President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Commando]

It's amazing that the Russisns were good enough to tip the election on a budget of less than a million dollars.

What did Hillary spend her billion on?

Mind joining the rest of us in reality?

[imanihonjin]

Well, Hillary herself and what few friends she still has maybe.

But this is way overblown, IMO, as a motivation and is primarily a Trump projection onto the other side because his ego makes him terrified he won't be seen as a legitimate winner of the 2016 election. The fact he has been known to say he actually did win the popular vote if it weren't for millions of non-citizens voting bears that out.

90% of the dems I think are just scared that the system is compromised in some way whether it be hackers or Russian trolls. They probably overestimate the threat. The problem is it's impossible to know by how much. We do know there was a substantial amount of foreign-inspired fake news and trollish activity on social media in 2016 meant to confuse and stir up trouble.

You would think that if they were so terrified about the effects on an election that they would be all over supporting voter ID laws as well.

[BlueK]

You would think that if they were so terrified about the effects on an election that they would be all over supporting voter ID laws as well.

I don't have any problem with reasonable ID laws. But I'm skeptical about all the political motivations around those. A state like North Dakota, for example, doesn't have a problem with lots of non-citizens living there who are trying to illegally vote. But unreasonably rigid id laws can make things difficult for natives who live on Indian reservations, for example, who clearly have every right to vote. This isn't a hypothetical. This happened there in 2018.

If it's really about security, that's fine. But don't sell it as that when it's actually about making it harder for certain populations to cast a vote because you think they're more likely to vote a way you don't like.

[Commando]

You would think that if they were so terrified about the effects on an election that they would be all over supporting voter ID laws as well.

Those are meant to disenfranchise voters and manipulate the vote in a similar manner to gerrymandering. A regular ID/voter registration is sufficient. Idaho used to have registration at the polls, but they got rid of it. Wonder why.

[imanihonjin]

I don't have any problem with reasonable ID laws. But I'm skeptical about all the political motivations around those. A state like North Dakota, for example, doesn't have a problem with lots of non-citizens living there who are trying to illegally vote. But unreasonably rigid id laws can make things difficult for natives who live on Indian reservations, for example, who clearly have every right to vote. This isn't a hypothetical. This happened there in 2018.

If it's really about security, that's fine. But don't sell it as that when it's actually about making it harder for certain populations to cast a vote because you think they're more likely to vote a way you don't like.

You are the one who said the dems are just scared about the security concerns around elections and wanting to ensure the legitimacy of our election process. I would just think that their concerns would also extend to other areas that are potential issues for abuse.

[imanihonjin]

Those are meant to disenfranchise voters and manipulate the vote in a similar manner to gerrymandering. A regular ID/voter registration is sufficient. Idaho used to have registration at the polls, but they got rid of it. Wonder why.

Man, do you want Russians showing up to the ballot box on election day to vote?

[BlueK]

Man, do you want Russians showing up to the ballot box on election day to vote?

you're refuting your own arguments with such a silly response.

[imanihonjin]

you're refuting your own arguments with such a silly response.

Only if you think said response was a serious response.

[BlueK]

You are the one who said the dems are just scared about the security concerns around elections and wanting to ensure the legitimacy of our election process. I would just think that their concerns would also extend to other areas that are potential issues for abuse.

I just said there might be more to it than just trying to win an argument about an election from three years ago.

Also, the abuse can go many ways. I think it's abusive to create laws that go too far, including election laws that seem to make it disproportionately harder for certain populations to jump through the hoops when we already know there is no question they are citizens.

[imanihonjin]

I just said there might be more to it than just trying to win an argument about an election from three years ago.

Also, the abuse can go many ways. I think it's abusive to create laws that go too far, including election laws that seem to make it disproportionately harder for certain populations to jump through the hoops when we already know there is no question they are citizens.

I thought you said that 90% were just scared about the legitimacy of elections.

[BlueK]

I thought you said that 90% were just scared about the legitimacy of elections.

LOL. whatever. Are you actually trying to make the argument that they don't care about whether there is foreign interference in the future even though they probably believe it hurt them last time? Even if the past is all they care about (which goes against common sense), I don't get where this argument takes you other than trying to be annoying. If you're not a lawyer you totally missed the boat.

[imanihonjin]

LOL. whatever. Are you actually trying to make the argument that they don't care about whether there is foreign interference in the future even though they probably believe it hurt them last time? Even if the past is all they care about (which goes against common sense), I don't get where this argument takes you other than trying to be annoying. If you're not a lawyer you totally missed the boat.

I am merely taking issue with the premise of your argument. You said that 90% of dems are scared that the system is compromised. I don't think for a second that they would have cared to this extent had Hillary won. That is evident by the very fact that the democrats don't even pretend to be concerned with how their own primary was rigged from within its very own party.

Edit: I also find the idea of you calling out others for being annoying on presidential politics quite funny. Might want to look in the mirror, bud.

[Uncle Ted]

I noticed you have dodged PaloAlto's question? And well, the Meuller report says they spent 1.25 million per month:

https://adage.com/article/digital/ru...mueller/312424

Oh good hell... was the Obama administration asleep at the wheel? Why didn't they do something to stop them?

[BlueK]

I am merely taking issue with the premise of your argument. You said that 90% of dems are scared that the system is compromised. I don't think for a second that they would have cared to this extent had Hillary won. That is evident by the very fact that the democrats don't even pretend to be concerned with how their own primary was rigged from within its very own party.

The real premise of my argument is that elected officials of any party should care if foreigners are fucking with our election process.

I'm not here to defend democrats or republicans. I hate them both most of the time. That's why I vote Libertarian so much. That doesn't mean I think Congress should never do anything. If one side or the other I think is working toward something I think is correct then the rational choice is to support it. Most of the time over the last few decades I've voted for many more Republicans than democrats when I have voted for one or the other. Today the Republican party under Trump isn't even remotely like the one I used to vote for back then, and I don't see it coming back to that probably for a long time, at least not until they take a butt whooping at the polls.

But right now you seem to just want to have a petty partisan bullshit argument about whether dems really care sincerely enough or not. Maybe it's as crass for you as not caring because you think the foreign influence helps the party you care about more. If that's true you're just proving my case for why both major parties suck.

Or maybe you really don't think it's a problem or any kind of actual threat whatsoever. Fair enough if that's honestly your view, I guess, as much as I think the evidence doesn't support it.

[frank ryan]

People should care that Trump welcomed Russian influence and interference and multiple people in his campaign made and worked to make contact with Russians.

Investigators were also stonewalled by individuals who refused to cooperative with the special counsel and staff who got rid of electronic communications (just like shady Hillary).

That should be a massive scandal. Instead Trump is treated as the biggest modern day martyr by his fans and partisans.