US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9013

On October 18 2017 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:


What is it about this Russia controversy that is significantly different than US psyops/political ops around the world?

On October 18 2017 06:34 Jockmcplop wrote:


It worked exactly as intended.

On October 18 2017 06:59 Plansix wrote:
Dumb question, how did they prove she cheated?

The answers rarely came and when they did they usually didn't make any sense and have moved "goalposts" as much or more than LL.

On October 18 2017 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:...
What is it about this Russia controversy that is significantly different than US psyops/political ops around the world?
...

The legendary Bigfoot and other creatures like it have reportedly been spotted near a Northern California lake, according to a paranormal investigator.

Jeffrey Gonzalez, a self-described paranormal expert, said he heard about the sighting from a local farmer who said he saw the creature and five others running on his ranch near Avocado Lake.

“One of them, which was extremely tall, had a pig over its shoulder," Gonzalez said in comments obtained by Fox 26, a Fox News affiliate. "And the five scattered and the one with the pig was running so fast it didn’t see an irrigation pipe and it tripped, with the pig flying over."

On October 18 2017 07:03 Aquanim wrote:

Can you explain to me why this question is relevant?

Just because the United States has done something in the past doesn't make it okay.

(If your argument is along the lines of "being upset when it's done to you but not when your government does it is hypocritical", then I'm again going to ask why that's relevant to the question of whether being upset about it in this instance is justified.)

On October 18 2017 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:


Well they could admit they were hypocritical and then be mad and that would make sense. But people want to be hypocritical and maintain they aren't which doesn't work.

But the larger point is that this isn't especially remarkable other than it happened to us. That's what is upsetting people and they don't want to own that they passively (some actively supported) accepted it forever until someone was capable of retaliating and now they want to throw a fit.

It's like picking on your little brother for years until he gets big enough to fight back and then immediately complaining to mom about how he's abusing you. It looks stupid.

To reiterate, the problem isn't that it happens, it's that someone was able to fight back and it hurt a politician they wanted to win.

In a follow-up email, Faber further defended the note: "If stating some historical facts makes me a racist, then I suppose that I am a racist. For years, Japanese were condemned because they denied the Nanking massacre."

On October 18 2017 07:16 Aquanim wrote:

Just to be absolutely clear, you are saying that Russia's actions with respect to the 2016 election are unremarkable and not a problem?

On October 18 2017 07:18 PhoenixVoid wrote:


I... really fail to understand what his point is here. The Japanese were rightfully condemned for denying a massacre which happened, and somehow this connects to his first sentence about how "stating some historical facts makes me a racist, then I suppose that I am a racist."

On October 18 2017 07:16 Aquanim wrote:

Just to be absolutely clear, you are saying that Russia's actions with respect to the 2016 election are unremarkable and not a problem?

On October 18 2017 07:22 Mohdoo wrote:


I think it's just the whole edgelord "and yet the US imperialists stick their noses in everyone else's business omg puppet dictators" shpeal. It's like when people post on FB about how no one is throwing a fit over Somalia but we all care about the attack in Las Vegas.

On October 18 2017 07:22 Mohdoo wrote:


I think it's just the whole edgelord "and yet the US imperialists stick their noses in everyone else's business omg puppet dictators" shpeal. It's like when people post on FB about how no one is throwing a fit over Somalia but we all care about the attack in Las Vegas.

On October 18 2017 07:25 Jockmcplop wrote:


To be honest I think the reason everyone's making such a huge deal about the Russia thing is that they don't like being confronted with evidence of how easy it is to manipulate large groups of people on the internet and how fragile that makes democracy look.

On October 18 2017 07:24 GreenHorizons wrote:...
I managed to tune out most of the "OMG Russia!" hysteria but this new trend of trying to put longstanding divisions under the heading of "Russian influence" is total bullshit.
...

On October 18 2017 07:35 Aquanim wrote:

I don't disagree with the notion that the systemic problems with your country have a way larger impact on election outcomes and the like than Russian influence does. It would be almost impossible for that not to be the case outside of a puppet state.

I'm also greatly troubled by past and present American foreign policy.

However, I also think that covert foreign influence in other nations' elections (such as in this case) is a serious problem, and dismissing the entire business as hypocrisy, business as usual, or people just being mad Clinton lost, or whatever your flavour of choice is, seems to me to be dangerously missing the point (even if some subsets of the people upset about Russian interference can be described in those ways).

On October 18 2017 07:34 Mohdoo wrote:


The weakness of the weak is definitely the soft underbelly of democracy. When masses of people can be so heavily influenced, it kinda tosses a wrench in the whole thing. All of the overly romantic nonsense about "omg everyone has a voice <3 <3" looks a lot less noble. The amount of actual fake news circulating around FB and influencing people's votes really calls into question the value of every voice. If all you need to do to change ~1000 people's minds is design a semi-decent website and publish 100% false bullshit, the value of those people's minds becomes really questionable.