Elections, Hacking, Russia, And Trump: This Is Serious

[Grinning Dragon]

And like a million years old by her telling.

17,265. This will take you to the start of that. But we digress ...

Oh Farn, there's no reason not to tell them our secret. To achieve immortality you simply stop dying.

Much like that time we were both shipwrecked off the Land of Punt while undertaking that trade mission for Amenhotep II - we avoided death by not drowning.

And she doesn't look a day over 16,000.

Quick look over there a wookie --------->
/runs away.

[Grave_n_idle]

That's not the question, is it?

You're saying that such interference DOES take place, and your evidence is someone saying that it didn't.

That's not evidence that supports the claim you're making.

Intellectual dishonesty at its finest everyone. She wanted to rig an election, she was prevented by people with better judgement, and you want to give that woman the presidency?

Me? No. I already said I was not a Clinton supporter, do not particularly like Clinton, and certainly did not vote for her.

Which makes your accusation of intellectual dishonesty ironic, no?

[Grave_n_idle]

In terms of Russia, while I agree that there was obviously Russian interference in the elections, I'd like to point out that it's a bit hypocritical to be upset by Russian involvement in American affairs when the US was doing the exact same thing during Russian federal elections barely a decade prior.

That's not what hypocrisy means.

I think that there needs to be some sort of fuss made over Russian interference in the American democratic process.

This is not hypocrisy, because I similarly object to Americans interfering in Russian democracy (although there is a good argument to be made that Russian democracy is a lot less democratic - but not the point).

[Opfornia]

Intellectual dishonesty at its finest everyone. She wanted to rig an election, she was prevented by people with better judgement, and you want to give that woman the presidency?

Me? No. I already said I was not a Clinton supporter, do not particularly like Clinton, and certainly did not vote for her.

Which makes your accusation of intellectual dishonesty ironic, no?

Here's an either or question; would you have rather had a Hillary presidency or a Trump presidency? Neither isn't an option, one of the two was going to win. Which do you think would be better?

You're going at length to defend her, when her words were very clear, that the US should have rigged the Palestinian election. She was at one time our Secretary of State, the face of foreign policy, the same mouth that said they should have rigged a foreign election. Would you have rather her as president?

[Vassenor]

Trump mentioned Wikileaks 164 times in last month of election, now claims it didn’t impact one voter

...Not sure what plane of reality he's even living on any more.

[Vassenor]

NYT: Democratic House Candidates Were Also Targets of Russian Hacking

Looks like they were trying to stack the legislature as well.

[Nariterrr]

I wonder what would happen if the situation was reversed, if Hillary Clinton won the election and a foreign state is alleged to help her. I bet that in that instance, Trump supporters would be willing to ignite a civil war.

[Opfornia]

I wonder what would happen if the situation was reversed, if Hillary Clinton won the election and a foreign state is alleged to help her. I bet that in that instance, Trump supporters would be willing to ignite a civil war.

In this fictional world, were Russian internet trolls one of the top contributing factors? Like in the CIA report on Russia's influence on the election.

Cause in that case, the accusations are just as ridiculous and unbelievable.

[Lady Scylla]

Me? No. I already said I was not a Clinton supporter, do not particularly like Clinton, and certainly did not vote for her.

Which makes your accusation of intellectual dishonesty ironic, no?

Here's an either or question; would you have rather had a Hillary presidency or a Trump presidency? Neither isn't an option, one of the two was going to win. Which do you think would be better?

You're going at length to defend her, when her words were very clear, that the US should have rigged the Palestinian election. She was at one time our Secretary of State, the face of foreign policy, the same mouth that said they should have rigged a foreign election. Would you have rather her as president?

Definitely.

[Lady Scylla]

That's because of budget issues, or was. NASA's been approved to use private company's rockets. The cynicism here is disturbing.

NASA has been approved to us private company's rockets. But is NOT actually doing so.
And again, NASA's problems go much deeper than just the budget.

They've, quite literally, just gotten that approval. Patience, padawan.

[Nariterrr]

Me? No. I already said I was not a Clinton supporter, do not particularly like Clinton, and certainly did not vote for her.

Which makes your accusation of intellectual dishonesty ironic, no?

Here's an either or question; would you have rather had a Hillary presidency or a Trump presidency? Neither isn't an option, one of the two was going to win. Which do you think would be better?

You're going at length to defend her, when her words were very clear, that the US should have rigged the Palestinian election. She was at one time our Secretary of State, the face of foreign policy, the same mouth that said they should have rigged a foreign election. Would you have rather her as president?

No one says that Hillary is a goddess of perfectionism, but she is much better and more experienced than her counterpart who will now have access to nuclear weapons.

[Opfornia]

Here's an either or question; would you have rather had a Hillary presidency or a Trump presidency? Neither isn't an option, one of the two was going to win. Which do you think would be better?

You're going at length to defend her, when her words were very clear, that the US should have rigged the Palestinian election. She was at one time our Secretary of State, the face of foreign policy, the same mouth that said they should have rigged a foreign election. Would you have rather her as president?

Definitely.

Then you should keep believing Russia stole the election, its almost poetic.

[Lady Scylla]

Definitely.

Then you should keep believing Russia stole the election, its almost poetic.

I'm finding it more amusing, if we're to believe your signature as descriptive of your political leanings, that you'd have such an issue with corruption or dirty-politics. As I said before, take your snide arrogance elsewhere. It's not the same as confidence, and it's merely tiring. Now, you could argue if I've a single moral bone in my body, and to that I would say you'd have to find it. I'm fully aware of her corruption, and I'd still take her over Trump -- it's the entire reason I voted for her, and I'm not even a Democrat.

[Nariterrr]

Definitely.

Then you should keep believing Russia stole the election, its almost poetic.

When all the evidence from credible GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (notice the plural), you disregard it because it does not play into your political agenda. Just think about the roles being reversed.

[Opfornia]

Here's an either or question; would you have rather had a Hillary presidency or a Trump presidency? Neither isn't an option, one of the two was going to win. Which do you think would be better?

You're going at length to defend her, when her words were very clear, that the US should have rigged the Palestinian election. She was at one time our Secretary of State, the face of foreign policy, the same mouth that said they should have rigged a foreign election. Would you have rather her as president?

No one says that Hillary is a goddess of perfectionism, but she is much better and more experienced than her counterpart who will now have access to nuclear weapons.

She was unelectable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/ ... als-trust/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_584fb ... 1621824160

Then you should keep believing Russia stole the election, its almost poetic.

I'm finding it more amusing, if we're to believe your signature as descriptive of your political leanings, that you'd have such an issue with corruption or dirty-politics. As I said before, take your snide arrogance elsewhere. It's not the same as confidence, and it's merely tiring. Now, you could argue if I've a single moral bone in my body, and to that I would say you'd have to find it. I'm fully aware of her corruption, and I'd still take her over Trump -- it's the entire reason I voted for her, and I'm not even a Democrat.

My question wasn't even toward you, I was asking someone who hadn't voted Hillary. Are you admitting to being an immoral person?

And by the way, just because my nation is fascist, and I like the a e s t h e t i c, you need to learn how to separate internet jokes and memes from reality. If you click the spoiler, it's very clear I'm not fascist because I'm not anywhere near authoritarian, just a nationalist.

[Lady Scylla]

No one says that Hillary is a goddess of perfectionism, but she is much better and more experienced than her counterpart who will now have access to nuclear weapons.

She was unelectable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/ ... als-trust/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_584fb ... 1621824160

I'm finding it more amusing, if we're to believe your signature as descriptive of your political leanings, that you'd have such an issue with corruption or dirty-politics. As I said before, take your snide arrogance elsewhere. It's not the same as confidence, and it's merely tiring. Now, you could argue if I've a single moral bone in my body, and to that I would say you'd have to find it. I'm fully aware of her corruption, and I'd still take her over Trump -- it's the entire reason I voted for her, and I'm not even a Democrat.

My question wasn't even toward you, I was asking someone who hadn't voted Hillary. Are you admitting to being an immoral person?

And by the way, just because my nation is fascist, and I like the a e s t h e t i c, you need to learn how to separate internet jokes and memes from reality. If you click the spoiler, it's very clear I'm not fascist because I'm not anywhere near authoritarian, just a nationalist.

Hence my use of, if we're to believe it; and I don't take much stock in the compass BS. As far as immoral? To you, perhaps. Then again, I don't give a damn about morality anyway. I want the country to function, people can leave their morality at the door. Your question may not have been towards me, but I've chimed in anyway because I'm neither liberal, nor Democrat so it takes off the legs of much of your argument from what I've seen. And I'd like to see you adjust your argument to be more befitting to someone such as myself.

[Opfornia]

She was unelectable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/ ... als-trust/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_584fb ... 1621824160


My question wasn't even toward you, I was asking someone who hadn't voted Hillary. Are you admitting to being an immoral person?

And by the way, just because my nation is fascist, and I like the a e s t h e t i c, you need to learn how to separate internet jokes and memes from reality. If you click the spoiler, it's very clear I'm not fascist because I'm not anywhere near authoritarian, just a nationalist.

Hence my use of, if we're to believe it; and I don't take much stock in the compass BS. As far as immoral? To you, perhaps. Then again, I don't give a damn about morality anyway. I want the country to function, people can leave their morality at the door. Your question may not have been towards me, but I've chimed in anyway because I'm neither liberal, nor Democrat so it takes off the legs of much of your argument from what I've seen. And I'd like to see you adjust your argument to be more befitting to someone such as myself.

My argument already applies to you as well. People who would have rather had Clinton as president are either immoral or fine with immoral politicians, in denial of the evidence that proves she is an immoral person, or are incredibly uninformed. I'm glad I could clear that up for you.

[Vassenor]

She was unelectable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/ ... als-trust/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_584fb ... 1621824160

So what does that say about Trump if the "unelectable" candidate got more votes than he did?

[Opfornia]

She was unelectable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/ ... als-trust/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_584fb ... 1621824160

So what does that say about Trump if the "unelectable" candidate got more votes than he did?

California has very low standards of politicians, probably. Remove them from the equation and Trump leads the popular vote by approximately 1.8 million.

[Imperializt Russia]

So what does that say about Trump if the "unelectable" candidate got more votes than he did?

California has very low standards of politicians, probably. Remove them from the equation and Trump leads the popular vote by approximately 1.8 million.

"California doesn't count because I don't like it"

[Opfornia]

California has very low standards of politicians, probably. Remove them from the equation and Trump leads the popular vote by approximately 1.8 million.

"California doesn't count because I don't like it"

America is a federal republic of states, one state doesn't get to decide a federal election.

[Lady Scylla]

Hence my use of, if we're to believe it; and I don't take much stock in the compass BS. As far as immoral? To you, perhaps. Then again, I don't give a damn about morality anyway. I want the country to function, people can leave their morality at the door. Your question may not have been towards me, but I've chimed in anyway because I'm neither liberal, nor Democrat so it takes off the legs of much of your argument from what I've seen. And I'd like to see you adjust your argument to be more befitting to someone such as myself.

My argument already applies to you as well. People who would have rather had Clinton as president are either immoral or fine with immoral politicians, in denial of the evidence that proves she is an immoral person, or are grossly uninformed. I'm glad I could clear that up for you.

And you're under the impression that Trump is somehow not corrupt or immoral himself? I do like the cherry-picking people put on, especially Trump supporters who are willingly capable of ignoring the misgivings of the Republicans, or their own candidate, while simultaneously looking for a horse to ride on to feel superior to the Democrats/Libs/whateverthenewtermthesedaysis. It's absolute bullshit, and completely stupid and disingenuous thinking, and largely the fault of why this country has become utter trash. The public has become so politically polarised that anything short of an absolute schism in policy would make heads roll.

But, I can give you a newsflash from reality -- Governments are corrupt, it is their inherent nature, they have to be to get anything actually done -- neither party is a saint in this regard, to think so is laughably blind. I do enjoy this whole black and white charade people put on, especially involving this election and I do hope reality comes knocking hard enough to force them into the mud where they'll have to face the bullshit they've refused to acknowledge for so long. You're no exception to this, just as much as I am. Politics has no room for morality.

So no, I don't believe you're any more moral than I am. You're aware of your shit candidate, at least have the balls to admit it.

[Vassenor]

"California doesn't count because I don't like it"

America is a federal republic of states, one state doesn't get to decide a federal election.

Most elections are decided by at most six states. In this case it was three.

[Imperializt Russia]

"California doesn't count because I don't like it"

America is a federal republic of states, one state doesn't get to decide a federal election.

Does the term "swing state" mean anything to you?

It's not one state that decides the federal election. It's five

(Oh, and California isn't one of them)

[Opfornia]

My argument already applies to you as well. People who would have rather had Clinton as president are either immoral or fine with immoral politicians, in denial of the evidence that proves she is an immoral person, or are grossly uninformed. I'm glad I could clear that up for you.

And you're under the impression that Trump is somehow not corrupt or immoral himself? I do like the cherry-picking people put on, especially Trump supporters who are willingly capable of ignoring the misgivings of the Republicans, or their own candidate, while simultaneously looking for a horse to ride on to feel superior to the Democrats/Libs/whateverthenewtermthesedaysis. It's absolute bullshit, and completely stupid and disingenuous thinking, and largely the fault of why this country has become utter trash. The public has become so politically polarised that anything short of an absolute schism in policy would make heads roll.

But, I can give you a newsflash from reality -- Governments are corrupt, it is their inherent nature, they have to be to get anything actually done -- neither party is a saint in this regard, to think so is laughably blind. I do enjoy this whole black and white charade people put on, especially involving this election and I do hope reality comes knocking hard enough to force them into the mud where they'll have to face the bullshit they've refused to acknowledge for so long. You're no exception to this, just as much as I am. Politics has no room for morality.

So no, I don't believe you're any more moral than I am. You're aware of your shit candidate, at least have the balls to admit it.

And people in this thread said that I was being edgy.