a big deal. Except that hasn't been proven yet.

If they provide us with evidence of corruption of any of our candidates, as most folks agree happened, that would be a big deal as well, but a welcome one imo.

If they buy more facebook ads on both candidates again to just sow chaos, which is the only provable action they took thus far, I don't think it would be a big deal. If Facebook, as a private entity, has the right to ban certain people for offensive political speech, then, as a private entity, they can choose whether or not to allow foreign entities to use their platform for disinformation campaigns during elections... and The People can boycott them or not accordingly (I am).

 

Not sure, as I don't keep up with it. It was evidenced we have meddled close to a hundred times after the founding of the CIA though. Of course you might think intel had a come to jesus moment, but I find that rather difficult to believe. From an agency that lies to congress and spies on its own oversight committee.

I can remember reading about all of our meddling, and obama did it overtly in Israel. Guess he figured getting our CIA to do that to Israel might not be agreeable to them? ha ha

I am sure if you want to discover the last documented case(and it takes some time for it to be revealed) you can google it. And get a reliable source of fact. Not that you would be interested in doing that of course. People who don't like facts generally don't try to find them, right?

Here is one of the sources I read, and a quote...

I am sure more will be found as time passes and books are written by ex CIA operatives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/...y-one-meddling-in-elections-we-do-it-too.html

 

Thank you. And I understand what you mean. Though for me, I find that there are many far too many traditionalist Western nations as well. It is people like Trudeau, (and every European leader who brought in Islamic refugees from Syria) that ruin the less religious countries. If only, for example China's government, could embrace sex-positivism and certain forms of hate speech protection. I wouldn't hesitate to move to such a place. Censorship of the internet and religion are already well in place. I would not like China's marxist (psuedo-marxist?) imagery, but one can't have everything, I suppose. Sweden would be nicer, but I have a feeling it is more likely that the Communist Party of China will accept sex-positivism than Sweden will accept aspects of authoritarianism.

 

Traditionalist in what way?

 

Them having a voice. Do you want to just shut the internet down or make the US servers only accept input from US based IP addresses?

Voting machines.

Any time you get on the internet, you will run across something from outside your country. It will be an influence and there is nothing short of isolation like N Korea has done to prevent you seeing stuff from the outside world.

That's my point. The left is only trying to blame Russia because of 14 troll posters who put something up on FB which has shown to have swayed a total of 0 voters into electing Trump instead of Hillary.

 

And what would that achieve do you think?

Sure but isn't it a bit different when it is a foreign government doing it with the intention of targeting another countries election?

Oh I see what you mean now. I thought that you were saying that a country actually tried to sway your election! Anyway, isn't the 14 troll posters only part of it? What about the hacking of the DNC server?

 

No, not different, unless you want to hold America accountable for the hundreds of elections our gov has influenced.

What about the hacking. Was the information released true? If it was true, there is a bigger case against the DNC for their own election fraud than Trump. If it wasn't true, then was there even a hack? Every country has hacked our computer systems, its cyber warfare, and we've hacked others. To imply the election is invalid cause of an outside government sanctioning a hacking and releasing TRUE info is silly.

 

You make it sound as if Obama handled it personally. What do you mean exactly?

 

It would be a big deal to you? Why, if it would be a "welcome one" to you? Do you mean a POSITIVE big deal?

 

Does that matter? Do you think Putin took over a hackers terminal and posted troll memes personally?

 

Ha ha. It is between him doing it personally and him having absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

You don't keep up with factual info, much?

 

Please quote my entire post if you're going to quote me.

Yes, I consider all forms and methods of corruption exposure beneficial to society. Don't you?