• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Trump Made Russian Hacking More Effective

OpportunityCost said:
David Frum...a conservative?!?!?!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could compare your own conservative credentials against his and then see who cries the loudest?
 
haymarket said:
And why do you introduce this into this old news discussion?
Click to expand...

Maybe he offered some old and relevant news into a thread based upon unproved and paranoid claims?
 
haymarket said:
David Frum - a conservative - has an excellent piece that is more important today with the report on the Russians and wikileaks than it was days ago when released.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...p-made-russias-hacking-more-effective/511880/

It details how Trump not only used the daily wikileaks material that came from the Russians as part of a campaign to help Trump win - but exaggerated it to his supporters and to the nation.



This is not some so called "butt hurt liberal" claiming Trump is illegitimate because they are a "sore loser". This is a noted respected conservative writer openly questioning Trumps illegitimacy for the help from the Russians and his use of the material to win a close election.

Remember - Trump won Michigan by 0.3%
Trump won Wisconsin by 1 percent.
Trump won Pennsylvania by 1.2%.

Had he not won those three states he would not have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by over 2.8 million Americans votes.

And Trumps daily use of the wikileaks material helped him turn the election to him in the last days. Expert poll takers confirm that although they cannot say exactly to what extent. But the margin in those three states is so small that it defies rational thought to pretend it did not play a role and did not have an impact.

And then we have the open connection between the Trump campaign and Russian TV which strangely aired many of the anti-Clinton arguments right along with Trump and his allies. Michael Flynn has a connection with Russian TV and now has been appointed to an important position with Trump.

We knew about the Flynn - Russian TV connections months ago.

The Kremlin’s Candidate - POLITICO Magazine



Flynn was named by Trump as one of his top national security advisers and will begin on January 20th when Trump takes the office the Russians helped him win .
Click to expand...

LOL

Dang you're desperate haymarket.

David Frum has written pieces arguing why Republicans should vote for Hillary.

The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton - The Atlantic

Do you think people are fools to buy this BS you're trying to sell?

The Progressive Machine can do all it can in their vile disgusting effort to deflect from the fact Hillary and her co-conspirators in the MSM and at the DNC tried to steal the election through lies and deceit, but it isn't going to work.

The only ones getting spun up are the losers who will increasingly be laughed at by the rest of the Nation who are looking forward to a more prosperous future.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Maybe he offered some old and relevant news into a thread based upon unproved and paranoid claims?
Click to expand...

Why is it relevant? Is this an effort to excuse what the Russians did in their zeal to help Trump win?
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

Dang you're desperate haymarket.

David Frum has written pieces arguing why Republicans should vote for Hillary.

The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton - The Atlantic

Do you think people are fools to buy this BS you're trying to sell?

The Progressive Machine can do all it can in their vile disgusting effort to deflect from the fact Hillary and her co-conspirators in the MSM and at the DNC tried to steal the election through lies and deceit, but it isn't going to work.

The only ones getting spun up are the losers who will increasingly be laughed at by the rest of the Nation who are looking forward to a more prosperous future.
Click to expand...

Lots of Republicans did not support Trump. Some even voted for Hillary. It was their hatred and loathing of Trump which moved them to do so - not any love of Clinton.

They signed public letters.
They took out ads.
They did public interviews.
Some were very vocal.

Of course, that just makes them FOOLS in your eyes for daring to buck the party choice. :doh:roll:
 
haymarket said:
Lots of Republicans did not support Trump. Some even voted for Hillary. It was their hatred and loathing of Trump which moved them to do so - not any love of Clinton.

They signed public letters.
They took out ads.
They did public interviews.
Some were very vocal.

Of course, that just makes them FOOLS in your eyes for daring to buck the party choice. :doh:roll:
Click to expand...

Your wrote this:

This is not some so called "butt hurt liberal" claiming Trump is illegitimate because they are a "sore loser". This is a noted respected conservative writer openly questioning Trumps illegitimacy for the help from the Russians and his use of the material to win a close election.​

Frum is not some respected conservative writer openly questioning Trump. He is rabidly biased anti-Trump mouthpiece going to great lengths to get Hillary elected.

It's just a lie to suggest anything else haymarket.

This effort you and the rest of the Progressive Machine are undertaking to try to take the focus off Hillary's effort to steal the election and manipulate the vote will go nowhere.

The facts have been proven, and not denied. Hillary, her political backers, and her MSM partners used lies, deceit, manipulation and collusion with the MSM in an attempt to defraud the voters and secure the Presidency. That is the real issue.

It's laughable, but understandable, the left, including Obama, are trying to keep the public from focusing on that.

That's fine, it just relegates them all to the scrap heap where they belong.
 
ocean515 said:
Your wrote this:

This is not some so called "butt hurt liberal" claiming Trump is illegitimate because they are a "sore loser". This is a noted respected conservative writer openly questioning Trumps illegitimacy for the help from the Russians and his use of the material to win a close election.​

Frum is not some respected conservative writer openly questioning Trump. He is rabidly biased anti-Trump mouthpiece going to great lengths to get Hillary elected.

It's just a lie to suggest anything else haymarket.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can put up your conservative credentials and we can compare them to David Frum and better judge him on his overall record rather solely on him committing the mortal sin of not backing your favorite?

Your response is highly indicative of right wingers who are quick to accuse some of their follow of heresy and desertion even though they marched shoulder to shoulder with them for years. We saw the same thing with Joe Scarborough over the years also where people wanted to pretend he was not a conservative.

That is the nature of the True Believer. You can fight shoulder to shoulder with them in 999 battles but should you stray and go a different direction in the penultimate all important battle One Thousand - you are consigned to the fires burning all the other heretics as well.

Your post is a great example of that. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Nap said:
Ha, that is old news. Trump is actually a double sleeper agent put in place by the Bilderberg group to infiltrate Russia and take down Putin after the global domination and pass the power to them on July 25th, but little does everyone know the entire plan was funded by Soros and the Koch brothers.
Click to expand...

I heard almost the same thing, but it was the more infamous Build-a-Bear group.
 
haymarket said:
Why is it relevant? Is this an effort to excuse what the Russians did in their zeal to help Trump win?
Click to expand...

It is relevant because it reminds the informed reader of the sheer and obscene hypocrisy in action as the US criticizes others for interfering in elections, assuming the charges against Russia are true.

When it comes to interfering in elections and overturning legitimately elected governments around the planet, there is no government with a better record or more experience in that tactic than the United States Government, going back decades.

Hillary and Barack most recently practiced it in Honduras some years back.
 
Thoreau72 said:
It is relevant because it reminds the informed reader of the sheer and obscene hypocrisy in action as the US criticizes others for interfering in elections, assuming the charges against Russia are true.

When it comes to interfering in elections and overturning legitimately elected governments around the planet, there is no government with a better record or more experience in that tactic than the United States Government, going back decades.

Hillary and Barack most recently practiced it in Honduras some years back.
Click to expand...

So you see nothing wrong with Russian interfering with the US elections and doing their worst to get Trump elected because they feel they will fare better about him.... especially since Trump himself publicly invited them to get involved?
 
haymarket said:
So you see nothing wrong with Russian interfering with the US elections and doing their worst to get Trump elected because they feel they will fare better about him.... especially since Trump himself publicly invited them to get involved?
Click to expand...

IF it could be proved that the Russians actually did interfere in our election, THEN yes I would "see something wrong".

But the larger point which completely escapes you for some reason is that NOBODY--neither you nor the government nor the media--has been able to prove that to be the case. And in the meantime, dozens of well qualified and well informed experts, including a handful of NSA whistleblowers, are on record as saying it is most unlikely that the Russians did that.
 
haymarket said:
Perhaps you can put up your conservative credentials and we can compare them to David Frum and better judge him on his overall record rather solely on him committing the mortal sin of not backing your favorite?

Your response is highly indicative of right wingers who are quick to accuse some of their follow of heresy and desertion even though they marched shoulder to shoulder with them for years. We saw the same thing with Joe Scarborough over the years also where people wanted to pretend he was not a conservative.

That is the nature of the True Believer. You can fight shoulder to shoulder with them in 999 battles but should you stray and go a different direction in the penultimate all important battle One Thousand - you are consigned to the fires burning all the other heretics as well.

Your post is a great example of that. Thank you.
Click to expand...

David Frum represent the Establishment Elite that needed to be scrubbed from Washington D.C. I guess if you want to admit to being surgically attached to party and never stray an inch from their mandates and commands, that is your choice. I'm not bound by such indoctrination.

David Frum was not some average conservative. He was a party sell out hack. No conservative with any integrity would EVER argue to vote for Hillary Clinton.

I don't have a problem using an establishment hack to try and make your point, but don't put him out there as some everyday conservative. The guy is a scumbag.

Again, it all gets back to the Progressive Machine trying desperately through it's minions to spread this meme about Russia in order to hide the lies, deceit, fraud, and corruption Hillary, the DNC, and her MSM partners attempted to foist on voters, to steal the vote.

That's documented, and that is the real story.
 
haymarket said:
David Frum - a conservative - has an excellent piece that is more important today with the report on the Russians and wikileaks than it was days ago when released.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...p-made-russias-hacking-more-effective/511880/

It details how Trump not only used the daily wikileaks material that came from the Russians as part of a campaign to help Trump win - but exaggerated it to his supporters and to the nation.



This is not some so called "butt hurt liberal" claiming Trump is illegitimate because they are a "sore loser". This is a noted respected conservative writer openly questioning Trumps illegitimacy for the help from the Russians and his use of the material to win a close election.

Remember - Trump won Michigan by 0.3%
Trump won Wisconsin by 1 percent.
Trump won Pennsylvania by 1.2%.

Had he not won those three states he would not have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by over 2.8 million Americans votes.

And Trumps daily use of the wikileaks material helped him turn the election to him in the last days. Expert poll takers confirm that although they cannot say exactly to what extent. But the margin in those three states is so small that it defies rational thought to pretend it did not play a role and did not have an impact.

And then we have the open connection between the Trump campaign and Russian TV which strangely aired many of the anti-Clinton arguments right along with Trump and his allies. Michael Flynn has a connection with Russian TV and now has been appointed to an important position with Trump.

We knew about the Flynn - Russian TV connections months ago.

The Kremlin’s Candidate - POLITICO Magazine



Flynn was named by Trump as one of his top national security advisers and will begin on January 20th when Trump takes the office the Russians helped him win .
Click to expand...

I’m not sure when all these wikileaks started. But the most avid Trump supporters became so in late 2015 and continued throughout the Republican primaries. It was his persona that they fell in love with. So what we want to figure out is whom the leaks might have influenced. From looking at the polls, approximately 80% of all Americans decided whom they would support between Clinton and Trump by the time they were nominated. Of the remaining 20%, roughly 8% were undecided and 12% supporting third party candidates like Johnson, Stein and Castle.

One also must remember the two major party candidates were the most disliked candidates in our history of presidential elections. Around 55% of all Americans viewing Clinton very negative and 60% of all Americans viewing Trump in the negative give or take a couple of points as time went by. Neither was wanted by anything close to a majority of Americans. Trying to get inside those 20% heads to find out how they decided whom to vote for is almost impossible. How did they decide which candidate was the leased disliked by them, the lesser of two evils or the least terrible candidate?

What we do know is that 12% of third party voters dropped to 5% as they slowly choose the least disliked candidate while the 8% of undecided came off the fence. What we do know is with 2 weeks remaining prior to the election 85% of Americans had made up their minds between Trump and Clinton 8% remained undecided and 7% stated their preference for third party candidates. Since wikileaks received most of its attention during the final two weeks, we are now down to 15% of the electorate which they could have influenced. With two weeks to go, according to RCP Clinton lead by 5 points, with one week to go by 2 points. With one week to go, 90% of Americans had made up their minds between Trump and Clinton, 6% remained for third party candidates and only 4% undecided. Clinton went on to win the popular vote by 2 points and third party candidate received a bit less than 5%.

Clinton led Trump 46-44 with a week to go and won the final popular vote 48-46 with some tenths thrown in. So could have wikileaks made a difference in the three states you mention, very possible. But also remember Trump outcampaigned her in those three states 6-0 in trips to Wisconsin, 5-1 in appearances in Michigan and 8-5 in Pennsylvania. Perhaps if Hillary had spent less time out in California attending fund raisers and made more appearances in those three states, she would be president elect today.

Personally, I think lack of attention shown by Clinton to Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania had more to do with her loses their than wikileaks. Although wiki could have had an influence. How much, we will never know. But when you have two very much disliked candidates by the majority of Americans, anything can happen and it did.
 
Perotista said:
I’m not sure when all these wikileaks started. But the most avid Trump supporters became so in late 2015 and continued throughout the Republican primaries. It was his persona that they fell in love with. So what we want to figure out is whom the leaks might have influenced. From looking at the polls, approximately 80% of all Americans decided whom they would support between Clinton and Trump by the time they were nominated. Of the remaining 20%, roughly 8% were undecided and 12% supporting third party candidates like Johnson, Stein and Castle.

One also must remember the two major party candidates were the most disliked candidates in our history of presidential elections. Around 55% of all Americans viewing Clinton very negative and 60% of all Americans viewing Trump in the negative give or take a couple of points as time went by. Neither was wanted by anything close to a majority of Americans. Trying to get inside those 20% heads to find out how they decided whom to vote for is almost impossible. How did they decide which candidate was the leased disliked by them, the lesser of two evils or the least terrible candidate?

What we do know is that 12% of third party voters dropped to 5% as they slowly choose the least disliked candidate while the 8% of undecided came off the fence. What we do know is with 2 weeks remaining prior to the election 85% of Americans had made up their minds between Trump and Clinton 8% remained undecided and 7% stated their preference for third party candidates. Since wikileaks received most of its attention during the final two weeks, we are now down to 15% of the electorate which they could have influenced. With two weeks to go, according to RCP Clinton lead by 5 points, with one week to go by 2 points. With one week to go, 90% of Americans had made up their minds between Trump and Clinton, 6% remained for third party candidates and only 4% undecided. Clinton went on to win the popular vote by 2 points and third party candidate received a bit less than 5%.

Clinton led Trump 46-44 with a week to go and won the final popular vote 48-46 with some tenths thrown in. So could have wikileaks made a difference in the three states you mention, very possible. But also remember Trump outcampaigned her in those three states 6-0 in trips to Wisconsin, 5-1 in appearances in Michigan and 8-5 in Pennsylvania. Perhaps if Hillary had spent less time out in California attending fund raisers and made more appearances in those three states, she would be president elect today.

Personally, I think lack of attention shown by Clinton to Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania had more to do with her loses their than wikileaks. Although wiki could have had an influence. How much, we will never know. But when you have two very much disliked candidates by the majority of Americans, anything can happen and it did.
Click to expand...

That is a very good analysis. I look at the margin in Michigan of 0.3%..... Wisconsin of 1.0 % and Pennsylvania of 1.2% and not that Trump and to win all three to win the EC. And the margin there changed over the last two weeks.

Trump was still Trump and a totally crappy candidate. Nothing had changed about that to improve his image especially with the ***** grabbing comments.
Clinton was still the crappy candidate she had been all summer when she was comfortable ahead.

And I agree that Clinton should have spent a lot more time in Michigan and Wisconsin. And that accounts for some of her slide there. But not all of it.

So what changed in the last two weeks shifting the vote away from Clinton and to Trump?

1- the daily barrage of wikileaks releases funneled through Russia to aid Trump
2- the Comey letter which hung out there for nearly nine days while 10 to 15 million people voted

And Donald Trump loudly and often exploited both exaggerating what he felt both contained and what they said.

Campaigns and events effect voters. If they did not there would be no reason for anybody to spend dollar one on them. And in this case, the change in events most certainly points to having impact on the results of the election.
 
haymarket said:
That is a very good analysis. I look at the margin in Michigan of 0.3%..... Wisconsin of 1.0 % and Pennsylvania of 1.2% and not that Trump and to win all three to win the EC. And the margin there changed over the last two weeks.

Trump was still Trump and a totally crappy candidate. Nothing had changed about that to improve his image especially with the ***** grabbing comments.
Clinton was still the crappy candidate she had been all summer when she was comfortable ahead.

And I agree that Clinton should have spent a lot more time in Michigan and Wisconsin. And that accounts for some of her slide there. But not all of it.

So what changed in the last two weeks shifting the vote away from Clinton and to Trump?

1- the daily barrage of wikileaks releases funneled through Russia to aid Trump
2- the Comey letter which hung out there for nearly nine days while 10 to 15 million people voted

And Donald Trump loudly and often exploited both exaggerating what he felt both contained and what they said.

Campaigns and events effect voters. If they did not there would be no reason for anybody to spend dollar one on them. And in this case, the change in events most certainly points to having impact on the results of the election.
Click to expand...

When did Hillary call 10's of millions of voters irredeemably deplorable?

How many DNC chairs resigned or received calls to resign amid revelations of deceit, collusion and fraud? When did DWS resign, and when did Brazille resign from CNN and receive demands to resign from her role at the DNC?

Do you think these issues had a role in the final results? Do you believe Sanders voters had a problem with Hillary after learning the fix was in to defraud voters?

This Russian thing is a joke.

Voters are watching, I'd advise someone on the left step back and think about this strategy they are running.
 
haymarket said:
Why is it relevant? Is this an effort to excuse what the Russians did in their zeal to help Trump win?
Click to expand...

If anything, we should be thanking the Russians for proving what the Republicans have been saying all along - that Hillary was a lying, dishonest crook, who herself rigs elections.
 
haymarket said:
Lots of Republicans did not support Trump. Some even voted for Hillary. It was their hatred and loathing of Trump which moved them to do so - not any love of Clinton.

They signed public letters.
They took out ads.
They did public interviews.
Some were very vocal.

Of course, that just makes them FOOLS in your eyes for daring to buck the party choice. :doh:roll:
Click to expand...

So, you are saying that Republicans were trying to influence the election toward Clinton? I guess everything is a wash then.
 
ocean515 said:
When did Hillary call 10's of millions of voters irredeemably deplorable?
Click to expand...

Because the people she was describing were deplorable. She erred in the numbers attached to the name.

How many DNC chairs resigned or received calls to resign amid revelations of deceit, collusion and fraud? When did DWS resign, and when did Brazille resign from CNN and receive demands to resign from her role at the DNC?
Click to expand...

How many angels can fit on the head of a pin?

Do you think these issues had a role in the final results?
Click to expand...

Perhaps some Stein voters may have been motivated by that but my guess is all that is far far far too much inside Washington beltway trivet reach citizens.

Do you believe Sanders voters had a problem with Hillary after learning the fix was in to defraud voters?
Click to expand...

Yes - I think that hurt Clinton also. As did the wikileaks barrage and the Comey letter - but even more so.
 
Last edited:
Moderate Right said:
So, you are saying that Republicans were trying to influence the election toward Clinton? I guess everything is a wash then.
Click to expand...

Only if you blindly and you falsely equate the legitimate efforts of American citizens to participate in their own election with the interference of a foreign power to pick their candidate.
 
Moderate Right said:
If anything, we should be thanking the Russians for proving what the Republicans have been saying all along - that Hillary was a lying, dishonest crook, who herself rigs elections.
Click to expand...

Is that the position you want to take? You are thankful the Russians did it and you are thankful they gave the info to wikileaks and you are thankful that TrumP was there every day to exploit it through exaggeration, distortion and even lies after inviting publicly the Russians to get involved int he first place?

Interesting position.
 
haymarket said:
Only if you blindly and you falsely equate the legitimate efforts of American citizens to participate in their own election with the interference of a foreign power to pick their candidate.
Click to expand...

But then you seem to feel it is ok for us to interfere in numerous elections around the world.
 
haymarket said:
David Frum - a conservative - has an excellent piece that is more important today with the report on the Russians and wikileaks than it was days ago when released.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...p-made-russias-hacking-more-effective/511880/

It details how Trump not only used the daily wikileaks material that came from the Russians as part of a campaign to help Trump win - but exaggerated it to his supporters and to the nation.



This is not some so called "butt hurt liberal" claiming Trump is illegitimate because they are a "sore loser". This is a noted respected conservative writer openly questioning Trumps illegitimacy for the help from the Russians and his use of the material to win a close election.

Remember - Trump won Michigan by 0.3%
Trump won Wisconsin by 1 percent.
Trump won Pennsylvania by 1.2%.

Had he not won those three states he would not have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by over 2.8 million Americans votes.

And Trumps daily use of the wikileaks material helped him turn the election to him in the last days. Expert poll takers confirm that although they cannot say exactly to what extent. But the margin in those three states is so small that it defies rational thought to pretend it did not play a role and did not have an impact.

And then we have the open connection between the Trump campaign and Russian TV which strangely aired many of the anti-Clinton arguments right along with Trump and his allies. Michael Flynn has a connection with Russian TV and now has been appointed to an important position with Trump.

We knew about the Flynn - Russian TV connections months ago.

The Kremlin’s Candidate - POLITICO Magazine



Flynn was named by Trump as one of his top national security advisers and will begin on January 20th when Trump takes the office the Russians helped him win .
Click to expand...

Yes, we need another thread on Russia...:roll:
 
haymarket said:
Because the people she was describing were deplorable.
Click to expand...

LOL

The broken record gets played again.

Once again, you won't answer the question. I asked when did she insult 10's of millions of US Citizens?

You've destroyed your credulity haymarket. I don't know why you worked so hard to do that.

C'est la vie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom