POLL: If Russia were to interfere in November...

As convenient as it is, you can't justify the interference based on the outcome. If you're going to be neutral about it, you have to assess whether the interference is acceptable before knowing what it would achieve. The question of, is it okay for a foreign power to interfere with our elections only has a YES or NO answer.

 

No, I think that a country can want to prevent a foreign power from doing something while at the same time doing the exact same thing to other countries. No one in the US government has come out and said that the US is innocent of ever having interfered in another country's election before. If they did, then THAT would be hypocritical, but I haven't seen anything like this. Have you?

 

Does that mean that you would want it to happen to your country's election?

 

What interest would Canada, Russia, or any other country have in "removing the American, Military-Industrial-Fascist Complex system and introduce Democracy?"

 

Is it necessary to know the effect in order to say that it is bad?

 

If the answer is no, how is that relevant?

 

Which is what exactly? Was this international news?

That really depends on how you define, "keep up." I certainly SEEK OUT factual info, just as I am doing in this very post.

 

No, but I don't think that Obama handled anything personally either. Why did you bring up Putin anyway?

 

And what would that achieve do you think?

I do hold America to account, but that doesn't mean that I have a problem with them doing it.

Does it matter?

I agree.

Why can't hacks results in false information being released?

And your point is?

I'm certainly not implying that. The election was perfectly valid and the Russian's didn't help Trump win.

 

Because you are giving Obama a pass for what his subordinates did but are not doing the same for Putin.

 

When did I even mention Putin?

 

No, chris, nobody said that it was not 'bad'. Nobody said that it was 'good', either. Not a terribly inspired commentary, is it...?

What such interference is, chris, is ubiquitous, and very, very long-standing. Countries have been interfering in each other's political processes for as long as there have been countries.

After the Soviet Union appeared on the scene when Russians overthrew the monarchy of their Czar, the 'democratic' nations of "the West", including Britain and the U. S., sought to 'interfere' with it because of the in-your-face threat of Communism, which was very scary to all capitalist nations in the Post-World War I era. Again, what were the EFFECTS? All our efforts notwithstanding, it wouldn't be until December 1991 that the communist Soviet Union would finally disappear -- well over 70 years after the 'interference' began....

"Interference" in the internal affairs of a country wasn't "good" then, it isn't "good" now, but it can always be justified by the practitioners of interference, using the mechanism of 'situation-ethics'....

 

Removing American Fascism would instigate WORLD PEACE & DEMOCRACY, that's what.

 

The hypocrisy comes in when you say how horrible and even antagonistic it is for russia to meddle, when we have been doing the same thing for years. We don't say, ok, meddling in another sovereign nation is wrong, and then do the same thing ourselves! That sir is hypocrisy.

 

I would suggest you google the obama admin, or obama and the Israel election. I think you will find the facts there. If you cannot, get back with me and I will find it for you. I read it from more than one source. So I know it is online.

 

Nice try. The exposition of the truth is always good. There is no politicizing that away.

 

What do you think?

 

So why is your question, "what is the EFFECT of such 'interference'?" relevant to this thread which asks if you think that Russian interference in November would be appropriate?

 

When I say it?

Its just that I haven't heard this rhetoric anywhere, from the left or the right. It is more just the narrative of Trump/Russia collusion that I've heard.

 

Not sure, but as it was YOUR comment, you would probably be the best person to answer that.

 

Because, chris, the EFFECT is the only thing that is of any real importance. A person's motive steers his personal viewpoint and is demonstrated in his actions, but the EFFECT is the benchmark by which we measure the very "effectiveness" of the action.

The Poll question asks (verbatim),"If Russia were to interfere in November...".

Some group of people with political motives can babble and blather on social media about any of several different topics, obviously (hate Trump, love Hillary... hate Hillary, love Trump, et al). But, again, what is the EFFECT? Anything measurable? I would suggest to you that the EFFECT is far more worthy of examination than whether or not someone's motives were 'good' or 'bad'.

 

These are state elections so Russia would have to be in every state. There hasn't been any allegations that votes were stolen or changed. The Russians, like everybody else, has free speech in this country so if they buy ads and such...........so what?
Is Canadian Michael Moore interfering with his hate movies? Or George Soros?

 

Sure, but we can't possibly measure the effect of Russia's interference in 2016, we just know that there is no evidence which suggests that it had any effect.

 

What is it exactly that you think I tried to do?

 

Not sure, but as it was YOUR comment, you would probably be the best person to answer that.