Why Russia Will Help the Democrats Next

[homersapien 11,369]

Interesting "big picture" perspective on foreign election interference and why a weak response is so dangerous to the U.S.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/19/russia-democrats-election-meddling-219020

Election meddling is cheap, effective and here to stay. And hurting the Republicans is the smart strategy for the midterms.

excerpt:

Democratic control of one or both houses of Congress might, from a brass tacks Chinese or Russian perspective, guarantee two years of a paralyzed America, a country continuing to look inward, not outward. And Democratic control of Congress could help arrest Trump’s trade war, which actually could be harming China’s growth and rise—and the one thing China can’t afford to lose right now is it’s economic growth. A Democratic House might lead to a polarizing impeachment fight that would further exacerbate America’s political divides and weaken the country globally, at least in the short term.

China doesn’t need to sideline the U.S. forever—just long enough to have built itself into the global military and economic superpower befitting its status as the world’s most populous nation. Two or four more years of America refusing to engage on the world stage and undermining rules-based systems like the World Trade Organization, and of President Trump storming out of G-7 summits would go a long way toward giving China the space it needs to solidify new alliances and build new systems that aren’t focused on the post-World War II Bretton Woods-style comity that aided the U.S. over the past 70 years.

Similarly, Russia might decide that its aid to Trump was so successful, that he's been so effective at advancing Putin's goals, that they want to keep him in power past 2020. A good way to help Trump get reelected is to give him a Democratic Congress to rail against for the next two years. There’s a pretty straightforward trend in American electoral politics: Recent incumbent presidents lose ground in the midterms, then win second terms.

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Similarly, Russia might decide that its aid to Trump was so successful,

That is bull crap. You guys have hollered so much about Russia that you are actually beginning to believe the hogwash.....disturbing Brother Homer.

[homersapien 11,369]

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

That is bull crap. You guys have hollered so much about Russia that you are actually beginning to believe the hogwash.....disturbing Brother Homer.

Didn't read the piece, huh?

 

“There should be no doubt that Russia perceives its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations,” Coats said in February. “We expect Russia to continue using propaganda, social media, false-flag personas, sympathetic spokespeople and other means of influence to try to exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States.” .....

....Vladimir Putin’s goal isn’t—and never was—to help the Republican Party, at least in the long run. Boosting Trump’s presidential campaign was a means to Putin’s end: Weakening the West, and exploiting the seams and divisions of the West’s open democracies to undermine our legitimacy and moral standing. Russia accomplished that with great success in 2016—and it’s a strategy that is continuing to pay dividends today. “Their purpose was to sow discontent and mistrust in our elections; they wanted us to be at each others’ throat when it was over,” former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Mike Rogers said last year. “It’s influencing, I would say, legislative process today. That’s wildly successful.”

Just look at the past week of foreign policy, during which Trump slammed NATO, insulted German Chancellor Angela Merkel, undermined British Prime Minister Theresa May and the government of our closest ally, called Europe a “foe,” and mused out loud about whether he would honor the foundational mutual-defense premise of NATO. Not to mention the bizarre news conference with Putin that the BBC summed up as: “Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit.” It would have been hard for Putin to plan a more effective week to undermine and divide the West if he had orchestrated and stage-managed the entire process from a Kremlin whiteboard.

 

 

 

 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Didn't read the piece, huh?

No. This stuff is getting ridiculous and you are way to intelligent not to realize it Brother Homer. 

[homersapien 11,369]

On 7/20/2018 at 6:34 PM, SaltyTiger said:

No. This stuff is getting ridiculous and you are way to intelligent not to realize it Brother Homer. 

If you didn't read it, you have no standing to criticize it.  There is nothing about this that is "ridiculous".

Got a counterpoint?   Then express it. In context. 

Ignorant poo-flinging doesn't meet the standards of this forum.

 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Ignorant poo-flinging doesn't meet the standards of this forum.

I  apologize. Did not realize we are in the "no poo-fling" zone. Saw the R word and just tired of it like most normal Americans. Please accept my apology. Carry on with the other respondents about the article.

[homersapien 11,369]

17 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

I  apologize. Did not realize we are in the "no poo-fling" zone. Saw the R word and just tired of it like most normal Americans. Please accept my apology. Carry on with the other respondents about the article.

I doubt there will be any.  Once poo-flinging is off limits, you guys seem to get pretty quiet.  Wonder why that is?

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

Wonder why that is?

After about 4 paragraphs of the article I was tired of the stuff again Brother Homer. 

[homersapien 11,369]

17 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

After about 4 paragraphs of the article I was tired of the stuff again Brother Homer. 

So you felt compelled to fling some poo generally?  Just couldn't muster up the energy to pick something out in particular to critique or refute?

I don't think many of you really understand how a forum is supposed to work.  To simply use it to hurl gratuitous insults amounts to disrespecting the forum as well as yourself.  It's a waste of everyone's time.

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

It's a waste of everyone's time.

Sorry to waste your time Brother Homer. I think a lot of time has been wasted with this Russia narrative. You lead the charge around here. Your article is completely correct in that it could be the dems next. 

We know Russia and others are adversaries and will launch another cyber attack. The stuff is not news.Been around long before President Trump. 

Problem I have with it is the way leftist and the liberal media have ratcheted the thing up to take out a duly elected president. Russia or Putin have done little concerning "sowing discontent" IMHO. You guys and the media have taken care of that.    

[AuburnNTexas 7,141]

I believe that the Russians tried to influence the election not to help Trump but to hurt Hillary. They like most people assumed Hillary would win. They wanted to weaken Hillary so that she would be coming from a position of weakness and not strength. A few things happened that changed the outcome, wanting a conservative Supreme Court Justice fired up the conservative base, multiple Bill and Hillary scandals weakened the Clinton campaign, Hillary ran a weak poorly thought out campaign and was not able to fire up her base. The Democratic Party took the white middle and lower class  Mid-West and East Coast vote for granted and did not court them.

Trump did slightly better with Blacks and Latinos then expected as illegal immigration affects poor Blacks, Whites and Latino's in helping to keep minimum wage down and taking jobs from those groups. The old saying is its the economy stupid. What many don't realize immigration affects the economy or at least people think it does which is the same effect.

The point of this article is Russia wanted to hurt the US. Initially it was to weaken Hillary they didn't expect her to lose, now will they want to hurt Republicans I believe the answer is yes because the motive is the same to hurt the US. I don't agree with every specific in this article but I agree with the basic principal in this article which is that Russia and other players will use this and similar tactics to hurt the US. Homer and I seldom agree and we probably would disagree on some of the points in this article but I agree with Homer that this is a valid article and it is about Russia doing what it can to hurt the US.

The article never mentioned that what the Russians were doing was trying to weaken Hillary that part of my response is my view on what I thought they were trying to do based on the fact that nobody myself included expected Trump to win.

 

[homersapien 11,369]

On 7/23/2018 at 8:10 PM, SaltyTiger said:

Sorry to waste your time Brother Homer. I think a lot of time has been wasted with this Russia narrative. You lead the charge around here. Your article is completely correct in that it could be the dems next. 

We know Russia and others are adversaries and will launch another cyber attack. The stuff is not news.Been around long before President Trump. 

Problem I have with it is the way leftist and the liberal media have ratcheted the thing up to take out a duly elected president. Russia or Putin have done little concerning "sowing discontent" IMHO. You guys and the media have taken care of that.    

How is it a "waste of time" to investigate foreign influence in our elections? 

Especially when the deniers are doing so entirely for partisan reasons.  Do you really think that's good for the country? Are partisan politics more important to you then the general interests of our nation?

And you sound exactly like Trump trying to conflate the investigation of Russian influence to a personal attack on himself.  Time will tell about that. 

Whether or not the Trump campaign is guilty of conspiring to take advantage of Russian interference, the Mueller investigation is the only way for that to be revealed.  Either way, it's certainly in the best interests of the country to know what happened so we can prevent it. 

There's not a bit of rationality in your post.  Seriously, blaming the left and the media?  How about blaming the Russians?   

And it's not the media's fault the Trump campaign had so many links to Russia. Obviously it's the implications of those links that Trump fears, but they have little to do with the basic fact Russia tried to affect our election. 

Fair and free elections are one of the bedrocks of our system.  Any rational citizen should be concerned about their being compromised by a foreign power.  Furthermore, a rational citizen would not prioritize Trump's political future over our country's future

 

 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

How about blaming the Russians?   

I do not blame the Russians because I expect such things from them. Get real.  I simply said this deal has been ratcheted up to oust our president. My opinion

all of your arguments belong in the other forum.

 

"Fair and free elections are one of the bedrocks of our system".  Good grief!

We had a fair and free election in 2016 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

@SaltyTiger is right. Complete dog crud. These kinds of OPs belong in other forum IMO. People want to complain that there's  not enough intellectual conversations circulating around on here, but then these are the kinds of topics pushed forth. 

[homersapien 11,369]

13 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

I do not blame the Russians because I expect such things from them. Get real.  I simply said this deal has been ratcheted up to oust our president. My opinion

all of your arguments belong in the other forum.

 

"Fair and free elections are one of the bedrocks of our system".  Good grief!

We had a fair and free election in 2016 

That makes a lot of sense.  Don't blame the Russians because that's just their nature.

At least it explains your support of Trump.

An election that features foreign interference is flawed in my book.  Such flawed elections is a threat to our system, even if it happens to help the candidate of your choice.

[homersapien 11,369]

13 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

@SaltyTiger is right. Complete dog crud. These kinds of OPs belong in other forum IMO. People want to complain that there's  not enough intellectual conversations circulating around on here, but then these are the kinds of topics pushed forth. 

That's just BS.  Russian interference is a legitimate topic to discuss seriously.  You just can't deal with it because you have a problem with the fact they supported your candidate in the last election.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

That's just BS.  Russian interference is a legitimate topic to discuss seriously.  You just can't deal with it because you have a problem with the fact they supported your candidate in the last election.

“I can’t deal with it.” Yeah that’s exactly it. 

For future reference, just try to post something more intellectually demanding. We’re keeping you accountable. Do better.

[AuburnNTexas 7,141]

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

That makes a lot of sense.  Don't blame the Russians because that's just their nature.

At least it explains your support of Trump.

An election that features foreign interference is flawed in my book.  Such flawed elections is a threat to our system, even if it happens to help the candidate of your choice.

The Russians have been doing it for years. The WH at the time knew about it and did nothing. Like me and others they were so sure of Hillary win they didn't worry about the Russians. The article you posted now says that the Russians and others are going to come at the Republicans next. So it is not about who they support but how we protect ourselves from them.

Your premise that an election that has foreign Influence is flawed is a crock as all elections have had foreign influence. If you don't think the Germans and English before World Wat II were not trying to influence the election you are naive. Other countries have always tried to influence elections including our own country trying to impact other countries.

It is debatable if we really needed a Special Counsel but do not be surprised if the crimes or incompetence that are found are the DNC paying an operative to either find or invent something on Trump using Russian sources and the inadequacies of the response of the WH and the Justice Department in protecting us from the Russian attacks.

[homersapien 11,369]

28 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

The Russians have been doing it for years. The WH at the time knew about it and did nothing. Like me and others they were so sure of Hillary win they didn't worry about the Russians. The article you posted now says that the Russians and others are going to come at the Republicans next. So it is not about who they support but how we protect ourselves from them.

Your premise that an election that has foreign Influence is flawed is a crock as all elections have had foreign influence. If you don't think the Germans and English before World Wat II were not trying to influence the election you are naive. Other countries have always tried to influence elections including our own country trying to impact other countries.

It is debatable if we really needed a Special Counsel but do not be surprised if the crimes or incompetence that are found are the DNC paying an operative to either find or invent something on Trump using Russian sources and the inadequacies of the response of the WH and the Justice Department in protecting us from the Russian attacks.

Well, hell, maybe the Russians will help the Democrats this time around.  I won't have any problem with that.  

[aubiefifty 16,775]

On 7/27/2018 at 9:17 AM, AuburnNTexas said:

The Russians have been doing it for years. The WH at the time knew about it and did nothing. Like me and others they were so sure of Hillary win they didn't worry about the Russians. The article you posted now says that the Russians and others are going to come at the Republicans next. So it is not about who they support but how we protect ourselves from them.

Your premise that an election that has foreign Influence is flawed is a crock as all elections have had foreign influence. If you don't think the Germans and English before World Wat II were not trying to influence the election you are naive. Other countries have always tried to influence elections including our own country trying to impact other countries.

It is debatable if we really needed a Special Counsel but do not be surprised if the crimes or incompetence that are found are the DNC paying an operative to either find or invent something on Trump using Russian sources and the inadequacies of the response of the WH and the Justice Department in protecting us from the Russian attacks.

show me a link proving the white house did nothing about it please..............

[Elephant Tipper 430]

On 7/30/2018 at 3:57 PM, aubiefifty said:

show me a link proving the white house did nothing about it please..............

Not only did the Obama administration not do anything, Susan Rice gave specific orders to not intervene as Michael Daniel, WH cybersecurity chief, testified before Congress.  Victoria Nuland, former Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, corroborated Daniel's testimony in her testimony before Congress.

Obama cyber chief confirms 'stand down' order against Russian cyberattacks in summer 2016

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-cyber-chief-confirms-stand-order-russian-cyberattacks-summer-2016-204935758.html

[Elephant Tipper 430]

On 7/20/2018 at 3:29 PM, homersapien said:

Interesting "big picture" perspective on foreign election interference and why a weak response is so dangerous to the U.S.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/19/russia-democrats-election-meddling-219020

Election meddling is cheap, effective and here to stay. And hurting the Republicans is the smart strategy for the midterms.

excerpt:

Democratic control of one or both houses of Congress might, from a brass tacks Chinese or Russian perspective, guarantee two years of a paralyzed America, a country continuing to look inward, not outward. And Democratic control of Congress could help arrest Trump’s trade war, which actually could be harming China’s growth and rise—and the one thing China can’t afford to lose right now is it’s economic growth. A Democratic House might lead to a polarizing impeachment fight that would further exacerbate America’s political divides and weaken the country globally, at least in the short term.

China doesn’t need to sideline the U.S. forever—just long enough to have built itself into the global military and economic superpower befitting its status as the world’s most populous nation. Two or four more years of America refusing to engage on the world stage and undermining rules-based systems like the World Trade Organization, and of President Trump storming out of G-7 summits would go a long way toward giving China the space it needs to solidify new alliances and build new systems that aren’t focused on the post-World War II Bretton Woods-style comity that aided the U.S. over the past 70 years.

Similarly, Russia might decide that its aid to Trump was so successful, that he's been so effective at advancing Putin's goals, that they want to keep him in power past 2020. A good way to help Trump get reelected is to give him a Democratic Congress to rail against for the next two years. There’s a pretty straightforward trend in American electoral politics: Recent incumbent presidents lose ground in the midterms, then win second terms.

You posted info that's not just wrong, it's blatantly deceiving.  Maybe you're aware, maybe not.

You stated, " Interesting "big picture" perspective on foreign election interference ".  As Obama, Clapper, Brennan have stated plus Director Wray yesterday along with other intelligence officials have all stated, that NO votes were changed, ie, the 2016 ELECTION.  When you use the word "election", that refers to the actual day of voting.  Russians, et al, however did interfere with the 2016 campaigns.  Totally different perspective.  In the article even G. Graff, the author, and Dan Coats slip between the two terms interchangeably which is inaccurate.  This is a disservice to the public and only brings fuel to mindless, endless straw man arguments that only serve to divide America, not resolve real issues.

The article though, as you stated, does bring a "big picture" perspective. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

30 minutes ago, Elephant Tipper said:

You posted info that's not just wrong, it's blatantly deceiving.  Maybe you're aware, maybe not.

You stated, " Interesting "big picture" perspective on foreign election interference ".  As Obama, Clapper, Brennan have stated plus Director Wray yesterday along with other intelligence officials have all stated, that NO votes were changed, ie, the 2016 ELECTION.  When you use the word "election", that refers to the actual day of voting.  Russians, et al, however did interfere with the 2016 campaigns.  Totally different perspective.  In the article even G. Graff, the author, and Dan Coats slip between the two terms interchangeably which is inaccurate.  This is a disservice to the public and only brings fuel to mindless, endless straw man arguments that only serve to divide America, not resolve real issues.

The article though, as you stated, does bring a "big picture" perspective. 

I’ve tried to point out porous logic before. I’m thankful you see it too. Let’s hope he starts taking our advice. Would do him well.

[homersapien 11,369]

1 hour ago, Elephant Tipper said:

You posted info that's not just wrong, it's blatantly deceiving.  Maybe you're aware, maybe not.

You stated, " Interesting "big picture" perspective on foreign election interference ".  As Obama, Clapper, Brennan have stated plus Director Wray yesterday along with other intelligence officials have all stated, that NO votes were changed, ie, the 2016 ELECTION.  When you use the word "election", that refers to the actual day of voting.  Russians, et al, however did interfere with the 2016 campaigns.  Totally different perspective.  In the article even G. Graff, the author, and Dan Coats slip between the two terms interchangeably which is inaccurate.  This is a disservice to the public and only brings fuel to mindless, endless straw man arguments that only serve to divide America, not resolve real issues.

The article though, as you stated, does bring a "big picture" perspective. 

Well, excuuuuuse me. 

I used the word "election" in the general sense, which included the nominations and campaign.  That's a common generalization.  When referring to an "election" people often mean everything associated with it.  I certainly wouldn't call it "blatantly deceiving".  

But I will concede you are technically correct (at least as far as I know).  The Russians didn't change any of the vote totals, but I don't know if they tried or not.  I don't see how it would be possible unless the internet is part of the states balloting process. I suspect that's rare.

Regardless, foreign intervention in our campaign process is serious enough without actual manipulation of the vote tallying process.  

 

[homersapien 11,369]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I’ve tried to point out porous logic before. I’m thankful you see it too. Let’s hope he starts taking our advice. Would do him well.

You are so funny.