- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:15 am to burke985
Nothing. I'm kinda shocked that the dems aren't upset about Hillary actually rigging their primary. If I'm not mistaken, It was gonna be Bernie and Trump.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:17 am to shinerfan
quote:
Could you kindly explain to us Neanderthals how these things are so different?
If you really need me to explain it.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:19 am to Pinecone Repair
quote:
It's weird that we're two pages in and there's not one good answer.
There are several. Whoever said "they didn't".
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:37 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
If you really need me to explain it.
I do. I really fail to see a difference in influencing an election and influencing the outcome of an election. Unless you meant that the effort to influence the election failed, in which case its the most poorly phrased gotcha I've ever seen. There's no substantive difference between the two.
Smug and meaningless at the same time. Very impressive.
This post was edited on 5/15/17 at 10:41 am
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:46 am to burke985
quote:
What exactly did Russians do to stop me from pushing button for HRC.
That's what they're investigating..
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:48 am to burke985
What would the Dems do if Russia started importing "undocumented" Russian immigrants through Mexico to start voting republican?
It would be awkward when they cry for a wall and an investigation into voter fraud, or god forbid ID laws.
It would be awkward when they cry for a wall and an investigation into voter fraud, or god forbid ID laws.
This post was edited on 5/15/17 at 10:50 am
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:51 am to EKG
Hillary had a donor list a mile long from foreign countries "paying to play", many of whom didn't have the US best interests in mind.
Does anyone really think the Dem machine didn't/doesn't have some type of "scratch my back I'll scratch yours" agreement? Delusion is a powerful brain decognitive
Does anyone really think the Dem machine didn't/doesn't have some type of "scratch my back I'll scratch yours" agreement? Delusion is a powerful brain decognitive
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:53 am to Sevendust912
quote:
Spread fake news and propoganda is my understanding.
Unlike the DNC who was saying "People would literally be dying in the streets." If ObamaCare were repealed.
Or, "Trump will deport all immigrants!"
I have a laundry list of things the Dems said that were false to try to influence the election. Not to mention, forcing Hillary on an unwitting Democratic populace.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:54 am to burke985
quote:
What exactly did Russians do to stop me from pushing button for HRC.
They exposed the criminal shenanigans of Team Hillary. So the expose' is the bad thing, not the shenanigans. That's what the left is trying to tell you.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:58 am to skrayper
quote:
If I type it out, are you sure you'll be able to read it?
I'm sure some of us would. You offered, now provide, please.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 10:58 am to shinerfan
Short of finding evidence of them hacking voting machines and manipulating the numbers, we'll never know if their influence had any impact on the outcome of the election. And before anyone loses their mind, I am NOT saying that occurred. Just saying that is likely the only way anyone will be able to prove they had an impact on the actual outcome.
But to believe they influenced it, you have to believe every credible source that has said they were behind the Wikileaks stuff, which many on this board still don't believe. Many of the releases were timed to change the national narrative, usually a narrative that was negative towards Trump. This board ate up the Wikileak releases. Every one of them got a pinned thread to the top of the page.
But to believe they influenced it, you have to believe every credible source that has said they were behind the Wikileaks stuff, which many on this board still don't believe. Many of the releases were timed to change the national narrative, usually a narrative that was negative towards Trump. This board ate up the Wikileak releases. Every one of them got a pinned thread to the top of the page.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:00 am to The Spleen
quote:
Did Russia type those emails for Podesta?
No surprise your pea brain missed the point.
Why do liberals always say. "You wouldn't understand" or "It's too complicated for you." or "it's over your head." when people ask them a question? You can never get a straight answer. It's just excuse after excuse why they won't answer a question.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:02 am to burke985
With Wikileaks, thousands of fake Facebook accounts , fake Twitter accounts, and many other internet fake news outlets.
They did it through fake news laced with HRC propaganda that had some real news intertwined. Even Trump quoted some of the Russian fake news in his speeches.
They did it through fake news laced with HRC propaganda that had some real news intertwined. Even Trump quoted some of the Russian fake news in his speeches.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:04 am to The Spleen
I think that's because the Wikileaks stuff that leaked the emails was actual hard concrete proof of the DNC undermining its own primary, blatant cheating, and collusion between main stream media outlets/journalists with the Democratic Party. Something that's been completely overlooked and cannot be harped on enough.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:05 am to MizzouBS
Just for fun.
Can someone explain to me why, after gaining information upon a candidate given near certain odds of winning, the Russians chose to make a deal with the candidate with near certain odds of losing?
That's just fricking weird.
Can someone explain to me why, after gaining information upon a candidate given near certain odds of winning, the Russians chose to make a deal with the candidate with near certain odds of losing?
That's just fricking weird.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:06 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Why do liberals always say. "You wouldn't understand" or "It's too complicated for you." or "it's over your head." when people ask them a question?
Because my initial post in this thread(which you didn't quote) that the question was in response to really spoke for itself. His question showed he completely missed the point.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:06 am to MizzouBS
quote:
With Wikileaks, thousands of fake Facebook accounts , fake Twitter accounts, and many other internet fake news outlets. They did it through fake news laced with HRC propaganda that had some real news intertwined. Even Trump quoted some of the Russian fake news in his speeches.
You do realize that everything you listed above existed PRO Hillary also. Right? You do realize this, right?
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:09 am to Magician2
quote:
I think that's because the Wikileaks stuff that leaked the emails was actual hard concrete proof of the DNC undermining its own primary, blatant cheating, and collusion between main stream media outlets/journalists with the Democratic Party.
And if any of that influenced people's voting decision, then you have to come to the conclusion that Russians influenced the election. Someone at least gets it.
It'd be more honest for people to admit Russia influenced the election, but the ends justified the means.
Posted on 5/15/17 at 11:09 am to The Spleen
quote:
Short of finding evidence of them hacking voting machines and manipulating the numbers, we'll never know if their influence had any impact on the outcome of the election.
I actually agree with this. There is no way of knowing if they had any impact, and if they did how big of an impact. The only way of knowing this is if they found they hacked the voting machines, and I believe they have already ruled that out.
quote:
But to believe they influenced it, you have to believe every credible source that has said they were behind the Wikileaks stuff, which many on this board still don't believe.
Hard to blame anybody for not believing the press when they have already shown their bias....quite clearly.
quote:
Many of the releases were timed to change the national narrative, usually a narrative that was negative towards Trump.
Timed? Possible. but they were released by WikiLeaks, not the Russians.
quote:
This board ate up the Wikileak releases. Every one of them got a pinned thread to the top of the page.
Of course it did. It was major news. It was actual e-mails exposing corruption of one of the major parties. Are you insinuating that the left would have done differently if the situation had been reversed?
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News