There is no serious person.. who would suggest that you could even rig America's elections. - Obama

[scoopj]

TL;DR

Rig vs influence

Google it.

The OP didn't use the term "influence". The distinction was between "rigging" and "hacking". There absolutely have been charges of hacking, which is a lot closer to the idea of "rigging" than "influencing".

 

[Rational Poster]

The OP didn't use the term "influence". The distinction was between "rigging" and "hacking". There absolutely have been charges of hacking, which is a lot closer to the idea of "rigging" than "influencing".

Oh, you're an idiot.

Thanks for letting everyone know in such a public fashion.

 

[scoopj]

Oh, you're an idiot.

Thanks for letting everyone know in such a public fashion.

Please explain, mr rational poster.

 

[lifelessheap]

Rigging the election is not the same as hacking/influencing the election. No one has suggested that the voting machines were hacked and the election rigged. This thread is silly.

Voting machines were certainly tampered with. Dems were stuffing ballots and were caught doing so. Cheaters.

 

[My Spot]

Please explain, mr rational poster.

He's been quite angry since the election.

 

[Rational Poster]

Please explain, mr rational poster.

You made a pointless semantic argument that doesn't change the intended meaning of my post.

The TS is not an idiot like yourself, I know he understood.

 

[scoopj]

You made a pointless semantic argument that doesn't change the intended meaning of my post.

The TS is not an idiot like yourself, I know he understood.

Your post was void of substance, and misrepresented the OP. It was a straw man. You either skimmed it or you didn't comprehend it. Please reconcile these two statements for me.

1. "There is no serious person out there who would suggest that you could even rig America's elections."
2. "The Obama administration had warned, for months, that Russian hackers had tried to interfere in U.S. elections".

My argument was about the importance of semantics. Do you comprehend that?

 

[Rational Poster]

Your post was void of substance, and misrepresented the OP. It was a straw man. You either skimmed it or you didn't comprehend it. Please reconcile these two statements for me.

1. "There is no serious person out there who would suggest that you could even rig America's elections."
2. "The Obama administration had warned, for months, that Russian hackers had tried to interfere in U.S. elections".

My argument was about the importance of semantics. Do you comprehend that?

You see.. Rigging implies that there was intentional tampering for a specific result. That is a different issue entirely and not what went on.

Hacking doesn't imply that. Hacking implies influence. The data was stolen and released, but there was no guarantee how that would affect the election, even if it was targeted in such a way to do so.

 

[scoopj]

You see.. Rigging implies that there was intentional tampering for a specific result. That is a different issue entirely and not what went on.

Hacking doesn't imply that. Hacking implies influence. The data was stolen and released, but there was no guarantee how that would affect the election, even if it was targeted in such a way to do so.

I just listened to the MSN video, and I see it's talking about the Wikileaks hacks, and not voting machines. I was under the impression the "hacking" was in reference to voting machines, which would imply rigging. Normally I'd apologize for the confusion, but you're a dick.

 

[Rational Poster]

I just listened to the MSN video, and I see it's talking about the Wikileaks hacks, and not voting machines. I was under the impression the "hacking" was in reference to voting machines, which would imply rigging. Normally I'd apologize for the confusion, but you're a dick.

Haha I'm right and you're wrong. The OP abandoned this thread because I killed it.

Run along.

 

[Stoic1]

I didn't get haxed.

 

[panamaican]

They manipulated the election by exposing the fact that the democrats were manipulating the election. Democrats got caught...blames Russia. In a nutshell

As I said...not the same thing as rigged. Arguing just to argue doesn't make sense when all you're doing is agreeing with me. It just reinforces my opinion that you struggle with cogent arguments.

 

[TheStruggle]

As I said...not the same thing as rigged. Arguing just to argue doesn't make sense when all you're doing is agreeing with me. It just reinforces my opinion that you struggle with cogent arguments.

Wasn't arguing with you, I was clarifying what you meant by 'manipulated'. Read before you pat yourself on the back.

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

I highly doubt you'll see ordinary citizens out in the streets and fighting or even militias.....

But I don't doubt for a second that there is going to be very significant tear between the upper echelon of our political system that may require military generals to essentially pick a side (step in and intervene politically), if Obama, Clinton, the DNC, FBI, and CIA keep pushing this narrative. And no I'm not kidding either, because Obama is essentially implying he will not allow Trump to transition into presidency (which is the hugest violation of our constitution) because that means we now are a dictatorship and not a republic anymore.

Listen man, the rhetoric Obama is slinging at Russia right now is *just* one step below making a declaration for war and I say that with complete sobriety. He's going out on a national platform and publicly telling another sovereign nation he's going to do something against them. (And its not going to be handing them a fresh bouquet of flowers)

This stuff is very f*cking serious.

lol


Obama wants dat 3rd term


In all seriousness, I don't see this going too far at all. The only real curve ball I could see being thrown at Trump is the electoral college voting 'nope' to letting him in. But trouble with that is, who gets in then? Not to mention, that will stir up some shit.

And I doubt that happens. I look at a lot of this as nothing more than hot air after a really tense election tbh

 

[panamaican]

Wasn't arguing with you, I was clarifying what you meant by 'manipulated'. Read before you pat yourself on the back.

My point didn't need clarification. It stood on its own. And your post wasn't clarifying mine, it was a completely different point.

 

[ehtheist]

*sees a bunch of posters actually discrediting her for using the dictionary to define the words they're using after they come in with semantic arguments*

Yep, that's some classic Sherdog right there Don't worry guys, you all know what "rigged" really means. The dictionary was written by cans.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

The Russians didn't rig the election. They manipulated the voting base. Which are 2 different things.

damn those russians spreading truth! the truth is always going to be unfavorable for the left

 

[legomaheggroll]

*sees a bunch of posters actually discrediting her for using the dictionary to define the words they're using after they come in with semantic arguments*

Yep, that's some classic Sherdog right there Don't worry guys, you all know what "rigged" really means. The dictionary was written by cans.

Are we sure the Russians didn't hack or influence our dictionaries too?

 

[TheComebackKid]

I started a thread that summarizes my opinion on your post. We've reached a stage where no one believes anything they don't like and never questions anything they do like.

Your post doesn't even contradict mine. Manipulation =/= rigging.

Who got manipulated? Unless you consider learning factual information and then adjusting your views accordingly as "being manipulated" them nothing of the sort happened.

Plus there's no evidence Russia stole the emails.

 

[TheComebackKid]

This, I don't get why people think they are mutually exclusive. There is bipartisan support for the CIA intelligence, even Hillary hating senior republicans are saying it happened, though it didn't win Trump the game, but it is still serious and outrageous from a nation that is not our friend. Russia hacked republicans too.

The RNC is also against Trump. You guys should stop referencing "bipartisan" when it comes to opposition to Trump...it doesn't carry any weight.