T Nation

The Next President of the United States: IV

I was mainly referring to the DNC emails, where they are, without a doubt, showing their corruption. Also, hacking someone, creating a fall guy and then denying it isn’t exactly what I would call overt. Furthermore, with Putin being as smart as he is, I can’t see how he would think that aligning with Trump would actually better Trumps causes of winning.

Russia hacking Podesta/DNC and showing their internal workings gave real insight into the political process that is rife with underhanded schemes (certainly would go both ways if the GOP got hacked). It undoubtedly hurt HRC to a certain degree, which may have been Russia’s intent. I just don’t get why Putin would align with Trump if that were the case. He has to know that everyone in the US is scared of him (Putin) and aligning with Trump would decrease his likelihood of success. I just think Russia is fucking with everybody, they are tired of what they perceive to be Western interference and sanctions.

Regardless, showing the inner workings of the DNC was fascinating and proved what many Bernie supporters who were called “paranoid” correct.

1 Like

Good point.

How is a constant endorsement from Putin expected to help Trump with the American people?

In no way whatsoever is a guy at the DNC proposing a line about Sanders’ apparent atheism – a plan that came to nothing – more “concerning” than an attempt by one thermonuclear power to sabotage the election of another by way of illegal intervention in its affairs and unprecedented subversion of its political institutions. The same goes for every other of the DNC hack’s “revelations,” which, odious as a few were (and legitimate as some Sanders fans’ grievances are), utterly pale in comparison with an irruption of Kremlin tradecraft into an American presidential race. One is – I hope you’re sitting down for this! – evidence of underhanded political maneuvering within a political machine, evidence that exactly no one believes wouldn’t be matched outrage-for-outrage by a look at the RNC’s internal emails during Trump’s ass-first charge through the GOP primary process. The other may constitute or approach constituting an act of war.

[Quote]
Also, hacking someone, creating a fall guy and then denying it isn’t exactly what I would call overt.[/quote]

The leaking of the documents was overt whether the real publisher intended to be discovered or not, and this separates the DNC hack-and-publish scheme from routine intelligence-gathering cyberops not intended to produce explicit, headline-making effects on a presidential race.

Then there’s plenty of this, from the “academic” wing of the Russian Foreign Ministry:

[Quote]
Furthermore, with Putin being as smart as he is[/quote]

He’s a relentless thief with a talent for stuffing his own maw full of state funds; beyond that, this Putin is so smart and he’s playing this super-cool international chess game meme is a right-wing masturbatory fantasy. He’s run his country’s economy into the ground and made it an international pariah. He invited sanctions and a monetary-financial crisis during a period of global financial recovery. Tip: if you fancy yourself a great power, your economy shouldn’t be struggling to measure up to those of individual US states likes California, Texas, and New York. If it is, it should be growing by >4%, not shrinking for the last 18 months because of a fire whose flames you needlessly fanned. Oh, and he’s managed to raise the probability of global nuclear war with scarcely any material Russian benefit in sight.

[Quote]
I can’t see how he would think that aligning with Trump would actually better Trumps causes of winning. [/quote]

Maybe it’s that he comes directly from the addled bowels of the KGB and thus vastly overestimates his intelligence services’ capabilities, believing them able to dupe the USIC when in fact they couldn’t even figure out how to fake Romanian-language fluency or hide their alphabetic imprint on the stolen documents’ metadata.

Or maybe he’s retreating into a state of warm, fuzzy mental deterioration, as the decadently-rich have been known to do when they find themselves without the edifying constraints of a moral conscience. It can’t help one to surround oneself with such luminous beacons of clear-headed reason as this:

Or maybe he simply overestimated the number of mindless rajrajian buffoons eager to devour and regurgitate Kremlin propaganda.

It doesn’t really matter anymore, does it? The election is over, barring an increasingly unlikely catastrophe. Putin’s man is going to lose. So it goes.

Attacking someone based on religious grounds bothers me, for a number of reasons but it wasn’t the vast conspiracy theory many had assumed. I still find it highly disconcerting that DWS resigned, in part, because of increasing pressure from the progressive wing of the party and then was immediately hired by HRC.

Putin being a relentless thief we can agree on, the rest I am not entirely sure. Is the Russian economy struggling? Sure. Would it be doing better in a scenario where Putin wasn’t in charge? I don’t know, as antagonistic as he may be, he has put his country in the forefront again, which has some value.

Every time I watch his interviews or read transcripts I am entirely convinced Putin is as smart as they say. He is diabolical. Even if you don’t concede he is the mastermind the right makes him out to be, you should be able to realize that he can process a political environ well enough to know he isn’t appreciated.

That New Yorker article is bizarre, the guy sounds like a genuine nutcase but with that being said I wouldn’t put too much weight into this Vayno because after all, “The state of permanent instability, in turn, was the ultimate instrument of control, which sapped the energies and attention of all.”

If the attacks perpetrated by Russia are as malicious as you claim I think there is still cause for concern. If Putin actually wanted Trump in the white house and put genuine effort in then I think the foreign policy of Russia going forward is going to be more belligerent but yea, Trump is going to lose. Clinton will win and hopefully keep things at bay.

Point is you guys aren’t the least bit concerned it’s bash Trump all the time with no consideration of his main opponents faults. Even hear you went back to talking about Trump

No, I mocked your attempt at false equivalence – between Saudi contributions of money to Clinton’s charity and GRU contributions of tradecraft to the sabotage of an American presidential election – for the fatuous horseshit it is.

one thing Trump has going for him is the alternative media which you guys clearly hate - “racist right wing propaganda”

Even trevor Noah is shitting himself over the fact some of them get 65M views in their videos

[quote=“heretolog, post:3808, topic:218984, full:true”]
Attacking someone based on religious grounds bothers me, for a number of reasons but it wasn’t the vast conspiracy theory many had assumed. I still find it highly disconcerting that DWS resigned, in part, because of increasing pressure from the progressive wing of the party and then was immediately hired by HRC. [/quote]

That’s fine. My issue is with the notion that the underwhelming content of the leaks is more concerning than the fact that they are the product of a Kremlin influence op employed to the political benefit of the stupidest and most disastrous presidential candidate in American history – because it isn’t.

[Quote]
Putin being a relentless thief we can agree on, the rest I am not entirely sure. Is the Russian economy struggling? Sure. Would it be doing better in a scenario where Putin wasn’t in charge? I don’t know, as antagonistic as he may be, he has put his country in the forefront again, which has some value.[/quote]

The Russian economy is struggling and Putin’s policies are directly to blame.

As for “he has put his country in the forefront again”: this is one of those stock lines people repeat without explaining or knowing what information it is supposed to convey. Putin’s fundamental statistics and numbers in the last couple of years have been atrocious. Again, if you want to fancy yourself a great power, you cannot pursue policies that allow the West to legally exert downward pressure on your economy. Otherwise, how will you ever be GDP-competitive with the state of Texas!? A military modernization project is futile – and destined to fail – if your economy is rolling backwards down a hill of your own manufacture.

Beyond the numbers, the story is just as simple. The RF has succeeded in restoring to itself some of its Imperial instincts and proclivities: this isn’t some kind of impressive feat. It really isn’t all that grandmaster-chessy to bomb the living shit out of a Syrian suburb when you’ve inherited a nuclear arsenal from your predecessor-state and are therefore pretty damn free to do bad shit up to a certain point and to a certain powerless segment of people. This is particularly so when the bombing campaign isn’t going to serve Russian interests in the long term.

[Quote]
Every time I watch his interviews or read transcripts I am entirely convinced Putin is as smart as they say. He is diabolical. Even if you don’t concede he is the mastermind the right makes him out to be, you should be able to realize that he can process a political environ well enough to know he isn’t appreciated.

That New Yorker article is bizarre, the guy sounds like a genuine nutcase but with that being said I wouldn’t put too much weight into this Vayno because after all, “The state of permanent instability, in turn, was the ultimate instrument of control, which sapped the energies and attention of all.” [/quote]

The question is how long a man can stand at the center of permanent instability before his own egg starts to crack. There have been numerous indications in recent years that Putin is increasingly surrounding himself with babbling loons. Let’s hope he’s the fortress of calculating reason the Right fantasizes him to be.

If Trump wins, expect a “Russians hacked US polling stations and its been confirmed by 42 different cyber security companies” headlines across MSM

BECAUSE NO ONE HERE EVER WANTED HILLARY TO BE THE PRESIDENT

I’ve got these guys defending Hillary Clinton.

Not even a shower will get you clean after doing that.

What guys?

Are you speaking for yourself or everyone else?

I said my piece long ago on why I favored Trump, then just let it stand. That position hasn’t changed much, other than the converse- my dislike for Clinton has grown substantially.

You, on the other hand, have continued to bloviate and create indefensible dead end points that have virtually no possible outcome than to turn people against Trump.

You overstated the value of null points and over talked way too many points that should have been made then left alone.

You, much like Trumps bellyflop off of a sky scraper into a pile of rusty re-bar, have done that to yourself.

6 Likes

You make the mistake in believing any active posters can have their minds changed.

The very fact many of you say I’m making no points while continuing to actively engaging me routinely is evidence you don’t even believe this yourselves.

It’s because of his opponent that I’m so perturbed with Trump and his enablers. It’s because he and his supporters gave away this election to her, that I’m irate. Why should I blast Hillary? She didn’t get herself elected. Trump and his followers did. She was about the worst possible candidate the Democrats could have gone with. Absolutely terrible. But, as I’ve said time and again, inexplicably the GoP decided to run the only person viewed more negatively. Donald Trump. Donald Trump and his supporters are getting it, because YOU GUYS are the ones that blew this election for all of us. Thanks guys. Thanks a lot.

2 Likes

During the 2012 election didn’t you get into long winded discussions with zeb over voting for Romney because santorum didn’t win the nomination? Did you vote for Romney?

I seem to recall you lamenting over the fact the GOP only pays lip service to your stances

It’s not that you aren’t making points. You are. Many are valid, but also negative. They actually detract from your position and credibility as a whole.

No, sometimes it’s just fun to dunk on a seven foot goal, and that’s why we do it.

3 Likes

Which should tell just how much I was looking forward to voting against Hillary Clinton. I was going to vote for the nominee of a party with which I’d grown disillusioned with. It could’ve been Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, or Cruz. Moderate or conservative this time. It wouldn’t have mattered. I prepared to vote for him, and against one “Corrupt Hillary.” You’re not understanding one thing. Hillary was/is about as vulnerable a candidate as one could hope for. And I was ready to add my vote AGAINST her by voting for the Republican nominee, squishy or ideologue. Even if just to repudiate the lying amoral corruption her political-celebrity (A Clinton) status allows for. Then Trump’s ascension in the primaries began…And I simply couldn’t believe what I was seeing. If I was into grand conspiracies I would be inclined to believe that historical Clinton supporter, defender, fan, and friend, Mr. Trump, ran interference. But I’m not. So I think it’s as simple as people being detached from reality this election (hopefully only this one, or we’re heading to a one party system at the national level for a while).

4 Likes

What are you even talking about? Speaking for myself, 8 months ago I had no idea who I was going to vote for and I have thought about numerous points that have been made by a number of posters when making my decision.

For example, I had no idea about the 5% threshold for federal funding. That’s a HYOOOOGGGEEE part of why I’m voting third party. HYOOOOOGGGGEEEE. Got that from right here in this forum.

1 Like