"Intel officials warned House lawmakers Russia interfering to get Trump reelected"

I really don't think it's a distinction that matters in the big picture. I do understand what your saying but most people aren't differentiating.

 

But there was reportedly bipartisan pushback on the House briefing concerning its depth, credibility and the scope of the evidence, a senior administration official told CBS News. The DNI official overseeing election security threats, Shelby Pierson, was not able to present a rock-solid case proving Russia's assistance, according to the senior administration official.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia...intelligence-officials-warned-lawmakers-2020/

And how can varied opinions on the world wide web be considered election meddling?

Merkel said of Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton: “I value her long political experience, her commitment for women’s rights, family issues and health care.

“I value her strategic thinking and that she is a strong supporter of the transatlantic partnership. Whenever I had the chance to work together with Hillary Clinton, it was a great pleasure. ”https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...eat-merkel-lauds-clinton-idUSMTZSAPEC36LTD4ZC

Then there were the countless donations to the Obama campaign from the middle east.
Election meddling?

 

No but polling is probably a better barometer than antecedotal information....

PS. I'm not trying to come across as snarky, sorry if I've given that vibe

 

Possible, I'm just confused if Bernie had the most delegates why would his supporters just throw their weight behind someone who just swoops in at the end?

If those Sanders supporters do sit out in states like Michigan all that work getting a "more viable" candidate may well end up being not only a waste of time for 2020 but may facture off the progressive side of the party no?

The only answer I see is take whoever comes out of the primary and ride with it. 2020 is important but i can't see how jumping over Sanders gets you close enough to make it worth the party discord that will cause

 

We disagree...I think there is a profound difference. Do you want fundamental changes to the basic institutions, or do you just want to more it more difficult for people to corrupt them? Campaign financing and gerrymandering are, IMO, two examples.

 

It says.. repost

 

No problem. But, there is a disconnect. That same electorate returns the same people to Congress term after term...i.e. while they distract Congress, THEIR elected representatives are fine. I blame that partially on our education system, partially on media, but mostly on the electorate itself and their failure to understand that with "rights" comes "responsibility" and one of the principal responsibilities of being a member of the electorate is to have a thorough understanding of our system of governance and the issues before that electorate.

 

Then, as should be obvious, that whole "Bernie got the most delegates" argument comes down to:

What "threshold" of plurality?

I mean if Bernie had 48% that would be a much easier case to make than if he had 38%.

 

I just think that you and me and most of us here on this sight are able to have a much more nuanced take on things than the average person. That's of course my antecedotal experience.

I think maybe that people take a negative incident and have a tendency to generalize it onto entire groups.

 

It's Pavlovian at this point.

The left-wing media rings the Russia bell, and the Trump haters start drooling.

 

Four courses should be mandatory for a high school diploma - IMO. Basic household finance, U.S. Civics, Logic, and Statistical Probabilities. My kids understood the first two before their graduations and the second two before they received their university degrees.

 

Have you heard of this thing called the internet? They didn't have it back then.

 

That makes it okay in your book?

 

Agree

 

Thanks for more than proving my point. I really really really appreciate it.

 

No but it has been going on for decades.. Only an issue when Hilary lost.... they need an excuse.. Cant be because sane people cant stand her.

 

They had guys like Lee Harvey Oswald handing out leaflets.

They really interfered with US elections back in that day.

 

You might want to bring up your relevation to Obama and let him know of your discovery as the Soviet Union quote is from him.

 

I never said its all they did..

Here you are yet again wanting me to debate your projections..

Run along.

 

Him buying himself on stage means nothing. He wont get any votes.

Now lets talk about when the Republicans did the same with Forbes

 

The left can rationalize anything.

 

And Bloomberg got the Dem nomination when ?

We’re going to compare apples to apples

 

Huh.....The primary and the general are 2 completely different races. Their not even in the same hemisphere.

Sanders cant beat Trump in the general because of the independents. Most dems will vote for the dem nominee, as republicans do mostly the same. Independents and “undecideds” make the election.

Its pretty sound logic

 

I think you have it pretty mush the same as I do.

But the debates really mean nothing. That was proven out in the last election. Trump voters wil vote for him no matter what he does or says. I really do believe he could shoot a baby on 5th avenue and most republicans would still vote for him, and then defend him for killing the baby. And I say that because thats really what the dems are up against. It’s very much cultish like behavior. Hell, if Hillary did any of the things Trump has done in the last few months, the right would be in the streets with torches and pitchforks

 

So thats the defense or Russia meddling in our election ?

I’m sure you would hold the same opinion if they supported Hillary right ?