It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The not-so-secret-story about how a country interfered to win an election

page: 15
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 03:40 PM

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Nyiah

We can't even get the bastards to end the sexual harassment Congressional Hush Fund or even get them to expose the names of the rat-bastards who used it.

Amen! The American people need to clean up our own Congress before casting Stones elsewhere.

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 04:05 PM

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Nyiah

We can't even get the bastards to end the sexual harassment Congressional Hush Fund or even get them to expose the names of the rat-bastards who used it.

Amen! The American people need to clean up our own Congress before casting Stones elsewhere.

And the latest trend I've seen is if you say things like that, you are not patriotic. No, really.

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 04:07 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy

I remember when that TIME magazine came out, and I was ashamed. I was a subscriber back then, because I believed TIME was legitimate world news. Well, they used to be, but have strayed since.

I thought it was really embarrassing that we interfered in Russian elections back then, and after when I started looking at history, and I understood that the US has interfered with so many so-called 'democratic' elections in so many other countries, predominantly but not limited to South and Central America (not to ignore everywhere else!), that these paid actors in the media (NOT journalists … because a true journalist would not make millions of dollars a year!) are all wrong currently.

I am waiting for a new generation of journalists to take back the news in the United States.

The current thespians have lost my trust. They just act … and act greatly, but the truth and balanced news reporting seem beyond them.

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 06:22 PM

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: DBCowboy

They perfectly know all that you said. You can't force mentally ill people to accept reality.

Well i'm mentally ill but i do know reality, using past transgressions as a feeble excuse to defend Trumps actions-that's like your favorite actor murdering someone and then saying "well people have been committing murder for thousands of years!" I know the trump groupies need to highlight previous acts to throw off the scent but the tracker dogs are still on the trail and if he gets into hot water well...his fans can't defend him, his legal team will.

I don't care who voted for Trump, but with all the 'fake news' and 'witch hunts' flying around i have genuine concern that some of the diehards will end up like this...

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 06:44 PM

Prove it.

Easy enough to do.

Prove that Russia flipped the election from Hillary to Trump.

Prove it.

How is that easy to do? Is someone going to interview everyone who voted Trump and ask if the anti-Hillary campaign had any impact? The email news? How is that easy? It might have swung the election, the race was extremely close. If it had been a blow-out, then sure... I'd not think so. Although people should still care that Russia hacked American servers to try to disrupt a campaign, regardless of what other countries may or may not have done before). But it was not even close to a blow-out. Close race - so who knows if enough people were influenced to swing the voting.

You sure as hell don't know, and you can't expect others to "easily" know either. I still don't think Trump was directly involved, but some of his campaign might have been. I don't think even Trump, as stupid as I think he is at times, would call for hacking of the election during his campaign, while knowing it was happening. I mean.. maybe he is that stupid. But... I don't think so. But something happened, and no one will ever know if it really swung the election results. Asking people to prove it is childish (and impossible).

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 07:05 PM
a reply to: DJW001

But hold on why would we not be discussing the meddling if Hillary won? Are you suggesting selective outrage?

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 07:19 PM
a reply to: Sillyolme

good thing its the electoral college that declares winners then not popular vote which is a good thing it keeps the larger states from having much more say then the smaller ones who's issues are often marginalized and ignored

For the fifth time in U.S. history, and the second time this century, a presidential candidate has won the White House while losing the popular vote. In this week’s Electoral College balloting, Donald Trump won 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 227, with five Democratic and two Republican “faithless electors” voting for other people. That result was despite the fact that Clinton received nearly 2.9 million more popular votes than Trump in November’s election, according to Pew Research Center’s tabulation of state election results. Our tally shows Clinton won 65.8 million votes (48.25%) to almost 63 million (46.15%) for Trump, with minor-party and independent candidates taking the rest. This mismatch between the electoral and popular votes came about because Trump won several large states (such as Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) by very narrow margins, gaining all their electoral votes in the process, even as Clinton claimed other large states (such as California, Illinois and New York) by much wider margins. Trump’s share of the popular vote, in fact, was the seventh-smallest winning percentage since 1828, when presidential campaigns began to resemble those of today. In fact, the very nature of the way the U.S. picks its presidents tends to create a disconnect between the outcome in the Electoral College and the popular vote. The last time a popular-vote loser won the presidency in the Electoral College was, of course, in 2000, when George W. Bush edged out Al Gore 271-266 despite Gore winning some 537,000 more popular votes nationwide. The other electoral-popular vote mismatches came in 1876 and 1888; in all four instances the Democratic nominee ended up the loser. (In the 1824 election, which was contested between rival factions of the old Democratic-Republican Party, Andrew Jackson won a plurality of the popular and electoral vote, but because he was short of an Electoral College majority the election was thrown to the House of Representatives, which chose runner-up John Quincy Adams.) Even in the vast majority of U.S. elections, in which the same candidate won both the popular and the electoral vote, the system usually makes the winner’s victory margin in the former a lot wider than in the latter. In 2012, for example, Barack Obama won 51% of the nationwide popular vote but nearly 62% of the electoral votes, or 332 out of 538.

The Electoral College is once again under siege. Critics arguing that it is obsolete and undemocratic have greatly overestimated the benefits of electing presidents by popular vote plurality. One key reason the founders of the United States of America created the Electoral College was the possibility that once George Washington retired or died, no other candidate could garner majority support from such a diverse nation. Their concern was well-founded. Of the 49 presidential elections the United States has held since 1824, when many states began allowing the public to choose electors, a full 18 contests have not given any candidate a popular vote majority.
and from same source

Had the founders required presidents to gain a majority of the popular vote rather than of the Electoral College, over 30 percent of our presidential elections would have been decided by the U.S. House. In both 2000 and 2016, the Republican House majorities surely would have chosen the Republican candidate, the same one who won the electoral vote.

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 07:32 PM
a reply to: DJW001

and democrats havent done the same thing? hey if you dont believe me take it from ginsbergs own mouth

Some of the justices compared partisan gerrymandering with racial gerrymandering. Justice Ginsburg noted, "There was a period when 'max-black' was the effort. And it seems to me that what we have here is 'max-Democratic.' And if 'max-black' was no good, why should 'max-Democratic' be OK?"

But if Democrats think this is the key to their political woes, they are kidding themselves. What ails the party—at every level—goes far beyond alleged Republican skulduggery. And a diagnosis of those ills requires an understanding of what the past decade has wrought. The Democratic Party, as I wrote here even before the 2016 wipeout, finds itself in its worst shape since the 1920s. From its perch in 2009, when it had a (shaky) filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, a 256-178 majority in the House and control of a majority of states, it has seen a precipitous collapse. That fall began in 2010, when a wave election brought a loss of 63 House seats, six Senate seats—and, most notably—massive loses at the state level. Republicans gained control of the Legislatures in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan, and won 29 governorships. These defeats did not happen because of gerrymandering (or voter suppression, for that matter), because Democrats had control of the politics before 2010. (When Democrats had political control in North Carolina, for example, it had some of the most unrestrictive voting laws in the country.) In order for the GOP to use its power to entrench its majorities, it had to win those majorities in the first place. That happened because Republicans and their conservative allies poured resources into a workmanlike effort to win control over state politics, while Democrats were mesmerized by the more glamorous fight to win and hold the White House. this link was the 2nd part of the cases that the scotus visited and goes to show gerrymandering is not just a republican "trick"

In spring 2011, the six Democratic members of Maryland’s congressional delegations tasked Eric Hawkins with two key jobs: Draw new district lines that get us re-elected easily for another five terms, while also taking direct aim at the state’s last two Republicans. Behind closed doors, Democratic insiders and high-ranking aides referred to it as “the 7-1 map.” Hawkins—an analyst at a Beltway data firm called NCEC Services—not only made it happen, but imagined an 8-0 map that might have shut Republicans out of power altogether. That, however, would have required spreading Democratic voters a little too thin and made some incumbents slightly less safe; these congressmen were partisans, sure, but they were also reluctant to risk their own seats. New court depositions and previously unseen emails uncover just how determined Maryland Democrats were to take a seat from the Republicans and knock 10-term veteran Roscoe Bartlett—an idiosyncratic conservative who after losing his seat retired off the grid in the mountains of West Virginia, issuing dire warnings about the vulnerability of our power grid—out of office. They also reveal the partisanship with which Democrats approached redistricting in Maryland: As former governor and 2016 Democratic presidential primary candidate Martin O’Malley explains, he and other Democrats wanted to use their party’s control of the governor’s office to secure a 7-1 majority. More Stories Donald Trump speaks about his summit meeting with Vladimir Putin Trump’s Crisis of Legitimacy David Frum The Atlantic Politics & Policy Daily: He Said, He Said Elaine Godfrey Trump's Remarkable Attempt to Walk Back His Russia Comments David A. Graham The Private-School Persuasion of the Supreme Court Alia Wong “Yes,” said O’Malley, in a deposition. “Part of my intent was to create a map that, all things being legal and equal, would, nonetheless, be more likely to elect more Democrats rather than less.”
so yeah dont act like democratic outhouses dont stink on this issue as well

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 10:23 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy
Ya! People are retards. Though most of this is egged on by the media, you know like Goebbels said repeat a thing enough times and it becomes reality.

Anyways, who knows maybe a war with Russia, particularity a nuclear war, it may be a good thing. You know, there is such a thing as reaching a critical mass in stupidity. A few thousand nuclear warheads is as good a cure for stupid as any.

But to tell the truth, none of them have the balls to go through with anything anyways. So its all posturing. And a waste of time, most of that stuff you call news is a waste of time, and even me reading this thread about that stuff on the news has wasted my few minutes.

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 11:41 PM
My god. Talk about whataboutism.

This is literally a tantrum thread - "snowflake" I think you guys say, when it's a liberal voicing concern?

How much more of this must there be before you actually start to question your dear leader?

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 12:17 AM
Yay! Lets attack our own country! That's exactly what we need!

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 01:00 AM

originally posted by: Starchild9250
Yay! Lets attack our own country! That's exactly what we need!

No, it's about questioning your leaders and holding them accountable. It's possibly the most important right we have in a free world.

Putting the blinkers on and giving them 100% relentless trust is a recipe for disaster.

This is not a team sport. This is important. Always always hold your leaders accountable. Always.

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 01:49 AM
so you've been influenced, what a shock!? welcome to reality then

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 02:13 AM
a reply to: strongfp

First, we have seen no evidence that the Russian govt hacked the DNC and there is nothing about Trump working with them to do it.
Second, even the accusation says that no votes were changed. Of course we don't know that either.
So basically you are asking ' how it feels' to pretend your TDS is reality.
Sorry, that's not possible.

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 02:38 AM
a reply to: network dude

Well Trump is saying he misspoke now, he actually meant the opposite of what he said. Doesn't sound super believable but it's better than nothing. Still quite an embarrassment.

I feel like you aren't really replying to my post, you're just generally complaining about the other side. I've defended Trump many times. I just can't respect him anymore.

I haven't seen anyone here demanding to change the election results, but that doesn't mean we have to pretend nothing happened. You can talk about the US manipulating foreign elections as much as you want, I think that's an interesting topic

Do you think the international community is going to punish us or something? If we cry loudly about Russia? Not that I even think we have to do that.

It's a though job to be President. I think he should be given respect, because as President he draws strength from that respect when doing his job, also when he meets allies or enemies or frenemies. But if he won't even try, then why should I respect him?

Lastly, can you say where in my post was the lie located? It was mostly questions. When I said 'I don't get it', was that the lie?

I'll be here looking at myself and asking tough questions, lol.

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 08:06 AM

originally posted by: DBCowboy

Russia does it.
USA does it.
China does it.
UK does it.
Israel does it.
Saudi does it.

Everyoine effing does it.

And the panty-waisted screaming beta-soy-boys scream like they just got a bug in their Starbiucks Vente.

Just cut the sh# out.

You're not fooling anyone except the chin-beards watching CNN and masturbating to MSNBC.

...and in other news...

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 10:08 AM
a reply to: DBCowboy

Of course, every major power has done whatever they could to influence the outcome of elections and political decisions on the other. Since the beginnings of time...

What is shameful in this recent US/Russia story is not that the Russians did it, is that the Americans let them do it and even worse that they are now complaining to themselves that they couldn´t stop the Russians. This is laughable to say the least.

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 01:04 PM
The thing is democrats had stolen Bernie's shot at being the democrat candidate. Obama it seems had stacked the courts and intelligence agencies with treasonous partisan corrupt individuals.

Word is not only was the opposing candidate spied upon by the government, a scandal worse than watergate. But measures were put in place to blackmail and depose a sitting president should he win.

On top of that you could hear over half a dozen news agencies parroting Hillary's campaign slogans like "power through", vast collusion from virtually all MSM and even fox and the republican party attacking Trump.

posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 04:42 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy

I was going to do my thing and come down on the dissenters straw houses with the ol huff n puff but I see plenty of people dismantled the arguments here decently enough that I don't feel you need a thread destroyer like myself intervening on the OP's behalf.

That being said I will compliment you in your OP as it flushed some biased thinking on the lefts part here out and exposed their short sighted nature.

Some who commented claim since we as supporters will acknowledge that Russians "tried" to meddle they think they are somehow entitled to hear it from Trump.

To them I say thus. He doesn't owe you a goddamn thing. Just because he doesn't talk about it doesn't mean he's refusing to admit anything.
He's smarter than you and knows the moment he gives you whining hypocrites any comment on "muh Russia" you will try to twist it into " he admits collusion"
He's got better things to do than waste his time on talking about your nothing burgers.

Also one self entitled fool claims we voted in a "promise for change" that's no different than what's come before.

That's a lie. He is actually following through and making changes. He brought North and South K to talks, made the first personal visit to N Korean leadership in US history and is tackling our economical issues and immigration like no one in history has ever dared to do.

And yes the person denying such you know who you are and if I have to come back here why don't you do yourself a favor and check phages anti theist thread. I wrecked it like a virgin on prom night and have had ZERO challenge. I also wrecked the DNC hack thread and it required less than an hour total research to do both.

Make me come back here again with your biased stupidity and I won't be merciful.
Do your research before posting next time and beware the Big..Bad..Woooolf!!!

edit on 20-7-2018 by AutisticEvo because: To add a good song

posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 07:12 PM

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

You also forget about Ukraine.

You realize how that all started right? Nuland's coup?

Are you moving on to a new OP?

Just wanted to point out how this poster continually deflects and ignores direct questions that destroy their presuppositions and invented outrage.

top topics

<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in