i love how the media - and people who didn't see the entire press conference - are running with this.
the dnc, along with the media, works to actually rig an election, and that gets no coverage. come up with some dopey "the russians did it" narrative to divert attention, and back it up with a 10 second sarcastic sound bite, and you've changed the narrative to protect your queen.
well done.
I don't think the narrative here has been "who is the bad guy, because in every story there is one good guy and one bad guy." It's been essentially treated as two separate stories, which I think is a good thing
Story 1: the DNC is over-exerting control over its own process, and is behaving in a way that looks like overt corruption.
Story 2: An aggressive non-ally has made an attempt to manipulate our election process, which is insane.
i love how the media - and people who didn't see the entire press conference - are running with this.
the dnc, along with the media, works to actually rig an election, and that gets no coverage. come up with some dopey "the russians did it" narrative to divert attention, and back it up with a 10 second sarcastic sound bite, and you've changed the narrative to protect your queen.
well done.
I don't think the narrative here has been "who is the bad guy, because in every story there is one good guy and one bad guy." It's been essentially treated as two separate stories, which I think is a good thing
Story 1: the DNC is over-exerting control over its own process, and is behaving in a way that looks like overt corruption.
Story 2: An aggressive non-ally has made an attempt to manipulate our election process, which is insane.
true, two stories. for one story, there is actual evidence to back it up. the other story has been put forth by those implicated in the first story for corruption and other misdeeds to mislead, cover up, and protect one certain candidate - with no proof.
even if story 2 was backed by actual evidence, story 1 is 100 times more important. last i checked, the us wasn't a 3rd world, african dictatorship, and was a country where the people were actually allowed to choose their leaders.
The story instantly became about the hack and not the contents of the data.
The whole point of Wikileaks is the contents of the data, nothing about the election or who wins.
The content of those emails was never going to get Trump elected.
It should make people realize how corrupt our entire election process (and the people running the country) really is. (Are)
Everyone has already decided and rationalized who they are voting for, nevermind principles, everyone's got one or two issues they vote on and that's really it. Conventions are one gigantic circle jerk.
Electromatic wrote:The story instantly became about the hack and not the contents of the data.
The whole point of Wikileaks is the contents of the data, nothing about the election or who wins.
The content of those emails was never going to get Trump elected.
It should make people realize how corrupt our entire election process (and the people running the country) really is. (Are)
Everyone has already decided and rationalized who they are voting for. Conventions are one gigantic circle jerk.
Assange has spoken out directly against Hillary and is funded in part by Russia, so it's not an entirely unbiased act, but that doesn't change the party's behavior or the fact the Dems were never going to let Bernie win the nomination.
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
How is it not worse? He is literally asking, in the open, the russian government to get involved.
McParadigm wrote:
Story 2: An aggressive non-ally has made an attempt to manipulate our election process, which is insane.
Do unto others...
I know, right? All those years the US was involved in rigging elections and now we're on the other side of that equation.
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
Pretty much.
dprival78 wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
And if you don't see it that way because you're an idiot, I don't know what to tell you.
AND you're equating espionage with the DNC issue. This isn't potaytoes/potahtoes, no matter how hard you wave your hands.
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
How is it not worse? He is literally asking, in the open, the russian government to get involved.
a political party rigged an election. literally. in the open. and they're getting away with it. and russia had zero to do with it.
did you watch the press conference? he clearly wasn't requesting that putin actually do anything.. it was more of your typical, trump, sarcastic nonsense.
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
How is it not worse? He is literally asking, in the open, the russian government to get involved.
a political party rigged an election. literally. in the open. and they're getting away with it. and russia had zero to do with it.
did you watch the press conference? he clearly wasn't requesting that putin actually do anything.. it was more of your typical, trump, sarcastic nonsense.
cutuphalfdead wrote:So Trump just asked a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponent.
not really.
but if people want to see it that way (and clearly that's the media's intent), is that better/worse than the dnc actually doing what we all now know that they did to fix the election?
How is it not worse? He is literally asking, in the open, the russian government to get involved.
a political party rigged an election. literally. in the open. and they're getting away with it. and russia had zero to do with it.
did you watch the press conference? he clearly wasn't requesting that putin actually do anything.. it was more of your typical, trump, sarcastic nonsense.
but it does make for a great diversion..
lol at rigging the election. C'mon.
the dnc was actively trying to bury sanders as a candidate. you had the disproportionate number of superdelegates pledging for hillary. she was clearly being favored by the party leadership when it's not their call to make. what else do you want to call it?
