Why is it so hard for Most Trump supporters to believe Russia tried to influence our election?

a reply to: testingtesting

Just because the social engineers and party planners / figureheads that have been at the helm the past 8 years have taken left beyond the mouth of madness, doesn't mean I've changed. My platform and I yet remain the same, where when it was Bush playing Mr. Figurehead up on the big stage the Republican's/Neocon's around here and beyond used to label me the "far left" for skewering their party nearly verbatim. The only exception is this Snowflake Generation / SJW mania crap, which yet still falls under my old anti-Politick via Moral Emotional Wedge Issue's & Identity Politic's, which the liberal party planners went ALL-in on and the left soaked it all in bones to brain to then run amok with.

My Unchanged Platform:
Anti-Deception
Anti-Blissful Ignorance
Anti-Social Engineering
Anti-Politics of Fear
Anti-Politick via Moral Emotional Wedge Issue's
Anti-Politick via Identity Politics
Anti-NWO
Anti-American Imperialism (Neo-Colonialism / etc)
Anti-Crony Corporatism (Corporatocracy)[and Oligarchy, Plutocracy, Aristocracy, etc],
Anti-Central Banksterism
Anti-Disaster Capitalism
Anti-War On Drugs
Anti-War On Terror (Global Imperialism)
Anti-Wall Street Speculationism
Anti-Regime Change/Nation Building/Empire Building (same thing)
Anti-Non-Consensual Taxation (okay this one I helped invent in 2010)
Anti-Military Industrial Complex (and Prison Industrial Complex & Etc Industrial Complex)
Anti-Oppression
Anti-Transhumanism (along with AGI etc)
Anti-Monolithic Government (the US embodying all of the above should explain why [everyone should be])
Pro-Liberty
Pro-Self Sufficiency
Pro-Allodial Title
Pro-Socio Agnostic

Note those links prove I've been on those trips forever. Hey if that list makes me "far left" one year and then "far right" 10 years later... you catch my drift?

Meanwhile Mr. Trump hasn't even taken office yet so what is there to even critique besides in-the-mouth-of-madness liberal conjecture & hyperbole?

People don't believe it because they will never believe, without 100% proof, something they don't support. Especially on these boards. And arguing against it only entrenches them further to support their cause. There are very few unbiased people unfortunately.

If Russia wanted Trump in office (and they did), would they try to influence the election? Quite possibly. And it's funny to me when multiple intelligence agencies say they know for a fact that this happened, that your regular joe public on a conspiracy board say they know they are wrong (or apparently lying.. in tandem).

People here do NOT know. I imagine the intelligence agencies have it right, and that Russia did try to influence the election. Which is a very serious offense. How do you think they'd react if the U.S. took direct involvement in their own elections?

Also if the inverse had been true, Trump supporters would have been posting in droves about how the election was rigged, and then, the intelligence agencies -would- be correct, and they'd ask for a do-over. But whatever.. it's all noise to me any more, I prefer to listen to unbiased, intelligent conversation. It's difficult to have that sort of discourse with anyone who believes Trump (or Clinton, or even Sanders, etc.) was / is the perfect choice.

Two wrongs make a right inundate the board. It doesn't even make sense. It becomes pointless to debate, when all someone is going to do instead of admitting their chosen hero had done something morally ambiguous or clinically stupid,
is to point out how some other political figure did this or that thing two years ago.. and so there!

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: everyone

How about because they have no evidence?

Who leaked the phone call between Baltic diplomats discussing the rioting in Ukraine? Do you believe that was "fake news?"

What is your evidence that russia made trump win.

a reply to: fleabit

Were the leaked emails also fake? Did the Russians write them or was the stuff in those emails true?

Are you simply going to own that the DNC cheated Sanders out of a straight shot at the nomination? Are you going to own evidence that the Clinton Foundation is involved in large pay for play deals with foreign actors to sell access to our government? Are you going to own that Podesta was heavily involved in planting campaign-friendly stories in the press all during Clinton's campaign and the press was letting him do it, even going so far as to let the campaign have final editorial discretion in some cases?

Which is dirtier? Leaking the evidence of that corruption -or- that corruption?

a reply to: fleabit

It has gotten to the point that even reality itself is disagreed upon, and you have people practically living in entirely different realities. There isn't even neutral ground to argue on. Nothing mutually agreed upon as fact, and it is getting to the point if you don't choose an exact side, someone will shove you somewhere whether you want it or not.

Actual debate in this country died. Just scream your fool head off, run around like a jack-ass flinging around names and titles and listen to whatever prophets affirm your view point. Not exactly the behavior of intelligent, civilized, critically thinking people, but apparently, it's a lot of fun and very lucrative.

originally posted by: fleabit
People don't believe it because they will never believe, without 100% proof, something they don't support. Especially on these boards. And arguing against it only entrenches them further to support their cause. There are very few unbiased people unfortunately.

If Russia wanted Trump in office (and they did), would they try to influence the election? Quite possibly. And it's funny to me when multiple intelligence agencies say they know for a fact that this happened, that your regular joe public on a conspiracy board say they know they are wrong (or apparently lying.. in tandem).

People here do NOT know. I imagine the intelligence agencies have it right, and that Russia did try to influence the election. Which is a very serious offense. How do you think they'd react if the U.S. took direct involvement in their own elections?

Also if the inverse had been true, Trump supporters would have been posting in droves about how the election was rigged, and then, the intelligence agencies -would- be correct, and they'd ask for a do-over. But whatever.. it's all noise to me any more, I prefer to listen to unbiased, intelligent conversation. It's difficult to have that sort of discourse with anyone who believes Trump (or Clinton, or even Sanders, etc.) was / is the perfect choice.

Two wrongs make a right inundate the board. It doesn't even make sense. It becomes pointless to debate, when all someone is going to do instead of admitting their chosen hero had done something morally ambiguous or clinically stupid,
is to point out how some other political figure did this or that thing two years ago.. and so there!

I do not think 100% proof is required, but when the proof is 0% it's unreasonable to ask someone buy into a narrative being pushed by dishonest people.

I'll say this, Hillary (if not all career politicians), are influenced by big oil, military, pharma...MANY special interest groups that give "contributions". What does the Russian influence have to gain? Avoiding WW3? I'm ok with that. I hhave ink most people know what the relationship would have been between Putin & Hillary. Whatever made Trump election happen, it may have been a blessing regardless.

a reply to: goou111

It's not so hard for me to believe Russia influenced anything. What's hard for me to believe is how the lefties are more concerned about who exposed criminal activity rather than the criminal activity itself of the Clinton machine.

I consider rather or not Russia interfered in our election to be irrelevant. The damage was already done when the DNC, Hillary, and mainstream media successfully colluded to deny Bernie Sanders his rightful nomination. That is why America now has Trump as President.

Does anyone think maybe it was Israel that hacked and released data. They seem pretty pleased with the outcome and very unhappy with Obama ?

a reply to: DBCowboy

Well since CNN was blatantly for Hillary the whole time and since Trump won despite that.

I have to go with russia.

originally posted by: tabularosa
I consider rather or not Russia interfered in our election to be irrelevant. The damage was already done when the DNC, Hillary, and mainstream media successfully colluded to deny Bernie Sanders his rightful nomination. That is why America now has Trump as President.

Not only was it done when that was exposed, but it was further dug in when people revealed to be most corrupt -- Wasserman-Schultz was revealed to have colluded with the Clinton Campaign to deny Sanders a fair shot at the democratic nomination and she may have stepped down, but they Clinton Campaign hired her right after! Donna Brazile was revealed to have colluded to pass the debate question to Hillary ahead of time and CNN may have fired her, but she become interim head of the DNC right after (a capacity she still holds today)!

Because its a lie. So is the Washington post teport that Russia tried to hack the energy grid. Where is the proof? Our media lies to us they are owned by globalist hacks. Its all propaganda and lies. And fear mongering. If you cant see that your blind.

White House fails to make case that Russian hackers tampered with election

Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks, it largely restates previous private-sector claims without providing any support for their validity. Even worse, it provides an effective bait and switch by promising newly declassified intelligence into Russian hackers' "tradecraft and techniques" and instead delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups.

and

The sloppiness, Lee noted, included the report's conflation of Russian hacking groups APT28 and APT29—also known as CozyBear, Sandworm, Sednit, and Sofacy, among others—with malware names such as BlackEnergy and Havex, and even hacking capabilities such as "Powershell Backdoor." The mix up of such basic classifications does little to inspire confidence that the report was carefully or methodically prepared. And that only sows more reasons for President elect Donald Trump and his supporters to cast doubt on the intelligence community's analysis on a matter that, if true, poses a major national security threat.

The grizzly steppe report is why I dont believe it. That report, and the 17 intelligence agency consensus obama referred to, is the main reason I can't believe the Russians were behind this or if it even happened at all.

If you read the grizzly steppe report and know anything about computers, you know that the descriptions of the hacks were basically a cut and paste of a virus definition followed by descriptions of xp era low tech trojans and email spams. Any kind of antivirus or firewall would detect such amateurish attacks and block them automatically. This report was designed to do one thing - throw some technical jargon at people who think the cd tray is a cup holder.

The main method of the attacks, according to obama, was based on sending an email to high ranking officials in the dnc from a fake website that mimics a real one. Just about any email filter will reject that without a second thought. Once the email was received, the recipient would have to click through multiple warnings to get to the actual macro, then leave secure mode again ignoring the warning, to let the macro begin editing. In other words, they would have to click YES about half a dozen times to the question, "Are you an idiot?"

If this is all it takes to hack the dnc, they deserve to get hacked. And if this is the shamefully amateur method Russia supposedly used to do it - they deserve to get caught. Bottom line, this was no high tech state sponsored hack. Not even close. Its laughable.

People thought if Hillary were elected we would have WWIII. Putin pretty much said that exactly.

So you guys who think some people were not influenced by the thought of nuclear Armageddon just have your head in the sand.

I know people who voted for Trump only because they were worried about war with Russia. They did not give 2 sh!ts about emails.

That is influence by definition.

originally posted by: tabularosa
I consider rather or not Russia interfered in our election to be irrelevant. The damage was already done when the DNC, Hillary, and mainstream media successfully colluded to deny Bernie Sanders his rightful nomination. That is why America now has Trump as President.

I agree.. Irrelevant. People still made their own choices whether they were influenced or not.

My whole point is who the hell cares if we blame Russia? Blame whoever you want I dont care .Trump won.

We won.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Wardaddy454

They have. Why are some people ignoring it?
What ever happened to deny ignorance?

You mean the fake news evidence given to the "useful idiot public" that disintegrates under the scrutiny of IT professionals?

a reply to: DJW001

I found the links to money laundering through the Bonner Group to be quite horrifying.
The connections to financial and logistical support to Saudi Arabia were certainly something to be concerned about.
I found Obama's decision to hire only muslims among staffers horrifying.
Everything related to Podesta, Brock and their very questionable activities horrifying.
I found the connections between Clinton and Lyn deRothschild unsettling.

LINK

The thing is, the people that support DNC won't care about this. They won't care about what she's done will fight against these tooth and nail. You'll continue to buy whatever is fed to you by the MSM and write many of us off as nuts who love doom porn.
I spent hours reading the emails and hours more reading articles about the emails others found. While there were certainly plenty of "boring" ones like in any email, there were many that were not necessarily campaign-breaking, but revealed personality aspects as a whole.

What you don't seem to realize is that this is information that was given to us and that is what is vital.

No citizen should be protecting these corrupted, inflated liars.
All citizens should be doing everything they can to encourage these types of leaks and embrace the information that's given to us and demanding more.

Wake tf up already. It's not Red vs. Blue. It's not my team vs. your team. Stop buying that rubbish. Learn that "Democracy" does not mean what you think it means anymore and we're all in big danger from these elites and yes, that includes Trump. Learn about what's going on behind the scenes and what started the world wars and why things are the way they are today.

But, you won't.

a reply to: gottaknow

I find the fact that you accept those incredible distortions of what the emails actually say horrifying. I wonder who is paying for that professionally designed website? (Whoever it is is based out of Panama.)