Did Russian Interference Affect the 2016 Election Results?

[Gonzomin]

Four million illegals voted in 2016.

Oh no, it was 40 million. Trump won every single honest vote, some of them twice.

[Rune]

did you get hit on the head with a lead pipe? You can't follow the conversation?? WTF do you think it means -
it means no vote totals weer hacked

So you got NOTHING like I figured.
Lying piece of shit.

[Rune]

ROFL . I can do my taxes on a postcard ( you don't understand that was a reference to simplification w/ no deduction), and taxes did drop for middle class.

Unless you were in a SALT state, like yourself- too bad

Don't tell me what I understand you stupid cunt.
If you are self employed you are not filing on a post card. Liar. Taxes went up for much of the middle class you liar.

[reagansghost]

really weird watching asshole annatta do post after post supporting Putin and Trump on the Russian election interference question

meanwhile 17 US intel agencies have proof they did interfere and have said so


couldn't be more obvious


fuck you comrade annie

[Truth Detector]

Right, but it does make a difference in the key states Manafort was sharing polling data with Kilmnik.

But we can't have an honest conversation here because you are too lazy to read Mueller's Report.

That is not what Mueller said the purpose was!

Mueller said in his report, the purpose was to get Trump elected.

YOU DIDN'T READ MUELLER'S REPORT, SO HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT HE SAID?

So fucking lazy.

Mueller Report; Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

National Security Agency Director Admiral Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both testified on Monday that no votes were changed due to hacking in the 2016 election.

"Do you have any evidence that Russian cyber actors changed vote tallies in the State of Michigan?" Nunes asked.

"No, I do not, " Rogers said.

[Truth Detector]

NO!

Mueller said in his report the purpose of the Russian hack was to get Trump elected.

It's literally what he said in the report you refuse to read...why?

Why do you refuse to read the report? What are you so afraid of?

The Russian government believed it benefited from Drumpf winning the election, so it hacked Democrats’ computers and ran a massive disinformation campaign online. [Vol. 1, pg 5]

LIE and LAME.

Mueller Report; Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

[Truth Detector]

Heritage can go fuck itself.

^^Stuck on moron.

[Truth Detector]

Right, so now you're saying Russian propaganda was effective?

^^Still stuck on moron.

[Truth Detector]

Also, you're a fucking piece of racist shit because those two poll workers in TX back in 2014 (not Democrats, but poll workers) had no party affiliation, nor was it mentioned anywhere. So you attributed that vote fraud to the Democrats, why? Because the two women had Hispanic-sounding names.

So you made a racist assumption because you are a lazy, racist piece of shit.

^^Triggered while going FULL RETARD.

[Truth Detector]

So you got NOTHING like I figured.
Lying piece of shit.

Don't tell me what I understand you stupid cunt.
If you are self employed you are not filing on a post card. Liar. Taxes went up for much of the middle class you liar.

^^MORON eruption. Thar she blows!!!

[Truth Detector]

really weird watching asshole annatta do post after post supporting Putin and Trump on the Russian election interference question
meanwhile 17 US intel agencies have proof they did interfere and have said so
couldn't be more obvious
fuck you comrade annie

Mueller Report; Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

National Security Agency Director Admiral Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both testified on Monday that no votes were changed due to hacking in the 2016 election.

[Flash]

But enough were persuaded in the key states Manafort was sharing polling data for..."a small percentage of voters" as you said.

100,000 was all it took.

Is 100,000 "a small percentage of voters"? These are your words, Flash.

True. But you don't know what influenced these voters. It could have been from the Trump campaign, the Republican Party, or the many PACs and independent expenditure groups, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc. You have no clue that any of these people even saw any of the Russian ads. Many older people do not do social media and these were the most reliable Trump voters.

And remember, Trump did not win by increasing his votes over Romney but by turnout for Clinton that was much lower than Obama received from reliably Democratic groups like blacks.

What propaganda was that?

That Trump was running a secret child cannibal sex ring out of a DC pizza shop?

That Hillary Clinton deleted thousands of e-mails that implicated her in (insert conspiracy theory here)?

Seriously, what Democratic propaganda was created top persuade idiots to vote for Clinton?

You try to make everything both sides because your mind is binary and cannot hold complex thought

There is it..."both sides". So...what country were the Democrats working with to create propaganda and memes to disparage Trump? NONE YOU SAY? So there goes your "both sides"..

You didn't see any negative propaganda against Trump in the 2016 election? Where do you think you got all the negative information about him? Propaganda is information aimed to influence, it can be true.

If you didn't see negative information about both Trump and Clinton you must have not been paying much attention to the campaign. Yes, both sides do this equally and they always have since the days of Washington, Jefferson, Adams.....

[Flash]

They sure did, and they sure do. That's why they had to sign a consent decree.




You are making an inference, I never made an implication.

It's not the Democrats who had to agree to a consent decree.




No, it's bothsiderism to think both sides engage in the same, equal conduct, which is the implication YOU ARE MAKING.

That's the implication, and I'm not making an inference.




Oh, you mean the one from Heritage that didn't even include the Republican cheating in NC-09 literally from 10 months ago?

Check your sources again.

The source clearly said it was not comprehensive but included documented cases. Did you find any errors in that database? If not, being from the Heritage Foundation does affect anything. Do you know of any other databases available for this information? No, then this is our best source.

Smearing the source is always the response when you can't challenge the facts. The point is that there are plenty of examples of both Democrats and Republicans cheating in elections with many convictions. Not including the NC case does not change that fact.

Any rational person knows the two parties use the same methods--only those whose partisanship blinds them to the facts argue otherwise.

[Flash]

Right, so now you're saying Russian propaganda was effective?

I am like you. I have no clue if Russian propaganda influenced one vote. No honest person would think they know the answer to this question. Or, whether any particular ad or piece of information from any source influenced any votes. Most vote their party affiliation. Those most likely to be undecided and make their decision late are those with the least interest and knowledge about politics and are least likely to watch political news. So, those most likely to be persuaded are the least likely to watch any of the ads or news.

[Flash]

Heritage can go fuck itself.

Also, no mention of the NC-9 vote fraud that happened last year. Why isn't that included?

When was the database last updated? Did you find any errors? No? Then smear the source and ignore the facts it presented. It would be fairly easy to take any one of the cases and do some simple research to see if it is true. But, you are too lazy and choose to reject common sense data because you can't admit Democrats cheat just like the Republicans. It would destroy your good vs. evil world and mean your side is not so perfect.