December 16, 2017, 03:37:17 AM

Author Topic: Bronies meet and greet  (Read 19818 times)

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #240 on: September 25, 2017, 08:57:07 AM »
99.99% of them were unaffected by those ads.

You're overestimating human intelligence.

Loads of adults believe Alex Jones "9/11 was an inside job" conspiracy crap, including some members of this board.

Those that would have believed the adds were already Alex Jones following types and thus were already going to vote against Hillary and were highly politically motivated.

Hillary being hauled into a van like a slab of beef influenced people. 20 years of NAFTA influenced people. Russian facebook ads did not.

But if the left wants to run a 2018-2020 election strategy fighting the bogeyman of Russian facebook ads and not things like out of work factory workers, unhinged SJWs, and NAFTA, be my guest.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #241 on: September 25, 2017, 09:05:53 AM »
Seven million people saw the ads. Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes, a 0.23% margin.
270 million saw Clinton collapse on 9/11 at the 9/11 memorial. The entire population of Michigan has felt NAFTA. Clinton didn't visit one, NOT ONE, UAW hall.

Michigan was over in the primary when Trump rolled big, the Republicans got more votes than the Dems, and Bernie Sanders stunned Clinton.

This was a wave that was building.

Again- Didn't. Visit. One. UAW Hall. In. Michigan.

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #242 on: September 28, 2017, 09:18:35 AM »
Seven million people saw the ads. Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes, a 0.23% margin.
270 million saw Clinton collapse on 9/11 at the 9/11 memorial. The entire population of Michigan has felt NAFTA. Clinton didn't visit one, NOT ONE, UAW hall.

Michigan was over in the primary when Trump rolled big, the Republicans got more votes than the Dems, and Bernie Sanders stunned Clinton.

This was a wave that was building.

Again- Didn't. Visit. One. UAW Hall. In. Michigan.
What does that have to do with Russians hacking the US electoral system? Thirty-nine states' election systems were hacked.

But attack a candidate that will never run again--repugnican derail.

Online Mr C

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #243 on: September 28, 2017, 09:40:10 AM »


Hillary being hauled into a van like a slab of beef influenced people. 20 years of NAFTA influenced people. Russian facebook ads did not.

I presume you have a cite for this. Please share the source of this information. Thank you.

Offline MayorHaggar

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #244 on: September 28, 2017, 10:31:15 AM »
Seven million people saw the ads. Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes, a 0.23% margin.
270 million saw Clinton collapse on 9/11 at the 9/11 memorial. The entire population of Michigan has felt NAFTA. Clinton didn't visit one, NOT ONE, UAW hall.

Michigan was over in the primary when Trump rolled big, the Republicans got more votes than the Dems, and Bernie Sanders stunned Clinton.

This was a wave that was building.

Again- Didn't. Visit. One. UAW Hall. In. Michigan.
What does that have to do with Russians hacking the US electoral system? Thirty-nine states' election systems were hacked.

But attack a candidate that will never run again--repugnican derail.

They don't care about helping destroying democracy if it means a Republican wins an election and it annoys liberals. They certainly don't seem to care about Trump goading Lil' Kim into bombing all of us. Seems like they'd jump off a cliff if Trump told them to.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #245 on: September 28, 2017, 10:33:05 AM »
I presume you have a cite for this. Please share the source of this information. Thank you.
Are you serious? You need a cite for 20 years of NAFTA influencing people's votes? You need a cite for Hillary getting tossed like a slab of beef into the back of a van influencing people's votes? The fundamentals of the campaign are the fundamentals. Anyone who thinks this election was tipped by facebook ads, is an idiot.

But no, those things didn't affect people's votes. $100,000 of Facebook ads did.  :rolleyes:

1) The facebook ads were a drop in the puddle compared to the over $1 billion dollars spent on advertising, with Clinton spending nearly twice as much as Trump (and still losing). Either Russian facebook ads are being cooked up by Don Draper or Hillary Clinton has the same ad people as the ones that gave us the Quizno's gerbils.
2) The populist wave and Trump had started well before the ad buys. This had been building since the 2008 financial panic with the Tea Party, populist waves across Europe, even Obama.
3) The facebook ads were on both sides of the aisle. Apparently some were pro-BLM and supported other left-leaning causes.
4) The facebook ads contained generic appeals that were echoed by other domestic groups. BLM. 2nd amendment. LGBTQ issues. Without having seen the ads, if this is true, it means that they were likely virtually indistinguishable from domestic ads.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/09/the-branching-possibilities-of-the-facebook-russian-ad-buy/541002/

Quote
That said, there is certainly reasonable doubt that even millions of dollars of Facebook spending could change the outcome of even a state in the U.S. presidential election.

But fine, go ahead and attribute Hillary's loss to $100k of facebook ads. That's a brilliant idea. Not only am I sure that it's 100% accurate, it is definitely a winning strategy to prepare you for 2020. No, it wasn't economic malaise across the Midwest or afeeling around the world that globalists are leaving the people in their countries behind. It wasn't failing to campaign in Wisconsin. It wasn't failing to visit a UAW hall in Michigan. It wasn't dismissing coal miners in Pennsylvania. It wasn't ignoring white working class people and Christians and Catholics in favor of celebrities. It wasn't the idea that Americans want a real job, not $15 an hour to flip burgers and welfare. It wasn't pretending not to have health problems and then collapsing at THE FRICKIN 9/11 MEMORIAL. It wasn't a naked sense of entitlement to the presidency. It wasn't the fact that Trump busted his butt and campaigned twice as hard. It wasn't the fact that this was a "change" election.

Nope, it was 100k of facebook ads bought by Russia.  :rolleyes:

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #246 on: September 28, 2017, 10:57:56 AM »
What does that have to do with Russians hacking the US electoral system? Thirty-nine states' election systems were hacked.

But attack a candidate that will never run again--repugnican derail.

Russia was able to breach and steal data on voter names and other basic polling data. No voter rolls were changed. No votes were added or taken away.

That had ZERO effect on who won.

So really, the derail is the idea that Russia somehow affected the outcome.

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #247 on: September 28, 2017, 11:37:44 AM »
I presume you have a cite for this. Please share the source of this information. Thank you.
Are you serious? You need a cite for 20 years of NAFTA influencing people's votes? You need a cite for Hillary getting tossed like a slab of beef into the back of a van influencing people's votes? The fundamentals of the campaign are the fundamentals. Anyone who thinks this election was tipped by facebook ads, is an idiot.

But no, those things didn't affect people's votes. $100,000 of Facebook ads did.  :rolleyes:

1) The facebook ads were a drop in the puddle compared to the over $1 billion dollars spent on advertising, with Clinton spending nearly twice as much as Trump (and still losing). Either Russian facebook ads are being cooked up by Don Draper or Hillary Clinton has the same ad people as the ones that gave us the Quizno's gerbils.
2) The populist wave and Trump had started well before the ad buys. This had been building since the 2008 financial panic with the Tea Party, populist waves across Europe, even Obama.
3) The facebook ads were on both sides of the aisle. Apparently some were pro-BLM and supported other left-leaning causes.
4) The facebook ads contained generic appeals that were echoed by other domestic groups. BLM. 2nd amendment. LGBTQ issues. Without having seen the ads, if this is true, it means that they were likely virtually indistinguishable from domestic ads.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/09/the-branching-possibilities-of-the-facebook-russian-ad-buy/541002/

Quote
That said, there is certainly reasonable doubt that even millions of dollars of Facebook spending could change the outcome of even a state in the U.S. presidential election.

But fine, go ahead and attribute Hillary's loss to $100k of facebook ads. That's a brilliant idea. Not only am I sure that it's 100% accurate, it is definitely a winning strategy to prepare you for 2020. No, it wasn't economic malaise across the Midwest or afeeling around the world that globalists are leaving the people in their countries behind. It wasn't failing to campaign in Wisconsin. It wasn't failing to visit a UAW hall in Michigan. It wasn't dismissing coal miners in Pennsylvania. It wasn't ignoring white working class people and Christians and Catholics in favor of celebrities. It wasn't the idea that Americans want a real job, not $15 an hour to flip burgers and welfare. It wasn't pretending not to have health problems and then collapsing at THE FRICKIN 9/11 MEMORIAL. It wasn't a naked sense of entitlement to the presidency. It wasn't the fact that Trump busted his butt and campaigned twice as hard. It wasn't the fact that this was a "change" election.

Nope, it was 100k of facebook ads bought by Russia:rolleyes:
FAKE NEWS!!!

How so? You left out a very important part of the story:
Quote
So, the Russian ad buy is a significant Facebook purchase, but not one that seems scaled to the ambition of interfering with a national U.S. election.

That could be because: 1) Not all the ads have been discovered, so the $100,000 is a significant undercount. 2) That was the right number, and the ads worked to aid distribution of disinformation. 3) The ads were part of a message-testing protocol to improve the reach of posts posted natively by other accounts. Think of it as a real-time focus group to test for the most viral content and framing. 4) That $100,000 was a test that didnít work well, so it didnít get more resources. 5) That $100,000 was merely a calling card, spent primarily to cause trouble for Facebook and the election system.

BTW, trumped up didn't "campaign twice as hard." That's just more of your fiction.

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #248 on: September 28, 2017, 11:42:18 AM »
What does that have to do with Russians hacking the US electoral system? Thirty-nine states' election systems were hacked.

But attack a candidate that will never run again--repugnican derail.

Russia was able to breach and steal data on voter names and other basic polling data. No voter rolls were changed. No votes were added or taken away.

That had ZERO effect on who won.


So really, the derail is the idea that Russia somehow affected the outcome.
You have no proof of that whatsoever. Thus it's just more FAKE NEWS!!!

Quote
The hacking of state and local election databases in 2016 was more extensive than previously reported, including at least one successful attempt to alter voter information, and the theft of thousands of voter records that contain private information like partial Social Security numbers, current and former officials tell TIME.

Quote
The fact that private data was stolen from states is separately providing investigators a previously unreported line of inquiry in the probes into Russian attempts to influence the election. In Illinois, more than 90% of the nearly 90,000 records stolen by Russian state actors contained drivers license numbers, and a quarter contained the last four digits of votersí Social Security numbers, according to Ken Menzel, the General Counsel of the State Board of Elections.

Congressional investigators are probing whether any of this stolen private information made its way to the Trump campaign, two sources familiar with the investigations tell TIME.

The investigation continues. You and trumped up can't DERAIL it.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #249 on: September 28, 2017, 11:50:26 AM »
BTW, trumped up didn't "campaign twice as hard." That's just more of your fiction.


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-last-10-weeks-of-2016-campaign-stops-in-one-handy-gif/

Okay, not exactly twice as hard but 106 appearances to 71 during the last 10 weeks. She lacked the stamina.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trumps-campaigns-numbers/story?id=43356783

She also raised twice as much money and spent much more time at donor meetings. Yet she still lost. Guess she had poor judgment.

TOTAL SPENT ON TV ADS:
CLINTON: $253 million
TRUMP: $93 million

Days spent there since clinching nomination on June 7:
Wisconsin: Trump- 5 Clinton- 0

Again, bad judgment. The more candidate with experience didn't even know where to campaign. Perhaps it was because of her bad temperament and failing to listen to her husband and to stubbornly do things her way.

But nope, it was 100k of facebook ads.

Online Mr C

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #250 on: September 28, 2017, 12:07:47 PM »
I presume you have a cite for this. Please share the source of this information. Thank you.
Are you serious? You need a cite for 20 years of NAFTA influencing people's votes? You need a cite for Hillary getting tossed like a slab of beef into the back of a van influencing people's votes? The fundamentals of the campaign are the fundamentals. Anyone who thinks this election was tipped by facebook ads, is an idiot.

But no, those things didn't affect people's votes. $100,000 of Facebook ads did.  :rolleyes:

1) The facebook ads were a drop in the puddle compared to the over $1 billion dollars spent on advertising, with Clinton spending nearly twice as much as Trump (and still losing). Either Russian facebook ads are being cooked up by Don Draper or Hillary Clinton has the same ad people as the ones that gave us the Quizno's gerbils.
2) The populist wave and Trump had started well before the ad buys. This had been building since the 2008 financial panic with the Tea Party, populist waves across Europe, even Obama.
3) The facebook ads were on both sides of the aisle. Apparently some were pro-BLM and supported other left-leaning causes.
4) The facebook ads contained generic appeals that were echoed by other domestic groups. BLM. 2nd amendment. LGBTQ issues. Without having seen the ads, if this is true, it means that they were likely virtually indistinguishable from domestic ads.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/09/the-branching-possibilities-of-the-facebook-russian-ad-buy/541002/

Quote
That said, there is certainly reasonable doubt that even millions of dollars of Facebook spending could change the outcome of even a state in the U.S. presidential election.

But fine, go ahead and attribute Hillary's loss to $100k of facebook ads. That's a brilliant idea. Not only am I sure that it's 100% accurate, it is definitely a winning strategy to prepare you for 2020. No, it wasn't economic malaise across the Midwest or afeeling around the world that globalists are leaving the people in their countries behind. It wasn't failing to campaign in Wisconsin. It wasn't failing to visit a UAW hall in Michigan. It wasn't dismissing coal miners in Pennsylvania. It wasn't ignoring white working class people and Christians and Catholics in favor of celebrities. It wasn't the idea that Americans want a real job, not $15 an hour to flip burgers and welfare. It wasn't pretending not to have health problems and then collapsing at THE FRICKIN 9/11 MEMORIAL. It wasn't a naked sense of entitlement to the presidency. It wasn't the fact that Trump busted his butt and campaigned twice as hard. It wasn't the fact that this was a "change" election.

Nope, it was 100k of facebook ads bought by Russia.  :rolleyes:

Dude, I asked for a cite. Had I known we would be subjected to that peculiar tedium that is an opinion statement from you, I wouldn't have bothered.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #251 on: September 28, 2017, 12:17:58 PM »
Dude, I asked for a cite. Had I known we would be subjected to that peculiar tedium that is an opinion statement from you, I wouldn't have bothered.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/why-did-people-vote-for-donald-trump-us-voters-explain

I don't see anyone writing in "I saw this ad on facebook and..."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/09/do_general_election_campaigns_actually_change_voters_minds.html

Quote
but at the very least, our one general takeaway should be skepticism that there is a big persuasive effect in American politics from an additional TV ad or an additional knock on the door or an additional mailer; that the effects that come from these direct campaign contacts are probably very small, if not zero; and that any argument to the contrary should be met with skepticism and should require some sort of evidence behind it.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 12:19:33 PM by Mr.DeMartino »

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #252 on: September 28, 2017, 04:16:28 PM »
BTW, trumped up didn't "campaign twice as hard." That's just more of your fiction.


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-last-10-weeks-of-2016-campaign-stops-in-one-handy-gif/

Okay, not exactly twice as hard but 106 appearances to 71 during the last 10 weeks. She lacked the stamina.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trumps-campaigns-numbers/story?id=43356783

She also raised twice as much money and spent much more time at donor meetings. Yet she still lost. Guess she had poor judgment.

TOTAL SPENT ON TV ADS:
CLINTON: $253 million
TRUMP: $93 million

Days spent there since clinching nomination on June 7:
Wisconsin: Trump- 5 Clinton- 0

Again, bad judgment. The more candidate with experience didn't even know where to campaign. Perhaps it was because of her bad temperament and failing to listen to her husband and to stubbornly do things her way.

But nope, it was 100k of facebook ads.
Russia hacked the election. And not with just the Facebook ads.

What Clinton did or didn't do right in no way affects whether russia hacked the election and how much help they may have given trumped up.

It's obfuscation. As well as woman bashing. 1+1 at the sr/dm school of derailment.

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #253 on: September 28, 2017, 04:23:49 PM »
Dude, I asked for a cite. Had I known we would be subjected to that peculiar tedium that is an opinion statement from you, I wouldn't have bothered.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/why-did-people-vote-for-donald-trump-us-voters-explain

I don't see anyone writing in "I saw this ad on facebook and..."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/09/do_general_election_campaigns_actually_change_voters_minds.html

Quote
but at the very least, our one general takeaway should be skepticism that there is a big persuasive effect in American politics from an additional TV ad or an additional knock on the door or an additional mailer; that the effects that come from these direct campaign contacts are probably very small, if not zero; and that any argument to the contrary should be met with skepticism and should require some sort of evidence behind it.
Three million more voted for clinton. Explain that.

And it's not just facebook; it's the russki hacking of polls in 39 states.

DERAIL!

Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2498
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #254 on: September 28, 2017, 05:50:47 PM »
Brutal poll shows most people think Trump is unfit for the presidency, are embarrassed he's president, and want him to stop tweeting
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/brutal-poll-shows-most-people-214647063.html


Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2498
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #255 on: September 28, 2017, 05:56:55 PM »
TOTAL SPENT ON TV ADS:
CLINTON: $253 million
TRUMP: $93 million

TOTAL HELP FROM RUSSIANS:
CLINTON: $0
TRUMP: $200 million

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #256 on: September 28, 2017, 11:53:00 PM »

Three million more voted for clinton. Explain that.

And it's not just facebook; it's the russki hacking of polls in 39 states.

DERAIL!

Clinton ran up big margins in California and New York. That's pretty common knowledge and has nothing to do with Russian hacking. Democratic support is very unevenly distributed, electoral college wise. Hillary ran a campaign to be popular. Trump ran a campaign to win. AGAIN- SHE DID NOT VISIT ONE DAMN UAW HALL IN MICHIGAN. SHE DID NOT CAMPAIGN ONCE IN WISCONSIN AFTER GETTING THE NOMINATION. DO YOU NOT SEE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT?

The Russian "hacking" of the polls had zero effect on the number of votes. Show me one legitimate MSM source that conclusively says one vote was changed because of Russian hacking.

Blaming Russia is like Republicans blaming illegal aliens for losing in 2012.

Quote
TOTAL HELP FROM RUSSIANS:
CLINTON: $0
TRUMP: $200 million

I assume you're referring to the investment into Trump properties.

That still doesn't account for the disparity in fundraising and ad revenue between Trump and Clinton.

Michael Moore predicted this would happen months before the election. Van Jones warned about "a wave" that was building. Bill Clinton was screaming into his cell phone with campaign advisers about how they were losing the white working class vote. Journalists in "fly-over country" were writing about how they'd drive through county after county and not see one Clinton sign where previously they had seen Obama signs.

Notice that this "Russian hacking cost Clinton the election" theory relies on the word of the CIA/NSA who apparently were so incompetent as to prevent this, yet we should trust them that Russia hacked everything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-lost-get-over-it-and-stop-blaming_us_584fba63e4b0151082221e8a
http://www.thedailybeast.com/schumer-rips-hillary-dont-blame-comey-or-russia-blame-yourself

I guess Chuck Schumer is a Russian agent or something. Why else would he be saying this.  :rolleyes:

Remember when Dems were telling people they had to accept the results of the election and that elections can't be rigged?

A thorough list of debunked Russia claims by left-leaning The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 12:10:40 AM by Mr.DeMartino »

Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2498
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #257 on: September 30, 2017, 02:32:49 PM »
I don't see anyone writing in "I saw this ad on facebook and..."

Probably because they didn't know it was an ad.

Quote
"Twitter notes RT bought $274,100 worth of U.S. ads on the platform."

http://www.10news.com/newsy/twitter-says-it-shut-down-dozens-of-russianlinked-bots

Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2498
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #258 on: September 30, 2017, 02:34:38 PM »
What's your take on this?:

Quote
The Kremlin spends $190 million a year on the distribution and dissemination of RT programming, focusing on hotels and satellite, terrestrial, and cable broadcasting. The Kremlin is rapidly expanding RT's availability around the world and giving it a reach comparable to channels such as Al Jazeera English.

Quote
RT hires or makes contractual agreements with Westerners with views that fit its agenda and airs them on RT. Simonyan said on the pro-Kremlin show "Minaev Live" on 10 April that RT has enough audience and money to be able to choose its hosts, and it chooses the hosts that "think like us," "are interested in working in the anti-mainstream," and defend RT's beliefs on social media.

Offline gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2027
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #259 on: September 30, 2017, 03:50:05 PM »

Three million more voted for clinton. Explain that.

And it's not just facebook; it's the russki hacking of polls in 39 states.

DERAIL!

Clinton ran up big margins in California and New York. That's pretty common knowledge and has nothing to do with Russian hacking. Democratic support is very unevenly distributed, electoral college wise. Hillary ran a campaign to be popular. Trump ran a campaign to win. AGAIN- SHE DID NOT VISIT ONE DAMN UAW HALL IN MICHIGAN. SHE DID NOT CAMPAIGN ONCE IN WISCONSIN AFTER GETTING THE NOMINATION. DO YOU NOT SEE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT?

The Russian "hacking" of the polls had zero effect on the number of votes. Show me one legitimate MSM source that conclusively says one vote was changed because of Russian hacking.

Blaming Russia is like Republicans blaming illegal aliens for losing in 2012.

Quote
TOTAL HELP FROM RUSSIANS:
CLINTON: $0
TRUMP: $200 million

I assume you're referring to the investment into Trump properties.

That still doesn't account for the disparity in fundraising and ad revenue between Trump and Clinton.

Michael Moore predicted this would happen months before the election. Van Jones warned about "a wave" that was building. Bill Clinton was screaming into his cell phone with campaign advisers about how they were losing the white working class vote. Journalists in "fly-over country" were writing about how they'd drive through county after county and not see one Clinton sign where previously they had seen Obama signs.

Notice that this "Russian hacking cost Clinton the election" theory relies on the word of the CIA/NSA who apparently were so incompetent as to prevent this, yet we should trust them that Russia hacked everything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-lost-get-over-it-and-stop-blaming_us_584fba63e4b0151082221e8a
http://www.thedailybeast.com/schumer-rips-hillary-dont-blame-comey-or-russia-blame-yourself

I guess Chuck Schumer is a Russian agent or something. Why else would he be saying this.  :rolleyes:

Remember when Dems were telling people they had to accept the results of the election and that elections can't be rigged?

A thorough list of debunked Russia claims by left-leaning The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/
Deny the evidence all you like. I hope it makes you feel better, although how anyone could feel good about being a dupe is beyond me.

Maybe they're paying you? Or are you, like Greenwald, defending a pre-determined position and ignoring any and all facts that don't support that position?