Nevada Primary

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm a little mystified by this almost rote reaction whenever the topic comes up that, 'Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate.' Do people believe Bernie would've beat Trump in the '16 election? I'm not so sure, and Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote by a couple of ballots.

- Doc

[_Dr Exiled]

I wasn't really sure what was truly meant by "Bernie Bro" before reading this thread. I'm with you, Res... I'll vote for Bernie of he's the nominee, despite what a lot of his supporters say.

They live in this weird dichotomy: either Clinton was a terrible candidate or the Russians helped Trump win. It's like it's not possible for both things to be true in their mind at the same time.

It's also hilarious to me that someone will say "there was a massive conspiracy against Bernie" and then also claim "the Russians didn't influence me!" It's kind of like claiming you're looking forward to your eternal marriage but the LDS church had no influence over your decisions.

Is it possible for "those other guys" to independently think in your mind. You probably think that outside influences don't push you one way or another, right? Perhaps Russia is an excuse for the failings of a democratic party to nominate a winner? Is that a possibility? I think anyone but Clinton could have beat Trump in 2016. But, it was her time to shine, supposedly. All the media and superdelegates were behind her, yet she lost. So, how do you think that happened? How did the small Russia media campaign do so well against the mountains of money Clinton had and used?

Do you think Russia is behind all the big crowds Trump gets at his rallies? Tonight in Las Vegas there is going to be another big rally for Trump. Maybe there are other reasons for this besides Russia? However, I hear that Putin is against same sex marriage and is for christian values, so, chrisitianity and by implication all the evangelicals who support Trump must be, somehow, controlled by Russia?

This article sums up my thinking on the Russian bot issue:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/a-n-y-times-story-just-accidentally-shredded-the-russiagate-hysteria/

I could be wrong of course. All the mainstream media is hysterical over Russia and obviously you aren't affected by their hysteria at all. Yet, when one digs deep, the trail either ends up with New Knowledge spooks telling us to trust them and that their information is "too sacred to tell" or part of "national security" or the trail ends up at areas that do not support the Russia hysteria narrative.

[_Dr Exiled]

I'm a little mystified by this almost rote reaction whenever the topic comes up that, 'Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate.' Do people believe Bernie would've beat Trump in the '16 election? I'm not so sure, and Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote by a couple of ballots.

- Doc

So, how do you explain why Clinton isn't president?

[_Dr Exiled]

Why didn't Clinton campaign in the key states she lost such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin? She got sick in September of 2016 and maybe that prevented her from making one last push?

Trump was screaming lock her up and then Comey did his about face. Perhaps that affected the key states?

[_Some Schmo]

You probably think that outside influences don't push you one way or another, right?

No, that's the difference between you and me. I can acknowledge I live in a world where there are constant influences. I remember feeling very much like there was a movement against Bernie back in 2016, but I'm also retroactively aware that I was being influenced by Russian actors to think it was a bigger deal than it was. I'm not ashamed to admit, they know what they're doing. It's obvious, especially when there are people like you completely oblivious and in denial about it.

I think your understanding of how they influenced the election is superficial at best. You just don't get how it works. It's not about getting people to believe something new. It's about preying on the things people already feel and amplifying them.

And by the way, advertising is not just about introducing people to something new. Most advertising is aimed at reminding people of stuff they already know. You think McDonald's needs to reintroduce themselves every day?

[_Dr Exiled]

You probably think that outside influences don't push you one way or another, right?

No, that's the difference between you and me. I can acknowledge I live in a world where there are constant influences. I remember feeling very much like there was a movement against Bernie back in 2016, but I'm also retroactively aware that I was being influenced by Russian actors to think it was a bigger deal than it was. I'm not ashamed to admit, they know what they're doing. It's obvious, especially when there are people like you completely oblivious and in denial about it.

I think your understanding of how they influenced the election is superficial at best. You just don't get how it works. It's not about getting people to believe something new. It's about preying on the things people already feel and amplifying them.

And by the way, advertising is not just about introducing people to something new. Most advertising is aimed at reminding people of stuff they already know. You think McDonald's needs to reintroduce themselves every day?

Of course people and state actors are always trying to influence and advertising works. Mormonism was a thing for us and still is for many. Evangelical ministers affect their flock like other leaders do, just like the mainstream media is trying to affect the population. MSNBC/CNN v. Fox is what the mainstream media want to portray because black and white thinking works to herd the population into areas that are safe for the 1%. However, some claim the influence is more than it is and some like New Knowledge used the Russia hysteria to falsely claim that Russians were behind the ultra conservative Judge in the Alabama Senate race. We live in a world where everyone seemingly has an agenda.

So, how are you able to think? How do you know that you aren't being controlled by some agenda driven entity? What is your secret wise one?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm a little mystified by this almost rote reaction whenever the topic comes up that, 'Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate.' Do people believe Bernie would've beat Trump in the '16 election? I'm not so sure, and Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote by a couple of ballots.

- Doc

So, how do you explain why Clinton isn't president?

It’s been explained ad nauseum. I don’t care to jump in the denialism vortex you enjoy again. It’s akin to arguing globes with a flat earther.

- Doc

[_Some Schmo]

So, how are you able to think? How do you know that you aren't being controlled by some agenda driven entity? What is your secret wise one?

Frankly, unless we live in a cave, none of us can be entirely sure we're not currently being manipulated. The best you can do is try to keep vigilant and seeking more information.

The real secret is honoring evidence over your own personal desires. You have chosen to ignore the reams of publicly available evidence that Russia influenced our election, and that Trump was all for it, probably due to an irrational level of hate for Clinton.

[_Dr Exiled]

It’s been explained ad nauseum. I don’t care to jump in the denialism vortex you enjoy again. It’s akin to arguing globes with a flat earther.

- Doc

I thought you were going to whip out a direct reference to 4 chan. Instead you went with the tried and true flat earthers reference. I bow to your expertise.

[_Dr Exiled]

So, how are you able to think? How do you know that you aren't being controlled by some agenda driven entity? What is your secret wise one?

Frankly, unless we live in a cave, none of us can be entirely sure we're not currently being manipulated. The best you can do is try to keep vigilant and seeking more information.

The real secret is honoring evidence over your own personal desires. You have chosen to ignore the reams of publicly available evidence that Russia influenced our election, and that Trump was all for it, probably due to an irrational level of hate for Clinton.

I think interpreting the evidence is where we disagree. I think whatever the Russian influence was, it was small compared to other forces that culminated in Clinton's loss. I think had Comey not done his last minute about face, she probably would have won. Had she not gotten sick, maybe she could have campaigned in the key states she lost. Also, it was a very low turnout election that always favors republicans. However, Russia did it is a simpler solution.