Which is worse

[Dragonlady]

4

a foreign government trying to influence an election, or our own government trying to influence an election.


just for discussion purposes lets assume that the Russians tried to influence our election and the FBI and DOJ tried to influence our election. Doesn't matter who they tried to help or hurt.

Which is worse?

The media tried to influence the election more than any other group.

By beating up on Hillary about emails at every turn and covering all of Trump's rallies from start to finish? Yeah, okay...

$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump

No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Look at you, parroting charges and lies in the Putin anti-Clinton propaganda campaign and then saying “that’s who she is”. The overwhelming body of evidence collected in the 17 investigations of the Clintons over the years say that’s NOT who she is.

No witnesses, no evidence, no charges, no indictments. And yet you believe she is a criminal. On what evidence?

 

[jwoodie]

No witnesses, no evidence, no charges, no indictments. And yet you believe she is a criminal. On what evidence?

Do you believe that destroying subpoenaed evidence is not a crime?

 

[Redfish]

4

The media tried to influence the election more than any other group.

By beating up on Hillary about emails at every turn and covering all of Trump's rallies from start to finish? Yeah, okay...

$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump

No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Oh fishy...it’s sad you’re so ill informed.

It’s true that if California’s vote totals were entirely removed from the equation then Hillary Clinton would lose her popular vote lead, but the logic of that assessment is somewhat flawed. One could, for example, arbitrarily remove the states of New York and Massachusetts from the vote count, docking Clinton roughly 2.6 million votes (and wiping out her popular vote win). Or one could similarly claim that Trump’s electoral vote victory “came entirely from Texas,” since if Clinton had taken the Lone Star state (and its 38 electoral votes), she would also have won the overall election. One could combine any number of states’ vote counts and exclude them from the aggregate, but doing so wouldn’t undo the basic mathematical principle that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states. In this case, California wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 61.4 million votes she received in other states.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

first of all, snopes has been proven to be a left wing propaganda site. Secondly, the quote makes my point, to wit " that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states"

which is exactly what I have been saying, the 3mill vote delta in California is not significant as to who won. So your continued rant that "she won the popular vote" is proven to be bullshit by your own citiation. Thanks for proving me right and confirming that you are ignorant.

 

[Redfish]

4

The media tried to influence the election more than any other group.

By beating up on Hillary about emails at every turn and covering all of Trump's rallies from start to finish? Yeah, okay...

$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump

No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Look at you, parroting charges and lies in the Putin anti-Clinton propaganda campaign and then saying “that’s who she is”. The overwhelming body of evidence collected in the 17 investigations of the Clintons over the years say that’s NOT who she is.

No witnesses, no evidence, no charges, no indictments. And yet you believe she is a criminal. On what evidence?

Comey laid out her guilt in detail under oath, then exceeded his authority by refusing to turn the case over to the DOJ because she "didn't intend to violate the law" and "was too ignorant to realize that she had".

Yes, I believe she is a criminal, so does more than half of America and most of the world.

 

[miketx]

One can only ask the real question buried under all the lies, why do the leftard morons want war with Russia?

 

[Redfish]

a foreign government trying to influence an election, or our own government trying to influence an election.


just for discussion purposes lets assume that the Russians tried to influence our election and the FBI and DOJ tried to influence our election. Doesn't matter who they tried to help or hurt.

Which is worse?

I'm coming around to thinking that before the election Obama should have ordered the DOJ and FBI to release all information about Trump's connections to the Russians. But thanks for the OP

how about all information about Clinton's connections to Russia? should they have been released too? There is no evidence of Trump/Russia collusion. Mueller is having to go back 30 years into the lives of Trump associates to find any offences and none of them have anything to do with Trump or the campaign.

 

[Redfish]

you said that we did not know about the Russia/collusion investigation until after the election, that is not true. Mueller was charged to investigate Russian attempts to influence our election, not to engage in a witchhunt of the last 30 years of everyone involved in the Trump campaign. His committee consists solely of democrats and Hillary contributors, how can anyone think this is not biased?

No fishy, that's not what I said. I pointed out how stupid your deep state conspiracy theory is because we, the American people, were not informed that the Trump campaign was under counter intelligence investigation until AFTER the election. A "deep state partisan FBI would have disclosed that had they been out to get the orange oligarch.

your continual partisan lying and inability to participate in a civil debate is why I put you on ignore, and may do so again.

Where have I been uncivil? Pointing out facts you have no response to? You poor thing!!! Vicious!

when you post talking points and cites from partisan opinion mills that is both uncivil and disingenuous. You will not participate in a normal discussion because you know that the facts will always prove you and your liberal ideology wrong.''

Link to these uncivil sources, fishy.

On that topic, can you please tell us when and where socialism, communism, progressivism, or liberalism have ever worked in any country? Give us some good examples of success of the ideology that you want for the USA.

Trying to flee your own thread? When were we "on that topic"?

Pure socialism, just like pure capitalism, doesn't work. You need a good dose of both.

uncivil sources: CNN, MSNBC, NY times, Wash post, NBC, the dem party, Maxine waters, Pelosi, schumer, the Clintons, anything funded by Soros, antifa, Farrakhan, BLM, Kimmel, the view. I could go on, but maybe you get it.

what is the difference between capitalism and pure capitalism? socialism and pure socialism. careful, altruism exists in both but is the major aspect of socialism, except for the rulers of socialistic countries, the rulers are dictatorial capitalists.

Links fishy....shouting out names like you’ve got some weird Tourette’s Syndrome is not proof of uncivil behavior.

I'm sure that by now you have seen Whoopi's vile, insane rant. Perfect example of the party of tolerance and love.

 

[Redfish]

We spent 20 years influencing elections with tanks and artillery in Vietnam. In the end, we weren't very influential.

Actually the United States was very influential. Then it abandoned South Vietnam in 1973. It was only after the United States abandoned South Vietnam in 1973 that the country and government collapsed two years later in 1975 from the Soviet supported North Vietnamese offensive that rolled through the country the same way Hitler did in Poland in 1939.

correct, and 58,000 americans died for nothing in Kennedy and Johnson's war.

 

[Redfish]

back to the OP. Does anyone think that internal corruption to influence an election is not worse than foreigners trying to influence an election? If so, why even have elections? just let the DC elites appoint our leaders. that's the way it works in Russia, China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, etc. Are we not better than them?

 

[dannyboys]

EVERY country tries to "influence" elections in other countries.

yes, they do. but you ignored the question

Neither is "worse". Both are just as bad.
We all live in a very bad world with some very bad people who are running it.
No one's hands are clean.
Obama tried to influence the election in Israel. I didn't notice any LIBs screaming their heads off.
Obama stuck his nose in the UK election. Same reaction from the LIB MSM........silence with a little grin on their faces.
If we all knew what was going on behind the scenes none of us would dare leave our homes.
Let's all take some deep breaths and enjoy the day. They are numbered.

 

[dannyboys]

4

The media tried to influence the election more than any other group.

By beating up on Hillary about emails at every turn and covering all of Trump's rallies from start to finish? Yeah, okay...

$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump

No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Look at you, parroting charges and lies in the Putin anti-Clinton propaganda campaign and then saying “that’s who she is”. The overwhelming body of evidence collected in the 17 investigations of the Clintons over the years say that’s NOT who she is.

No witnesses, no evidence, no charges, no indictments. And yet you believe she is a criminal. On what evidence?

When the foxes are counting the chickens the result is predictable.
What until the new AG Ted Cruz takes over.
I hope a few dozen top officials from the Obama administration enjoy eating Pho everyday in VN.

 

[Seawytch]

4

By beating up on Hillary about emails at every turn and covering all of Trump's rallies from start to finish? Yeah, okay...

$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump

No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Oh fishy...it’s sad you’re so ill informed.

It’s true that if California’s vote totals were entirely removed from the equation then Hillary Clinton would lose her popular vote lead, but the logic of that assessment is somewhat flawed. One could, for example, arbitrarily remove the states of New York and Massachusetts from the vote count, docking Clinton roughly 2.6 million votes (and wiping out her popular vote win). Or one could similarly claim that Trump’s electoral vote victory “came entirely from Texas,” since if Clinton had taken the Lone Star state (and its 38 electoral votes), she would also have won the overall election. One could combine any number of states’ vote counts and exclude them from the aggregate, but doing so wouldn’t undo the basic mathematical principle that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states. In this case, California wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 61.4 million votes she received in other states.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

first of all, snopes has been proven to be a left wing propaganda site. Secondly, the quote makes my point, to wit " that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states"

which is exactly what I have been saying, the 3mill vote delta in California is not significant as to who won. So your continued rant that "she won the popular vote" is proven to be bullshit by your own citiation. Thanks for proving me right and confirming that you are ignorant.

I proved you 100% wrong...saying it was “all California” is ridiculous. More telling is that Tump’s margin of victory in a number of swing states micro targeted by Russia was fewer than 20,000 voters.

 

[Seawytch]

No fishy, that's not what I said. I pointed out how stupid your deep state conspiracy theory is because we, the American people, were not informed that the Trump campaign was under counter intelligence investigation until AFTER the election. A "deep state partisan FBI would have disclosed that had they been out to get the orange oligarch.


Where have I been uncivil? Pointing out facts you have no response to? You poor thing!!! Vicious!

when you post talking points and cites from partisan opinion mills that is both uncivil and disingenuous. You will not participate in a normal discussion because you know that the facts will always prove you and your liberal ideology wrong.''

Link to these uncivil sources, fishy.

On that topic, can you please tell us when and where socialism, communism, progressivism, or liberalism have ever worked in any country? Give us some good examples of success of the ideology that you want for the USA.

Trying to flee your own thread? When were we "on that topic"?

Pure socialism, just like pure capitalism, doesn't work. You need a good dose of both.

uncivil sources: CNN, MSNBC, NY times, Wash post, NBC, the dem party, Maxine waters, Pelosi, schumer, the Clintons, anything funded by Soros, antifa, Farrakhan, BLM, Kimmel, the view. I could go on, but maybe you get it.

what is the difference between capitalism and pure capitalism? socialism and pure socialism. careful, altruism exists in both but is the major aspect of socialism, except for the rulers of socialistic countries, the rulers are dictatorial capitalists.

Links fishy....shouting out names like you’ve got some weird Tourette’s Syndrome is not proof of uncivil behavior.

I'm sure that by now you have seen Whoopi's vile, insane rant. Perfect example of the party of tolerance and love.

Nope...and still waiting for a single link to all this incivility that is so “new”. Come on snowflake, where is all this hate that’s got your panties twisted.

 

[Seawytch]

back to the OP. Does anyone think that internal corruption to influence an election is not worse than foreigners trying to influence an election? If so, why even have elections? just let the DC elites appoint our leaders. that's the way it works in Russia, China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, etc. Are we not better than them?

Is a hypothetical thing that did not happen worse than something that actually did happen. Hmmm [emoji848]

 

[Doc1]

We spent 20 years influencing elections with tanks and artillery in Vietnam. In the end, we weren't very influential.

Actually the United States was very influential. Then it abandoned South Vietnam in 1973. It was only after the United States abandoned South Vietnam in 1973 that the country and government collapsed two years later in 1975 from the Soviet supported North Vietnamese offensive that rolled through the country the same way Hitler did in Poland in 1939.

We never should have been there to begin with

We didn't have a choice. The powers that be wanted it and they got it. They made a statement with JFK and nobody has bucked them since.

 

[Redfish]

EVERY country tries to "influence" elections in other countries.

yes, they do. but you ignored the question

Neither is "worse". Both are just as bad.
We all live in a very bad world with some very bad people who are running it.
No one's hands are clean.
Obama tried to influence the election in Israel. I didn't notice any LIBs screaming their heads off.
Obama stuck his nose in the UK election. Same reaction from the LIB MSM........silence with a little grin on their faces.
If we all knew what was going on behind the scenes none of us would dare leave our homes.
Let's all take some deep breaths and enjoy the day. They are numbered.

well said and totally correct, but I take issue with your opening statement. I think internal interference is much worse than outside influence. Internal influence can make the voting process meaningless by manipulating the results. outside influence can only try to influence the minds of voters.

When elections are decided by the government rather than the people, as was attempted by the FBI and DOJ in 2016, then the constitution is no longer valid and we will have become a dictatorship, like Russia, Saudi Arabia, or North Korea.

 

[Redfish]

when you post talking points and cites from partisan opinion mills that is both uncivil and disingenuous. You will not participate in a normal discussion because you know that the facts will always prove you and your liberal ideology wrong.''

Link to these uncivil sources, fishy.

On that topic, can you please tell us when and where socialism, communism, progressivism, or liberalism have ever worked in any country? Give us some good examples of success of the ideology that you want for the USA.

Trying to flee your own thread? When were we "on that topic"?

Pure socialism, just like pure capitalism, doesn't work. You need a good dose of both.

uncivil sources: CNN, MSNBC, NY times, Wash post, NBC, the dem party, Maxine waters, Pelosi, schumer, the Clintons, anything funded by Soros, antifa, Farrakhan, BLM, Kimmel, the view. I could go on, but maybe you get it.

what is the difference between capitalism and pure capitalism? socialism and pure socialism. careful, altruism exists in both but is the major aspect of socialism, except for the rulers of socialistic countries, the rulers are dictatorial capitalists.

Links fishy....shouting out names like you’ve got some weird Tourette’s Syndrome is not proof of uncivil behavior.

I'm sure that by now you have seen Whoopi's vile, insane rant. Perfect example of the party of tolerance and love.

Nope...and still waiting for a single link to all this incivility that is so “new”. Come on snowflake, where is all this hate that’s got your panties twisted.

are you totally disconnected from reality? did you miss the Berkley riots, the Ferguson riots, "pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon", Bill Mahr, Whoopi, Kimmel, Streisand, Fonda, Pelosi, Waters, Jackson-Lee, behar, the Time cover, the New Yorker cover, the balloon in London, Farrakhan, BLM, Antifa, the idiot girl in NY that won her primary, flag burning at a Maxine Waters rally, the NFL kneelers.

How can you possibly be awake and not be aware of all the hate coming from the left?

 

[Redfish]

We spent 20 years influencing elections with tanks and artillery in Vietnam. In the end, we weren't very influential.

Actually the United States was very influential. Then it abandoned South Vietnam in 1973. It was only after the United States abandoned South Vietnam in 1973 that the country and government collapsed two years later in 1975 from the Soviet supported North Vietnamese offensive that rolled through the country the same way Hitler did in Poland in 1939.

We never should have been there to begin with

We didn't have a choice. The powers that be wanted it and they got it. They made a statement with JFK and nobody has bucked them since.

that's exactly why they all hate Trump, he is showing the world who and what they are. God help him if this country is to survive.

 

[Redfish]

back to the OP. Does anyone think that internal corruption to influence an election is not worse than foreigners trying to influence an election? If so, why even have elections? just let the DC elites appoint our leaders. that's the way it works in Russia, China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, etc. Are we not better than them?

Is a hypothetical thing that did not happen worse than something that actually did happen. Hmmm [emoji848]

Good question, since there was no Russian/Trump collusion (but there was with the Hillary campaign) and the FBI/DOJ corruption has been proven, I have to agree. actual happenings are worse than hypotheticals. thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Redfish]

4
No liar by constantly reporting that Trump had no chance. You know this is why I hate you liberals, You cannot tell the truth about anything ever.

trump cant win - YouTube





Just a few so can lie about something else.

That's because until Russian rat fucking and one sided FBI disclosures, he didn't. (And she still got 3 million more votes)

Hillary lost because the American voters understood that she was a corrupt, lying, angry, old, sick bitch. Russia and the FBI did not make her those things, she lost because of who and what she is.

the entire 3 mill vote delta was in California, the state that is now billions in debt and drowning in human waste. The electoral college works, the founders were brilliant.

Oh fishy...it’s sad you’re so ill informed.

It’s true that if California’s vote totals were entirely removed from the equation then Hillary Clinton would lose her popular vote lead, but the logic of that assessment is somewhat flawed. One could, for example, arbitrarily remove the states of New York and Massachusetts from the vote count, docking Clinton roughly 2.6 million votes (and wiping out her popular vote win). Or one could similarly claim that Trump’s electoral vote victory “came entirely from Texas,” since if Clinton had taken the Lone Star state (and its 38 electoral votes), she would also have won the overall election. One could combine any number of states’ vote counts and exclude them from the aggregate, but doing so wouldn’t undo the basic mathematical principle that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states. In this case, California wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 61.4 million votes she received in other states.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

first of all, snopes has been proven to be a left wing propaganda site. Secondly, the quote makes my point, to wit " that a vote difference in one state can’t sway the election results to or from a candidate who doesn’t also have significant support from multiple other states"

which is exactly what I have been saying, the 3mill vote delta in California is not significant as to who won. So your continued rant that "she won the popular vote" is proven to be bullshit by your own citiation. Thanks for proving me right and confirming that you are ignorant.

I proved you 100% wrong...saying it was “all California” is ridiculous. More telling is that Tump’s margin of victory in a number of swing states micro targeted by Russia was fewer than 20,000 voters.

take out the cal delta and who wins the PV?

tell us again how many votes were directly changed by Russia spending 50K on face book ads.

you never prove anything here, except your own ignorance.