• jaybone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    10 months ago

    Then Russia interferes with US election. It’s election interference all the way down.

    Except it stops at countries like Russia where the complete election is fake.

    • Altair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Unlike our glorious US empire where the elections are definitely totally legit (don’t ask why Trump won despite getting less votes)

      No liberal “democracies” are democratic in the first place on account of being capitalist dictatorships

    • Nudding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Remember when gore won the election and then Bush became president? Or when Hilary got more votes and then trump became president?

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Russia had no effect on US elections. Please update your understanding, it’s years old now. The Mueller report was clear on this point - Russia’s connections were far deeper and more effective (in both directions) with the Democrats than the Republicans

      • natecheese@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        The point you’re trying to make here isn’t very clear.

        Are you saying:

        1. That Russia didn’t try to interfere with the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections?
        2. Or are you saying that Russia did try to interfere, but they were incompetent and couldn’t actually do it?
        3. Or are you saying the Muller report clearly stated that there is a deep connection between Democrats and Russia, and only a much weaker connection between Russia and Republicans?
        4. Something else entirely or some combination of all of these?
        • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          They’re points perfectly clear; it’s right there in their first sentence. You’re just being deliberately obtuse.

          • natecheese@kbin.melroy.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            You’re being unnecessarily hostile. There is a lot of ambiguity in the statement as I outlined my comment.

            If you can clarify the point they were trying to make that would be great, if not you’re proving no value to this conversation.

            • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Read the fucking Muller report or a summary of its findings re Russia and you’ll have your answer

              • natecheese@kbin.melroy.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Also unnecessarily hostile.

                I’ve read the Mueller report and nothing in there supports your claims, which makes your statement even more confusing.

                From the Wikipedia article on the Mueller report:

                The report concludes that the investigation “did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”.[4][5][6] Investigators had an incomplete picture of what happened due in part to some communications that were encrypted, deleted, or not saved, as well as testimony that was false, incomplete, or declined.[7][8][9]

                More importantly:

                However, the report states that Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was illegal and occurred “in sweeping and systematic fashion”[10][11][12] but was welcomed by the Trump campaign as it expected to benefit from such efforts.[13][14][15] It also identifies myriad links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies,[16] about which several persons connected to the campaign made false statements and obstructed investigations.[4] Mueller later stated that his investigation’s conclusion on Russian interference “deserves the attention of every American”.[17]

                • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/questions-mueller-russiagate/

                  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-the-mueller-report-tells-us-about-russian-influence-operations/

                  Despite the Russian influence campaign, Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million votes.

                  So, despite Russian attempts at manipulating the population, Clinton lost because of the electoral college, an institution designed by the founders to ensure that minority land owners would always be able to override the popular will of the masses. Russia’s political meddling is demonstrably far less effective than US meddling globally.

                  • natecheese@kbin.melroy.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    So your point is that Russia does try to interfere in American and other foreign elections, they just aren’t very good at it?

                    The electoral college makes it easier for foreign actors to influence American elections. Instead of convincing 3 million people to change their votes from Clinton to Trump in order to effectively influence the election, the entities spreading FUD only need to influence a few thousand in key swing states.

                    From your Brookings article:

                    The bottom line is that the Mueller report clearly shows that the Russian information operations were highly adaptive to the political context in the United States, followed a seemingly well-thought out strategic plan akin to a marketing or public relations campaign, involved direction from Russian intelligence, and were incredibly effective in infiltrating American media while influencing public debate around the 2016 election.

                    The article from the Nation is a poorly sourced opinion piece from someone who seems to have a very poor understanding of how the Russian intelligence works. The key “gotcha” in the article is that IRA is not a Russian government agency, rather a private company run by Russian individuals.

                    This isn’t in contradiction to the Mueller report, it’s common for Russian intelligence (and other intelligence agencies around the world, including CIA and other American intelligence agencies) to use private corporations to carry their agendas. As pointed out by the Brookings article Russian intelligence directed the actions of IRA, even though IRA and its employees weren’t directly employed by the Russian Government on paper.