Did Russian Interference Affect the 2016 Election Results?

[LV426]

Whether NC is included does nothing to disprove your claim that only Republicans cheat.

NC-09 serves my point that the source you used to make the both sides argument is shit and biased, because you're shit and biased.

So a shitty, biased person is going to use a shitty, biased source. A source you didn't even bother to vet before you linked to it and made it central to your thesis. A source, by your own admission is inaccurate. So, do you always use inaccurate things to inform your position? So, so lazy...

It has about 1100 cases and a little research shows both Democrats and Republicans are abundantly represented. The point of the database was to show both sides do it.

Wait a second, you didn't do any of that research! You did no research. You did nothing. All you did was regurgitate a link that you didn't bother to check its accuracy or veracity.

The point of the cherry picked database is to advance a "bothsides" argument because that's the only way Conservatism can be legitimized. So yeah, it's effective propaganda and it worked on you because you have a small mind.

 

[Flash]

See how you keep moving the bar? We're talking specifically about the Russian propaganda that targeted voters in the states Trump narrowly won by less than 100,000 in total. You said yourself that propaganda was effective among "a small percentage of voters". So then it was effective in MI, PA, and WI.

The main issue is that you have no clue whether Russian efforts changed the vote of one person.

Everything else is just smoke and mirrors to challenge some minor fact or distort my posts. You can't show one vote was changed.

 

[LV426]

You are dishonest to pick out one case

One case?

It's the biggest electoral fraud in decades.

When was the last time we had to throw out election results of a Congressional race because one party openly cheated?

Didn't the GOP end up having to enter into a consent decree because of the last time they did that?

If "both sides are the same", how come only the GOP had to agree to the consent decree?

 

[evince]

Getty
Tad Devine
Emails between Paul Manafort and Tad Devine, a strategist for Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign who has also worked on a number of other high-profile Democratic campaigns, are part of a list of 500 potential exhibits released by Robert Mueller before Manafort’s upcoming trial. Here is what you need to know about Tad Devine.

1. Tad Devine Worked with Paul Manafort on Pro-Kremlin Campaigns for Nearly a Decade, & Now Their Emails Are Part of an Exhibit for Manafort’s Trialhttps://heavy.com/news/2018/07/tad-devine/

https://heavy.com/news/2018/07/tad-devine/

 

[dukkha]

OMG he's still talking about Mueller

View attachment 11364

 

[Getin the ring]

.[/B][/I]
"and maybe your $hit biased president will date my $hit stained Mom, and I will have a $hit stained brother, and your $hit stained source will support my argument
.

 

[evince]

what dems have been compromised

 

[Flash]

That was the start, but that's not where it ended up because it evolved.

Now if you're going to say that supporting Trump was a means to sow discord in the nation, then you might have a point. But that's not what you said.

That was the goal. Helping Trump was just one way to accomplish that goal.

 

[evince]

facts don't have an expiration date assholes

 

[LV426]

I said although he was indicted there has been no trial or conviction.

But before, you said your source included "indictments".

That's what you said.

Now, if you're going to admit that was a lie from before, that's fine, but don't wiggle around the parameters just because you can't keep yourself straight from post to post.

Just admit you posted a biased link you didn't do due diligence on because you're lazy.

But, NC does not change the proof presented by the database that Democrats and Republicans have both cheated plenty.

But the database doesn't include party affiliation, and you didn't do any research by your own admission, so how do you know it presents an equal bothsides case?

 

[Earl]

A burly Russian came to my house but I couldn't understand him. I once tried to learn Russian but gave up the first day. No one can really learn Russian. They just pretend that they do. (sic)

 

[evince]

other people can be compromised just like Bernie



I think Yang has been


who is pumping him up?

 

[evince]

A burly Russian came to my house but I couldn't understand him. I tried to learn Russian but gave up the first day. No one can really learn Russian. They just pretend that they do. (sic)

mitch has Moscow understanding

 

[LV426]

"TONS of instances from 2018" proves my point--there is plenty of cheating from both sides. NC does not affect what the other 1100 cases show. It is just a deflection on your party to ignore the facts about voter fraud.

Right, but because your source doesn't identify party affiliation, how can you argue it's equal on both sides?

And why doesn't it include NC-09? You haven't given a good explanation; instead, you've redefined the parameters of what your source includes TWICE.

 

[Earl]

Remember Rosenstein: No Vote Counts or Election Results Were Changed

 

[LV426]

I said campaign ads were aimed at the small group of undecided voters. We don't know whether those are successful or not.

We know they're successful because Trump is the President.

WTF?

ou are assuming the success of any campaign material comes from the Russians.

If you read the Mueller Report, which you refuse to do, you would see the extent which Russia disseminated its propaganda, and the extent to which Americans were duped into disseminating it for them.

Facebook added a tool to its interface where you could see if you shared any Russian propaganda.

Mueller details the propaganda in his report.

There is no mystery as to who generated it.

We know who generated it. We know who shared it.

Facebook even has a tool where you can check yourself.

 

[evince]

Remember Rosenstein: No Vote Counts or Election Results Were Changed

and he has proven to be a trumpy

 

[Getin the ring]

If you read the Mueller Report,






.

 

[Flash]

But before, you said your source included "indictments".

That's what you said.

Now, if you're going to admit that was a lie from before, that's fine, but don't wiggle around the parameters just because you can't keep yourself straight from post to post.

Just admit you posted a biased link you didn't do due diligence on because you're lazy.

But the database doesn't include party affiliation, and you didn't do any research by your own admission, so how do you know it presents an equal bothsides case?

If all 1100 cases are Republican cheating it is hard to claim it is biased.

It all 1100 cases are Democratic cheating it proves the point that Democrats cheat.

That was the only point I was making before you got into minutia about primaries, indictments, bias, poll worker vs. campaign worker, and all the other trivia that has nothing to do with the simple fact you are unwilling to admit. Face it, Democrats were giving away drugs and stuff to get people to vote. They are just like Republicans.

 

[evince]

that is not what the USA COURT RECORDS SAY