Res Ipsa wrote:Prediction: Clinton, the two-time loser, will not be the nominee this time around. Literally no one is clamoring for her to jump in the race. I'd be shocked if she did.
I don't actually know your political leanings, but I'm pretty left. And I had dozens of friends and acquaintances who absolutely were affected by the Russian propaganda. They cited me dozens and dozens of times to dodgy looking websites that purported to prove that the DNC was stealing the election from Sanders (like literally changing votes in the primaries). I remember trying to figure out at the time who was actually publishing those pages. When I later saw a published list of Russian "fake news" sites, I recognized several of them as sites I had been repeatedly referred to. Many of the people I know that believed the Russian propaganda decided to vote for Stein based on claims made in those articles. That's just people I had contact with. In my opinion, that's where the Russia propaganda operation had the most effect -- on the left. It took friction between the Sanders and Clinton camps and turned it into a raging inferno. Lots of pissed off Sanders backers didn't vote or stayed home.
At least for Jill Stein the math doesn't really add up to support your anecdote overall.
All communication relies, to a noticeable extent on evoking knowledge that we cannot tell, all our knowledge of mental processes, like feelings or conscious intellectual activities, is based on a knowledge which we cannot tell. -Michael Polanyi
"Why are you afraid, have you still no faith?" Mark 4:40
I don't actually know your political leanings, but I'm pretty left. And I had dozens of friends and acquaintances who absolutely were affected by the Russian propaganda. They cited me dozens and dozens of times to dodgy looking websites that purported to prove that the DNC was stealing the election from Sanders (like literally changing votes in the primaries). I remember trying to figure out at the time who was actually publishing those pages. When I later saw a published list of Russian "fake news" sites, I recognized several of them as sites I had been repeatedly referred to. Many of the people I know that believed the Russian propaganda decided to vote for Stein based on claims made in those articles. That's just people I had contact with. In my opinion, that's where the Russia propaganda operation had the most effect -- on the left. It took friction between the Sanders and Clinton camps and turned it into a raging inferno. Lots of pissed off Sanders backers didn't vote or stayed home.
At least for Jill Stein the math doesn't really add up to support your anecdote overall.
Thanks for the article. It's interesting, but I don't think it contradicts what I said. Regarding Stein, I said it was fair to say that Stein staying in the race, regardless of any Russian influence, was a but-for cause of Clinton's loss. The article really doesn't argue to the contrary. What it argues against is a claim that the Russian Propaganda changed the election result solely by boosting Stein's total. And I think it does a good job of showing that claim to be false. Or at least unlikely. What I anecdotally observed was people either voting for Stein or staying home. I heard a couple of people say they voted for Trump (to show people once and for all that Republicans are a disaster and so they would flock to the left and we'd live happily ever after). I didn't mention them because there were just a couple and I can't bring myself to believe that many people on the left actually did that. At any rate, what I saw was both not voting and Stein voting as a response to the propaganda. I don't think the article addressed that.
Still, I hadn't seen that analysis before and I appreciate the information. Obviously I can't prove anything, which is why I'm trying to stay in the realm of "fair to say."
Hope you are well.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Res Ipsa wrote:Prediction: Clinton, the two-time loser, will not be the nominee this time around. Literally no one is clamoring for her to jump in the race. I'd be shocked if she did.
OK, "literally no one" was an overstatement. But you'll have to forgive me for being skeptical about what "many, many, many people" and "enormous pressure" translates to in the real world. Maybe I've missed some big "Draft Hillary" movement. If there is one, I want a T-Shirt that I can wear post ironically.
I'll confess. I just don't pay attention to her any more. Which means I should keep my fat mouth shut about her.
Thanks for setting me straight.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Res Ipsa wrote:Prediction: Clinton, the two-time loser, will not be the nominee this time around. Literally no one is clamoring for her to jump in the race. I'd be shocked if she did.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Jersey Girl wrote:That's her claim about herself. Where's the evidence for her claim?
by the way, I'm under enormous pressure to become the next Queen of England.
Just saying.
Okay, it was Newark.
This is a fair suspicion, Jersey Girl, but To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if people close to her are encouraging her this way. Personally, I don't think it's a good idea that she run, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there were people close to her who think she should run and are trying to get her to do so.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Jersey Girl wrote:That's her claim about herself. Where's the evidence for her claim?
by the way, I'm under enormous pressure to become the next Queen of England.
Just saying.
Okay, it was Newark.
This is a fair suspicion, Jersey Girl, but To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if people close to her are encouraging her this way. Personally, I don't think it's a good idea that she run, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there were people close to her who think she should run and are trying to get her to do so.
That would make sense. There is some indication that Warren is scaring the crap out of the moneyed left, and establishment Democrats are losing confidence in Biden and looking for someone new to jump in. As if eleventy bazillion candidates aren't enough.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Jersey Girl wrote:That's her claim about herself. Where's the evidence for her claim?
by the way, I'm under enormous pressure to become the next Queen of England.
Just saying.
Okay, it was Newark.
This is a fair suspicion, Jersey Girl, but To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if people close to her are encouraging her this way. Personally, I don't think it's a good idea that she run, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there were people close to her who think she should run and are trying to get her to do so.
The burden of proof rests with the one making the positive claim. That's all I'm saying. It could be all smoke and mirrors so far as we know. Sorry, my head's in a murder case right now. All true!
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
