[Official] Russia Endorsing Trump, Again, Set to Interfere on His Behalf, Again

Those sites probably have better security

 

You are creating a meaningless criteria.

To you, if the numbers aren't shown then nothing happened.

It is an ignorant stance to take and a false choice.

Also it doesn't make it OK even if zero voters changed or abstained.

If I go into a crowded even with a gun and try to shoot as many people as I can but miss them all, it doesn't make it meaningless that I attempted that. It doesn't mean measures to prevent me from trying it again should be blocked and ignored.

Your whole premise is misguided at best.

We know they tried to influence our election. We know that Putin himself ordered it, and that he did it in an effort to get Trump elected. We know that Russia is working on interfering again. We know that they attempted to breach voter registration lists as well as voting machines in 2016. We know that was in addition to a propaganda campaign all with the intent of getting Trump elected.

We know that the CIA has said it did have an effect.

Your premise that without the actual numbers from their intelligence being released we shouldn't believe any of it or take it seriously is asinine.

 

For the umpteenth time. I said its not okay

THE POINT IS TRUMP WIULD HAVE WON ANYWAY AND THERE IS NO PROOF HE WOULDN'T HAVE

Numbers are the only truth we have. Nothing is truer than 1+1=2

 

You not seeing the numbers doesn't mean they don't exist.

Your claim that Trump would have won anyway is exactly as unprovable as saying that the Russian interference is the reason he won.

Neither of them are 100% provable. What we do know is that Trump barely won. We do know that if the people who didn't vote for either candidate for President in the state of Michigan had voted for Hillary, Trump would have lost Michigan. We know that in order for the propaganda to have made the difference it didn't have to cause any single Hillary voter to change their vote to Trump. All it had to do was convince enough people who normally vote Democratic to decide that all politicians are corrupt and so it wasn't worth voting at all or not voting for President or for voting a write-in or third party candidate.

People can look at how close the election was, and make up their own minds about what role the propaganda effort played. Neither side can be proven.

 

@FranchiseBlade

The only reason you take the CIA's word ilas gospel is because it fits your value set.

Did you believe in yellow cake going into Iraw

 

Bro

Elections are simple equations. He won with votes. Either the votes were caused by propaganda or not.

If an institution claims its won because of that THEY SHOULD HAVE PROOF

 

That isn't the only reason I take CIA's word as gospel. I definitely do not. But when I weigh the word of the CIA vs. that of Putin, and Trump, I'll go with the CIA. That doesn't mean I take it as gospel.

We know for a fact at least some of what Russia did, who they wanted to win, and what many voters thought about Hillary.

 

The multitude of motivations that go into the decision making process of millions of voters and non-voters aren't simple equations.

What I said is plain and simple truth.

 

Exactly, you're biased.

Its not their word vs Trump.

Its just their word with no proof

 

Really?

How many people ever vote differently?

Over 90% vote the same damn party every damn election.

 

It isn't their word with no proof. You don't actually understand the subject. Please show me the statement you are referring to about the CIA.

I haven't been able to find it.

 

Im not playing your stupid ass game. Its the proof the election was influenced. Now they didn't claim that?

 

Your own math hates you. Trump won because of .04% of votes in three states. The 10% that don't vote the same in each election could have changed the election many many times.

 

I haven't been able to find that the CIA has claimed that. Please show me where they claimed that.

 

Was there record low turnout?

 

You're right the CIA doesn't claim that. So i agree with the XIA. Thanks enjoy your Saturday night

Irs the media

 

Doesn't matter. There was a definite increase of ballots where the top of the ballot was left blank in 2016 over 2012.

Now quit stalling and show me where the CIA claimed that the propaganda changed enough votes to give Trump the election.

 

Bro you're saying the CIA didn't claim that so why do you keep trying to prove it?

 

I'm talking about it can't be proven. I've said that. I've said that it goes both ways.

I foolishly believed that you understood what you were talking about when you claimed the CIA did make statement saying that the propaganda swayed enough votes to change the election. I pointed out how they might have reached that conclusion but had no idea.

In the end, you didn't know enough about the subject matter being discussed.

 

So are you gonna challenge the other posters who act like there is proof Trump won because of Russia, the posters like the thread starter?