141–150 of 275 posts
Fun fact, many, many other foreign governments have "interfered" in our elections also. In addition the US has interfered in their elections as well. Its been happening for a very long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the politicians that enable this behavior. How many Republican ads are of them shooting their political party's opponent?
>"How many Republican ads are of them shooting their political party's opponent?" Zero? Edit: So I did some further digging and I assume the GP is talking about something like this: https://twitter.com/jim_lamon/status/1491836062934704141 It's a superbowl ad with a wild west showdown theme. Actors portraying Joe Biden, Sen. Mark Kelly, and Speaker Pelosi are having a high-noon style duel with the Republican candidate…
Fun fact, many, many other foreign governments have "interfered" in our elections also. In addition the US has interfered in their elections as well. Its been happening for a very long time.
This comment comes off as malinformation. Malinformation isn't information that is incorrect, but correct information used in a way to create a misleading context. There's 2 problems here. 1) You're implicitly dismissive of a foreign government interfering in our elections. I think most of us here will agree that any interference from any entity is not okay. 2) It muddles the conversation with more noise. A more in d…
Please do not normalize the use of a term that is being pushed by the government to justify censoring information they don’t like [1]. I understand that there is such a thing as “true information presented out of context in a manner meant to mislead”, and I even grant that the comment might be guilty of it. But “malinformation” and “misinformation” are just becoming labels for “information that is inconvenient”, and I don’t think normal internet commenters adopting their use is doing us any good.
[1] https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformat...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, their goal is indeed to have a specific election winner and to foment division. The IC has been quite clear that Russia had a strong preference for a Trump victory at least in 2016. [Removed a section on GOP preference for defunding Ukraine since this is not a party position, just a growing position within the party] Everything else you've said is true though - no reason to stick our heads in the sand about their…
> GOP's stated preferences for defunding Ukraine's defense The voting record shows their preference is to continue funding it. I don't know why your information sources are saying the opposite. Maybe they do it to polarize us.
edit: not that both don't have a huge base that is against WWIII, but with the Republicans, having a far more democratic internal process that was a concession to Tea Party activists, some of that base actually gets to have a say in Congress. The Congressional Democratic Party is completely impenetrable to anyone in their base who isn't an extreme nationalist hawk, whereas Republicans can't realistically exclude isolationists/paleocons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After the cold war ended (last three decades), I'm not sure of any case where America has been coup'ing countries in South America. Do you know some cases?
Dang, I didn't realize confirmed election interference stopped mattering if we were at war with another superpower.
Obviously Russian interferes in US elections. So do many other countries. And the US interferes in other countries elections. It's always been this way. It's just an issue now, because interference in the 2016 election was spun by domestic political groups to delegitimize an elected president and subvert the democratic process by attempting to remove the president.
There was some odd stuff going on in that election without much need for spinning it.
Are you suggesting that US elections can be rigged?
Obviously Russian interferes in US elections. So do many other countries. And the US interferes in other countries elections. It's always been this way. It's just an issue now, because interference in the 2016 election was spun by domestic political groups to delegitimize an elected president and subvert the democratic process by attempting to remove the president.
You’re talking too much sense dude, that won’t be tolerated here
Both extremes of the spectrum are pretty vocal. But I believe that there is a much bigger, more open minded center on all platforms.
> Russian companies were charged in the U.S. with operating a covert social media campaign aimed at fomenting discord and dividing American public opinion This is key here and I think we should all take note because I see comments here that feed into their tactics. Their goal isn't to have a specific election winner, but to divide us as a nation (not just US but all Westerners and even countries like Japan) and creat…
The problem is that smart people, paying attention and putting national interest will now compromise, and people not in that category will just continue to refuse. So the "centre" will move closer to whatever that latter group believes. And will keep doing so until then former group stops compromising. So this, like so so many issues, cannot be solves by appeals to individuals to change their own position. It REQUIRE…
> It REQUIRES a national level fix.
The US has a national election tomorrow. This requires individuals to vote for representatives that will adequately represent them in this manner. There is an individual role required to make a national fix.
I'd also ask, what to do when those national institutions fail? We've always, and always will, have to rely on individuals. This is both the power and vulnerability of a democracy (even democratically elected republics). It is the individual who votes. It is the individual who stokes or stamps the flames of extremism. Is always has been and always will be up to us. The alternative is autocracy. So please do not pass the buck. You have a role to play here and it is critical. Surely there are solutions that do not require us to go to civil war nor turn to autocracy. We're better than that.
I'm also going to leave this here: John Cleese's (of Monty Python) skit on Extremism. It is worth a watch, even just for a good laugh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXCkxlqFd90
The timing of this information suggests that while it may be true, its very disclosure may also be meddling in foreign elections -- i.e. casting doubt on their legitimacy helps many within the US who are actively trying to propagate that narrative. EDIT: A word
That is what a lot of people are missing with this: The goal of Russian propaganda has always been to create chaos and get people to disengage by creating a feeling that nothing is true, or at least that the truth is unknowable. Hence the constant stream of extremely transparent lies and BS. In other words, the point of their election interference is not primarily to manipulate the election successfully, but to creat…
My impression (mostly from coverage that I've seen at UnderstandingWar.org ) is that Yevgeny Prigozhin might be happy to admit to quite a few things - whether or not he'd actually done them - so long as doing so advanced his public image (hint - neither "weak" nor "pro-American") and political ambitions. Pass the salt?
This guy is known for saying ridiculous and highly sarcastic things. They also left out key parts of this specific statement: > My answer will be delicate, sophisticated, and forgive me - ambiguous. We have interfered, are interfering and will continue to interfere. Carefully, precisely, surgically and in our own way. During our pinpoint operations, we will remove both kidneys and the liver at once. This is pretty mu…