Great googamooga

Moderators: shutout, evs' Boytoy, Irish Mike

1976.52:20 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:37 pm



you're saying people who take a day off work and drive to a rally were people who changed their vote because of propaganda?
The Russians reached 125,00,000 people with their ads. They only needed to change 77,000 votes to change who was elected president. The Trumpette line is thats not possible. Yet a tiny minute fraction of that campaign was able to get people to take a day off work and drive to a rally.
it seems more likely that 3rd party candidates had more effect...and studies indicate they haven't swayed an election even though it "feels" like they have, particularly Nader.
I know it doesn't fit in the narrative, but they played both sides of every issue, including the election. Maybe they wanted trump more than Hillary, but their goal is to divide us. It's pretty easy to see for people who don't blindly follow the party line. If they swayed people to vote for trump, what makes you think they didn't sway people to vote the other way? Again, they were playing both sides.

1977.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:40 pm

it does seem pretty dumb though. I mean how many people are swayed by bumper stickers and yard signs? There are tons of them, do they do anything but annoy?

1978.Tommy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:52 pm

It’s amazing (more depressing) how many rational, smart people totally lose their mind and blindly support the party line, making illogical and just plain stupid arguments to support their position supporting the party / candidate. Think most of it is ego, “I’m smarter than you, here’s how”, when in reality they’re proving their ignorance and stupidity.

User avatar 1979.Denver-Gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:04 pm

It’s amazing (more depressing) how many rational, smart people totally lose their mind and blindly support the party line, making illogical and just plain stupid arguments to support their position supporting the party / candidate. Think most of it is ego, “I’m smarter than you, here’s how”, when in reality they’re proving their ignorance and stupidity.
I think some of it is an unwillingness to admit you were wrong, or that you were duped.

1980.MoralityULack » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:10 pm



you're saying people who take a day off work and drive to a rally were people who changed their vote because of propaganda?
The Russians reached 125,00,000 people with their ads. They only needed to change 77,000 votes to change who was elected president. The Trumpette line is thats not possible. Yet a tiny minute fraction of that campaign was able to get people to take a day off work and drive to a rally.
it seems more likely that 3rd party candidates had more effect...and studies indicate they haven't swayed an election even though it "feels" like they have, particularly Nader.
There are plenty of reasons. The biggest is Hillary herself. 538 has a convincing case against Comey. Maybe if he had not bungled his job Hillary would have won. But he did. Why dismiss one? The Russians could easily have contributed 77,000 votes.

Its like a football game where you lose by 1. It could have been the fumbles. It could have been the interception. It could have been the blown coverage. It could have been the bad call. But it is just as fair to point out that if they had not had 12 men on a blocked kick the game would have been different. And maybe we should have an official in the booth counting players before the next season.

1981.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:10 pm

It’s amazing (more depressing) how many rational, smart people totally lose their mind and blindly support the party line, making illogical and just plain stupid arguments to support their position supporting the party / candidate. Think most of it is ego, “I’m smarter than you, here’s how”, when in reality they’re proving their ignorance and stupidity.
I think some of it is an unwillingness to admit you were wrong, or that you were duped.
this is a great point. People are unlikely to admit they were duped with a camera in their face or confronted, say over the internet, but hopefully pointing it out gets them thinking and realizing there's a problem, even if it takes time. That's where I think social media/conventional media attention to this an help, the more nonsense is pointed out as such it at least gets people to examine it privately.

I've managed to get most of my FB friends to stop sharing David Avocado bs, so I have hope!

1982.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:12 pm



The Russians reached 125,00,000 people with their ads. They only needed to change 77,000 votes to change who was elected president. The Trumpette line is thats not possible. Yet a tiny minute fraction of that campaign was able to get people to take a day off work and drive to a rally.
it seems more likely that 3rd party candidates had more effect...and studies indicate they haven't swayed an election even though it "feels" like they have, particularly Nader.
There are plenty of reasons. The biggest is Hillary herself. 538 has a convincing case against Comey. Maybe if he had not bungled his job Hillary would have won. But he did. Why dismiss one? The Russians could easily have contributed 77,000 votes.

Its like a football game where you lose by 1. It could have been the fumbles. It could have been the interception. It could have been the blown coverage. It could have been the bad call. But it is just as fair to point out that if they had not had 12 men on a blocked kick the game would have been different. And maybe we should have an official in the booth counting players before the next season.
or it could just be that people who supported Trump were more motivated than Clinton voters, whether you want to admit it or not.

1983.9508 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:22 pm

It’s never good to get in between Evs and VD... but isn’t the question of what motivated people the heart of the Russian interference investigation? What we have seen was disinformation designed to raise fears (on both sides, but it was especially effective with the anti Washington crowd which played in to Trumps hand) hacked emails that surely depressed motivation on the Dems side.

What’s important to note though is that Russia is trying to sow discord in America and divide the country deeply. Trump was convenient for their end goal, but he is hardly their boy. If making discord grow appears easier by pushing the dem in the next election they will have a field day trashing Trump.

That’s why you see them playing both sides. To ratchet up the crazy. And when they see which approach is more effective, that’s what really takes off.

Russia doesn’t give a fuck who is in office as long as America is ineffective.

1984.HG 2.0 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:24 pm

It’s amazing (more depressing) how many rational, smart people totally lose their mind and blindly support the party line, making illogical and just plain stupid arguments to support their position supporting the party / candidate. Think most of it is ego, “I’m smarter than you, here’s how”, when in reality they’re proving their ignorance and stupidity.
This is vodun to a tee, except the "rational, smart" portion...

1985.52:20 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:25 pm

It’s never good to get in between Evs and VD... but isn’t the question of what motivated people the heart of the Russian interference investigation? What we have seen was disinformation designed to raise fears (on both sides, but it was especially effective with the anti Washington crowd which played in to Trumps hand) hacked emails that surely depressed motivation on the Dems side.

What’s important to note though is that Russia is trying to sow discord in America and divide the country deeply. Trump was convenient for their end goal, but he is hardly their boy. If making discord grow appears easier by pushing the dem in the next election they will have a field day trashing Trump.

That’s why you see them playing both sides. To ratchet up the crazy. And when they see which approach is more effective, that’s what really takes off.

Russia doesn’t give a fuck who is in office as long as America is ineffective.
Well said

1986.MoralityULack » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:26 pm



it seems more likely that 3rd party candidates had more effect...and studies indicate they haven't swayed an election even though it "feels" like they have, particularly Nader.
There are plenty of reasons. The biggest is Hillary herself. 538 has a convincing case against Comey. Maybe if he had not bungled his job Hillary would have won. But he did. Why dismiss one? The Russians could easily have contributed 77,000 votes.

Its like a football game where you lose by 1. It could have been the fumbles. It could have been the interception. It could have been the blown coverage. It could have been the bad call. But it is just as fair to point out that if they had not had 12 men on a blocked kick the game would have been different. And maybe we should have an official in the booth counting players before the next season.
or it could just be that people who supported Trump were more motivated than Clinton voters, whether you want to admit it or not.
I said there were many factors. You can only respond by adding a factor. Once again you cant admit that the Russian reaching virtually every voter with a deluge of posts could have made a difference. The Russians were doing something campaigns spent millions to do because THEY think it makes a difference. But you don't.

Perfect example of the above discussion.

1987.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:26 pm

It’s never good to get in between Evs and VD... but isn’t the question of what motivated people the heart of the Russian interference investigation? What we have seen was disinformation designed to raise fears (on both sides, but it was especially effective with the anti Washington crowd which played in to Trumps hand) hacked emails that surely depressed motivation on the Dems side.

What’s important to note though is that Russia is trying to sow discord in America and divide the country deeply. Trump was convenient for their end goal, but he is hardly their boy. If making discord grow appears easier by pushing the dem in the next election they will have a field day trashing Trump.

That’s why you see them playing both sides. To ratchet up the crazy. And when they see which approach is more effective, that’s what really takes off.

Russia doesn’t give a fuck who is in office as long as America is ineffective.
well sure, they were more anti people who they thought would be worse to them, so anti cruz, Rubio and Hilary; pro Bernie and trump (generally)
we and Russia have been playing games with each other for a long time and it will continue. Its important to be aware of it.

I think it was maybe more effective than it might have been because of the shady impression people had of Clinton, it was easy to play up. if it had been Biden would it have worked as much?

I still don't think it really impacted the election, but its near impossible to prove.

1988.Tommy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:29 pm

How can you be duped, by a politician? With Hillary and Trump, who actually thought they were good people who wanted to just do good, when both have a history of being complete shitbirds?

1989.HG 2.0 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:31 pm

How can you be duped, by a politician? With Hillary and Trump, who actually thought they were good people who wanted to just do good, when both have a history of being complete shitbirds?
Worse, you were duped by twitter bots

1990.9508 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:31 pm

It’s never good to get in between Evs and VD... but isn’t the question of what motivated people the heart of the Russian interference investigation? What we have seen was disinformation designed to raise fears (on both sides, but it was especially effective with the anti Washington crowd which played in to Trumps hand) hacked emails that surely depressed motivation on the Dems side.

What’s important to note though is that Russia is trying to sow discord in America and divide the country deeply. Trump was convenient for their end goal, but he is hardly their boy. If making discord grow appears easier by pushing the dem in the next election they will have a field day trashing Trump.

That’s why you see them playing both sides. To ratchet up the crazy. And when they see which approach is more effective, that’s what really takes off.

Russia doesn’t give a fuck who is in office as long as America is ineffective.
well sure, they were more anti people who they thought would be worse to them, so anti cruz, Rubio and Hilary; pro Bernie and trump (generally)
we and Russia have been playing games with each other for a long time and it will continue. Its important to be aware of it.

I think it was maybe more effective than it might have been because of the shady impression people had of Clinton, it was easy to play up. if it had been Biden would it have worked as much?

I still don't think it really impacted the election, but its near impossible to prove.
Oh there is zero chance of proving impact. I’m actually more concerned about the gerrymandering. Let’s establish both sides do it. The pubs lately have been a little more obvious about it. And it needs to stop. Parties have been shopping for voters instead of working to get voter support. It’s ridiculous. Clean up the maps and get to work. I see the appeal but it’s bad for the country. And it allows outside efforts to be more effective.

1991.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:34 pm

How can you be duped, by a politician? With Hillary and Trump, who actually thought they were good people who wanted to just do good, when both have a history of being complete shitbirds?
well for a lot it was the lesser of two evils

but lets face the fact being an elected official is a thankless shit job and its no wonder we can't get anyone great.

User avatar 1992.evs' Boytoy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:43 pm

ONCE AGAIN!

1993.MoralityULack » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:48 pm

It’s never good to get in between Evs and VD... but isn’t the question of what motivated people the heart of the Russian interference investigation? What we have seen was disinformation designed to raise fears (on both sides, but it was especially effective with the anti Washington crowd which played in to Trumps hand) hacked emails that surely depressed motivation on the Dems side.

What’s important to note though is that Russia is trying to sow discord in America and divide the country deeply. Trump was convenient for their end goal, but he is hardly their boy. If making discord grow appears easier by pushing the dem in the next election they will have a field day trashing Trump.

That’s why you see them playing both sides. To ratchet up the crazy. And when they see which approach is more effective, that’s what really takes off.

Russia doesn’t give a fuck who is in office as long as America is ineffective.
Yes and no.

Yes they want to fuck with America in general. They want to undermine faith in the institutions. They don't care who is the instrument of that.

No. Hillary has been firm against Russia throughout her career and as Secretary of state. They were definitely anti-Hillary.

Obama busted their chops over treatment of women, gays and muslims and sanctioned them for adventuring. What better way to tear America down than with a racist, nazi loving philanderer, who assaults women, brags about it, and hates Muslims and is itching to nuke somebody. And they do know Trump intimately. He has done business with Russia, long rumored to have done business with the Russian mob, maybe money laundering, and all the people around him also have a sleazy connection to Russia. If you are doing business in Russia legal or illegal the government is in on it. I don't know if they do or don't have pictures of Trump taking a golden shower. But they know where at least his people have skeletons buried and they are going to leak it in time.

So yes. They are going to fuck with Trump too. When he outlives his usefulness.
Last edited by MoralityULack on Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar 1994.Denver-Gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:50 pm


well sure, they were more anti people who they thought would be worse to them, so anti cruz, Rubio and Hilary; pro Bernie and trump (generally)
we and Russia have been playing games with each other for a long time and it will continue. Its important to be aware of it.
I'll go back to Trump's failures on this one. Yes, and the President not only needs to be aware of it, but also not to feed it. It seems like a good percentage of his tweets make it seems like he buys into whacky conspiracy theories, the same types of crap the Russians are using to divide us. He needs to stop calling fake news, real news. And vice versa. He plays right into their hands.

1995.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:55 pm


well sure, they were more anti people who they thought would be worse to them, so anti cruz, Rubio and Hilary; pro Bernie and trump (generally)
we and Russia have been playing games with each other for a long time and it will continue. Its important to be aware of it.
I'll go back to Trump's failures on this one. Yes, and the President not only needs to be aware of it, but also not to feed it. It seems like a good percentage of his tweets make it seems like he buys into whacky conspiracy theories, the same types of crap the Russians are using to divide us. He needs to stop calling fake news, real news. And vice versa. He plays right into their hands.
again it would be good if he didn't do that but he's old, it's like old folks forwarding shitty emails like Obama is a muslim in 2006. saying he shouldn't do it isn't going to stop him. continue to complain about it but he seems like he does that shit just to get at people like you who get mad.

1996.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:56 pm

however, as one who doesn't think the government has all the answers, you should agree that twitter, fb, the news media will likely be more effective than an unpopular president speaking about it.

User avatar 1997.Denver-Gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:59 pm


well sure, they were more anti people who they thought would be worse to them, so anti cruz, Rubio and Hilary; pro Bernie and trump (generally)
we and Russia have been playing games with each other for a long time and it will continue. Its important to be aware of it.
I'll go back to Trump's failures on this one. Yes, and the President not only needs to be aware of it, but also not to feed it. It seems like a good percentage of his tweets make it seems like he buys into whacky conspiracy theories, the same types of crap the Russians are using to divide us. He needs to stop calling fake news, real news. And vice versa. He plays right into their hands.
again it would be good if he didn't do that but he's old, it's like old folks forwarding shitty emails like Obama is a muslim in 2006. saying he shouldn't do it isn't going to stop him. continue to complain about it but he seems like he does that shit just to get at people like you who get mad.
Again, you seem to have this propensity to defend the indefensible by saying, well, he isn't going to change so just shut up. Fuck that, I'll say what I want.

You seem to like making excuses for someone who's unfit for the job

User avatar 1998.Denver-Gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:02 pm

however, as one who doesn't think the government has all the answers, you should agree that twitter, fb, the news media will likely be more effective than an unpopular president speaking about it.
He wouldn't be so unpopular if he wasn't being such an idiot about all of this. Again, just make excuses for him rather than hold him accountable

1999.evil gator » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:07 pm

however, as one who doesn't think the government has all the answers, you should agree that twitter, fb, the news media will likely be more effective than an unpopular president speaking about it.
He wouldn't be so unpopular if he wasn't being such an idiot about all of this. Again, just make excuses for him rather than hold him accountable
wow you did not used to be this dense, I'm not making excuses, I'm facing reality.
Sort by

« Sports, Entertainment, and Everything Else