Did Russian Interference Affect the 2016 Election Results?

[LV426]

I did not make the assumption it was committed by Democrats

Yes you did.

You said Democrats commit election fraud just as Republicans did, and you supported that bullshit with something that was "not comprehensive" (your words).

So you were making the assumption, despite no evidence in the source you used, that Democrats committed voter fraud as Republicans did.

I don't understand why you are lying about what you said, about your tactics, and about your strategy.

This database is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list,

Right, which means it's biased and I showed you how it was biased by showing it didn't include the biggest election fraud in decades in NC-09.

So you're using a source that cherry picks voting fraud to make the argument that Democrats are just as bad as Republicans, even though the source doesn't attribute the fraud to any party.

So you took it one step further and decided to distribute equal amounts of voter fraud across both parties for the sole purpose of post-hoc validating your both siderism.

I just wish you were honest about it.

 

[Flash]

So they cherry picked instances, then.

So that would be bias.

To not include the biggest election fraud in decades, committed by Republicans, screams bias.

Biased toward what? 1,100 cases of voter fraud? As you said---there is no party affiliation listed, so party is not the bias. You have yet to find anything wrong with the database other than it includes both parties.

 

[LV426]

I did not cut off anything.

Yes you did!

You literally posted the sentence before what I posted in a vacuum.

You didn't attribute it correctly to where it was in Mueller's report, nor did you mention what he said immediately after that.

So why did you do that?

I never disputed Russian interference to help Drumpf.

That is what this whole discussion is about!

You don't think Russian propaganda manipulated voters in the three key states Manafort was sharing polling data with Kilmnik. This, after you said propaganda is effective among "a small percentage of voters".

I would consider 100,000 voters across three states as "a small percentage of voters", wouldn't you?

So if you're now saying Russia was hacking to help Trump, why are you resisting the fact that hacking was successful in flipping the "small percentage of voters" in the three key states where Trump's margin was narrow?

But when I said they attempted to sow discord in America you said "No, they were trying to get Drumpf elected."

Becuase sowing discord in America was what they started out doing, and then it evolved into electing Trump, just like Mueller's report says.

So you admit that Russia was hacking for Trump, was spreading propaganda that is effective, but it wasn't effective in MI, PA, and WI where Trump's margin was "a small percentage of voters"?

 

[LV426]

Obviously, they could be trying to do both (but you are against "both-sidism"].

Stop with this bad faith sophistry.

It's these kind of shit tactics that make me not respect you at all.

Both siderism is about finding a false equivalence between two artificial sides in order to maintain a posture of "independence".

But what it really is is laziness.

"Both sides are the same" says to the world that you cannot be bothered to recognize distinctions and differences, so everyone must lower their collective expectations of you.

 

[LV426]

How can you make a "racist assumption" against a group that is not a race.

It was not an assumption. I read about at the time. A. C. Cuellar was a Democratic County Commissioner.

"A campaign manager pleaded guilty Monday in connection to a 2012 vote-buying scheme that tried to sway voters with cash and cocaine to pick certain Donna school board candidates, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Francisco “Frankie” Garcia, 47, of Donna, copped to one count of conspiring to buy votes and one count of vote-buying during the 2012 general election, court records show.

Garcia, who worked as a campaign manager for four school board candidates, is the latest to admit guilt. Five other politiqueras, or paid campaign workers, have also pleaded guilty for their roles in the vote-buying, records show.

Prosecutors have not disclosed the names of the candidates.

Vote-buying may have also extended to the 2012 primary election. One of the politiqueras, Veronica Saldivar, testified at her court hearing Sept. 26 that she had worked for Pct. 1 Commissioner A.C. Cuellar Jr., who beat Joel Quintanilla in the primary with 57 percent of the vote."

Wait a second...this was during a primary election?

Here I thought this was general election fraud, but what you're doing is stretching the bounds to include primaries.

So in your mind what happened in this primary is the same as what happened in the NC-09 general election?

 

[LV426]

Sure I can. They worked for a Democratic County Commissioner. A little easy research could have discovered that fact.

Well, the other fact is that you're trying to "both sides" a primary with a general election.

And whether or not they worked for a Democratic County Commissioner doesn't necessarily mean they were doing it on behalf of that guy, does it?

The fraud perpetrated in NC-09 was done on behalf of the Republican, with the knowledge of the Republican Party.

So that's how they're not "both sides".

A little easy research could have discovered that fact too.

 

[LV426]

Propaganda has never been limited to false information. It information to persuade.

OK, so then you admit propaganda is effective, you admit Russia was disseminating it to help Trump, but you deny that it worked to flip the 100,000 total voters needed for Trump to win PA, MI, and WI?

 

[LV426]

The source does not include party affiliation yet you claim it is biased. What is the bias?

I just fucking told you; that it didn't include the largest election fraud in decades in NC-09.

Why didn't it include that? It's major news.

It's the first time in decades we've had to hold another election because of fraud.

The NC case has an indictment but there has been no trial (as far as I know) or a conviction.

A little easy research would show you're fucking wrong as usual.

The guy who committed the fraud was indicted.

So once again, Flash, we have another instance of you being lazy and acting in bad faith.

How come?

 

[LV426]

That means 36% of seniors do not use social media.

LOL!

You said "many seniors don't".

I showed an overwhelming majority do.

The words you're looking for are; "I was talking out of my ass and I apologize".

 

[Flash]

Right, the link you used for your source says that.

So...did you even look at the link before you posted it? Doesn't seem like you did. What happened was you got so worked up that you did a rushed, sloppy Google search and posted the first link that turned up.

It's OK to admit it, but it's not OK to pretend you've done any good faith work on this.

The political fraud data base clearly says "campaign" workers. You changed that to "poll workers" to change the meaning.

You must have read it about as carelessly as you read the Mueller report when you said it did not say it was an attempt to sow discord which obviously worked on you because you claimed it was a fraudulent election. Some people are so easy to manipulate. Russians were obviously aiming their efforts toward people like you.

 

[LV426]

That is a lot of votes which is what I said---a lot of seniors do not use social media

The overwhelming majority of seniors in 2016 used social media.

Less than younger voters so they would be less influenced by those campaign sources.

64% is not a small number, and it's hilarious watching you argue that it is.

Remember, Trump only had to flip 100,000 votes of that 64%.

 

[LV426]

Biased toward what?

Towards Conservatism! By neglecting to include the instances of voter fraud like NC-09, Heritage (which is a Conservative PAC and think-tank that has been wrong about so much before) is skewing the instances of voter fraud so bothsiderists like you can legitimize Conservative cheaters like Mark Harris.

 

[LV426]

As you said---there is no party affiliation listed, so party is not the bias.

Because the bias is Conservatism, and Conservatism is of the strategy to pretend voter fraud is widespread by both sides so that the instances of fraud committed by Conservatives are diminished or completely ignored, like NC-09.

The question though is why did you think this was a legitimate source?

 

[Flash]

Well, the other fact is that you're trying to "both sides" a primary with a general election.

And whether or not they worked for a Democratic County Commissioner doesn't necessarily mean they were doing it on behalf of that guy, does it?

The fraud perpetrated in NC-09 was done on behalf of the Republican, with the knowledge of the Republican Party.

So that's how they're not "both sides".

A little easy research could have discovered that fact too.

I knew all those things. You are trying so hard to pretend it was not Democrats buying votes in South Texas. Cheating in a primary (and a general election) is still cheating. I am very aware both parties engage in those activities--you are the one pretending it is only the Republicans. I suspect you really know better but can't admit your party is not still a virgin.

You don't think the County Commissioner knew what they were doing? It was Democrats cheating to help their candidate (a Democrat) win.

So, yes, is a great illustration of both sides cheating.

 

[Flash]

OK, so then you admit propaganda is effective, you admit Russia was disseminating it to help Trump, but you deny that it worked to flip the 100,000 total voters needed for Trump to win PA, MI, and WI?

I said propaganda is not limited to false information and is used to persuade. That does not mean it always works. And, we both have no clue whether somebody's vote was changed because of campaign material from the many sources during a campaign.

 

[LV426]

The political fraud data base clearly says "campaign" workers. You changed that to "poll workers" to change the meaning.

No, the actual instance you were talking about from TX were poll workers and it was during a primary, not a general election. And they were "buying votes" not for a specific candidate, but to get people to vote. Period.

That's what your link says.

Stop trying to shift the blame for what you've done onto me.

Or, maybe just use better sources next time.

You must have read it about as carelessly as you read the Mueller report when you said it did not say it was an attempt to sow discord which obviously worked on you because you claimed it was a fraudulent election.

You carelessly read and then plagairized the Mueller report by not posting the rest of what followed from that sentence. You literally stopped reading after that sentence. The next sentence following what you quoted says that the campaign evolved to support Trump.

That's literally what it says.

You decided what followed that first sentence wasn't relevant and the only reason why you think that is because if you posted the rest, your argument would be in the toilet.

So you are selectively editing the Mueller report to make it say something it doesn't say for your ego's sake.

 

[Flash]

I just fucking told you; that it didn't include the largest election fraud in decades in NC-09.

Why didn't it include that? It's major news.

It's the first time in decades we've had to hold another election because of fraud.

Because it is 1) relatively recent; 2) there has been no trial and conviction. Therefore, it is not a documented conviction for voter fraud.

 

[LV426]

I knew all those things.

No you didn't.

You didn't even know about NC-09 until I bought it up, and then you stupidly and lazily tried to say no one in NC-09 has gone to court or been indicted when both have occurred and it's been happening since February.

Lazy.

 

[LV426]

You are trying so hard to pretend it was not Democrats buying votes in South Texas.

NO!

What your link says, and what the reports say, is that they were offering people incentives to vote, but not for a particular candidate, just to cast a ballot.

The difference between that and NC-09 is that in NC-09, Conservatives were literally changing votes and/or throwing votes away.

 

[LV426]

You don't think the County Commissioner knew what they were doing? It was Democrats cheating to help their candidate (a Democrat) win.

Idiot, this was in a primary so all the people running on the ballot were already Democrats.

Secondly, your own links say that what she was doing was offering incentives to people to vote, not to vote for any candidate in particular.

She wasn't electioneering, she was offering people incentives to cast a ballot in the primary.

These details are in the articles you linked to, but didn't even read!

And that's your style; to act in bad faith, engage in sophistry, and to lie.

You lied. You straight up fuckin' lied, bro.