Alcofribas Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 The problem with that is that Trump has at several points had a chance in the race, if his handlers had better control of him, and if the sex pest stuff hadn't come out he might have won, especially with Russia's help. It's win/win for Russia either way though.You've spent the entire election assuring the forum trump has no chance (except maybe unless Bernie delegates were protesting) and I think Putin probably had people telling him the same thing. I'm not saying theres no chance Russia ever believed trump could win but rather that it's always been a longer game. But yes, win/win. It has played out pretty much how I thought it would play out, there was always the chance I could be wrong though (it does happen the odd time you'll be surprised to learn), and it's still possible I could be wrong (though less and less likely by the day). Polls have been spectacularly wrong in the past, though the sheer number of them this time means it's extremely unlikely. Assange might still have some bombshell up his sleeve too, which the Russians would probably know about, though you'd have thought they'd have used it by now, but who knows. Yeah I think you've been right about the polls, it's looked pretty consistent in Hilary's favor. That being said you're also correct that there could be something missing or the polls themselves could be wrong or there's a Molotov cocktail coming any day (which Russia would definitely be aware of). But if we accept the consistency of the polls and trump's universal inability to actually do politics I think we can safely say Russia must have accepted the same. It would be great for their interests to have trump in the White House but imo the game their playing has probably been less organized toward that outcome than it has been portrayed in the media and by Clinton's campaign. It seems more likely they were looking to basically just fuck with the election knowing that Hillary would most likely win and thus their message was perhaps more finely tuned to her in some sense. Basically, as usual I think the analysis of this has been extremely trite and without nuance. Russia isn't new to this kind of shit. In some sense I think they were testing the water to see how Clinton would respond. Notice her reply has been genetically hawkish but she hasn't exactly committed to intervention in Syria for example. It's definitely an act of aggression but imo it would be much wiser to look beyond the interpretation that Russia was only looking for the outcome of establishing their preferred candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcofribas Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Which means, imo, this is much less about Putin favoring trump and more about Putin saying "welcome to the presidency stupid woman."i think you meant putin saying "ЖELKOM ТО PЯECIDENCЪ STУPID ШОМАН" my bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 https://www.buzzfeed.com/benking/tiny-hand-will-be-your-new-comic-sans?utm_term=.svvDNgAM0Q#.thLNynOeWd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YangYing Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I'd like to propose a theory about Russia. Since the first batch of wikileaks before the dnc liberals have accepted the Clinton campaign's assertion that 1) Russia is behind the leaks and 2) it's bc they want Hillary to loose bc trump wil be a more useful president for Putin. I think we can all agree 1) is almost assuredly true. We've not been offered concrete evidence...but come on. As for 2) well I think it's also true but only partially so. I think in theory Putin favors trump but I also think he realizes trump won't win. Thus the liberal consensus about trump being a "useful idiot," "Manchurian candidate," "putin stooge," etc is missing a subtler point, viz, that the leaks are not meant to cost Hillary the election but are meant to undermine her presidency. I think the intention is to spread a sense of unease and chaos during what should be a much more clear-cut win against trump. On the one hand the leaks make Hillary look weak, exposed, vulnerable. So while some people content themselves with the fact that nothing scandalous or illegal is revealed they miss the point that in and of themselves they make Hillary look like she doesn't have control and by exposing the private inner workings of her campaign they do not so much "humanize" her campaign (like they're all just people like us, sharing risotto recipes and doing their jobs) but rather diminish the symbolic cache of her campaign, reducing her from the symbol of a leader and drawing her into a more fallable order. At the same time, they force Hilary's hand. She can't just ignore them and she can't just pretend it's not Russia fucking with her. This, however, makes her look hawkish. This is one of the qualities progressive voters dislike about her. When she appears before the voting public telling them intelligence agencies are saying a foreign power is antagonizing our country many of us can't help but be reminded of her vote for Iraq. What is more, it makes her look like a hypocrite: here she is telling us how wrong it is for a government to be spying on us and infiltrating our private emails and yet there's Russia affording asylum to the very U.S. citizen who revealed our own government has been doing exactly that not just do foreign nations but to its own people. So Putin has her in a bit of a bind here. None of this is enough to cost her the election. The October surprise was not particularly surprising. And we've seen that liberal voters and the media have no qualms aligning themselves with her take on these leaks. She continues to lead in the polls and there appears to be no reason not to think trump will loose. I think Russia is well aware of this. Which means, imo, this is much less about Putin favoring trump and more about Putin saying "welcome to the presidency stupid woman." I thoroughly enjoyed this review of the elseq record by autechre and am excited for future alco reviews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I'd like to propose a theory about Russia. Since the first batch of wikileaks before the dnc liberals have accepted the Clinton campaign's assertion that 1) Russia is behind the leaks and 2) it's bc they want Hillary to loose bc trump wil be a more useful president for Putin. I think we can all agree 1) is almost assuredly true. We've not been offered concrete evidence...but come on. As for 2) well I think it's also true but only partially so. I think in theory Putin favors trump but I also think he realizes trump won't win. Thus the liberal consensus about trump being a "useful idiot," "Manchurian candidate," "putin stooge," etc is missing a subtler point, viz, that the leaks are not meant to cost Hillary the election but are meant to undermine her presidency. I think the intention is to spread a sense of unease and chaos during what should be a much more clear-cut win against trump. On the one hand the leaks make Hillary look weak, exposed, vulnerable. So while some people content themselves with the fact that nothing scandalous or illegal is revealed they miss the point that in and of themselves they make Hillary look like she doesn't have control and by exposing the private inner workings of her campaign they do not so much "humanize" her campaign (like they're all just people like us, sharing risotto recipes and doing their jobs) but rather diminish the symbolic cache of her campaign, reducing her from the symbol of a leader and drawing her into a more fallable order. At the same time, they force Hilary's hand. She can't just ignore them and she can't just pretend it's not Russia fucking with her. This, however, makes her look hawkish. This is one of the qualities progressive voters dislike about her. When she appears before the voting public telling them intelligence agencies are saying a foreign power is antagonizing our country many of us can't help but be reminded of her vote for Iraq. What is more, it makes her look like a hypocrite: here she is telling us how wrong it is for a government to be spying on us and infiltrating our private emails and yet there's Russia affording asylum to the very U.S. citizen who revealed our own government has been doing exactly that not just do foreign nations but to its own people. So Putin has her in a bit of a bind here. None of this is enough to cost her the election. The October surprise was not particularly surprising. And we've seen that liberal voters and the media have no qualms aligning themselves with her take on these leaks. She continues to lead in the polls and there appears to be no reason not to think trump will loose. I think Russia is well aware of this. Which means, imo, this is much less about Putin favoring trump and more about Putin saying "welcome to the presidency stupid woman." I thoroughly enjoyed this review of the elseq record by autechre and am excited for future alco reviews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcofribas Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 lol I suppose that was something of an alco review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 lol @ trump after debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usagi Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I'd like to propose a theory about Russia. ...the intention is to spread a sense of unease and chaos... Russia in particular seems to have a long history of employing this tactic to their perceived advantage. it's been a part of their statecraft since the 19th century at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candiru Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I bet John Erlichmann is voting for Trump. Also, people in this thread are acting like he still has a chance... Go vote and rest easy. Also, legal marijuana in Massachusetts, fuck yeah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted October 21, 2016 Author Share Posted October 21, 2016 so, i'm guessing when clinton gets in office, first order of business to go after upstart julian assange? https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789188917736071169 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted October 21, 2016 Author Share Posted October 21, 2016 https://youtu.be/VN7cLyyJgGY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 (edited) ouch, lots of boos. loved the 'YOU'RE A JOKE' shouted out. Clinton went down a lot better, better joke writers no doubt, but better delivery too. Check out the face of Giuliani when she hits him, beautiful. https://youtu.be/Q0ryocAv8Zw?t=6100 Edited October 21, 2016 by caze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted October 21, 2016 Author Share Posted October 21, 2016 yeah i was watching hers and thought it went well. i just posted trump coz you could tell when he either added his own parts, or insisted his writer/s add the e-mail/wikileaks parts. and tomorrow, that writer/s will be fired and trump will deny ever giving that speech since everyone in that room was in on it to get trump to look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 ouch, lots of boos. loved the 'YOU'RE A JOKE' shouted out. Clinton went down a lot better, better joke writers no doubt, but better delivery too. Check out the face of Giuliani when she hits him, beautiful. https://youtu.be/Q0ryocAv8Zw?t=6100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 (edited) Interesting article @Vox about how politicians often do keep their promises. Against popular belief. And according to multiple studies. Some background in article and implications with respect to what we know about what HRC has promised (and hasn't promised!): http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/21/13317060/politicians-keep-promises The best-kept secret in politics is that presidents mostly do what they say they’ll do — so paying attention to what the woman who is very likely to become president says she’ll do is worth your time. Edited October 22, 2016 by goDel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 is there anything going to happen between now and election...? the debates are over, what's next..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 is there anything going to happen between now and election...? the debates are over, what's next..? Between now and the election it's just waiting for the next Trump scandal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 ballots came in the mail on friday so i can vote this weekend and then just cross my fingers for a couple weeks and hope for the best. also, masks! CHINA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 ballots came in the mail on friday so i can vote this weekend and then just cross my fingers for a couple weeks and hope for the best. also, masks! CHINA! Gotta meet that halloween demand for trump masks. Those pictures illustrate the absurdity of the world pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubin Farr Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Did anyone see the nude statue of Hillary that appeared in NYC? We can't link it here, but damn it was hideous, with a Wallstreet banker suckling at her side, LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 it's pretty sad / lol that somehow it is thought that such image is too much for our sensitive eyes to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bitroast Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublename Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Post nude Hillary pls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts