Social Question

stanleybmanly's avatar

Considering their stunning success last time, are the Russians pushing as hard this time for Trump's re-election?

Asked by stanleybmanly (22148points) September 4th, 2019

Or have they figured out that the dumb loose cannon is too risky a prospect,

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

44 Answers

elbanditoroso's avatar

If I were Putin, I would be really disappointed that I got rooked in my Trump investment. I don’t know what the Russians paid Trump, but he (Trump) hasn’t exactly been a big help to the Russians in any sphere.

Sanctions, diplomatic expulsion, arrests—not exactly a winning strategy for old Vlad.

Unless Putin’s strategy was just do fuck things up for the hell of it – sow dissent and make a mess of democracy – in which case he has been successful, sort ot.

kritiper's avatar

My all powerful, all seeing crystal ball says…
...yes.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Of course Putin wants the sledding here as tough as he can arrange it. Idiots and thieves appointed to Federal offices. Key positions vacant, and governmental infrastructure dismantled. Climate change denial as official government policy:
That’s just the point. And in the end, for all of those Russians complaining about Vlad’s gangland governance, Putin merely has to point to the fool with “you see what democracy gets you?”

Dutchess_III's avatar

Do you guys think he could actually succeed a second time?

seawulf575's avatar

I think the question assumes the Russians had stunning success. Maybe the OP needs to actually show what exactly is considered “Stunning success”. Even Mueller didn’t go that far. He only said they carried out an effort, but couldn’t really say how much impact it had.

flutherother's avatar

They caught America off guard the last time. Despite Trump’s blundering denials that it ever happened the security agencies now have a pretty clear picture of how Russia attempted to influence the last election and they will be employing counter measures. The Russians will be trying you can be sure of that and their techniques will be constantly improving. They won’t necessarily promote Trump next time either.

seawulf575's avatar

@flutherother attempting is not the same as a stunning success.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I think Putin’s goal, the first time, was to destabilize the US. In that regard, it was a stunning success.

This time around, it will depend on who runs against Trump, and what agenda Putin has going forward. He will likely try to help whichever candidate will help his agenda the most. If he wants the US to fall further into chaos, so that he can do his own thing, with his only real threat distracted, then he will try to get Trump to stay…

Trump, is so easily manipulated, that that fact alone, may make him Putin’s guy…

stanleybmanly's avatar

Stunning success is a moron at the wheel of your opposition. 4 years of your most feared and powerful enemy reduced to a laughing stock headed by a tasteless practical joke.

flutherother's avatar

@seawulf575 We are in new territory here and it isn’t possible to quantify the effect Russia had on the election but that doesn’t mean it can be dismissed. In a close run election even a small effect can swing the result.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 If Putin’s goal was to destabilize the US and you consider that a stunning success, then you need to get the whole story out there. Russia really did nothing on its own. Yeah, they took out some Facebook ads. Big wow. It is assumed they hacked the DNC computers. Again…big wow. No average voter can say they actually know what was in any of those emails so it couldn’t have swayed them. That isn’t a stunning success. You might be able to say that the stunning success was the entire shadow that was thrown on the election and a sitting president that led to the whole Russia collusion investigation. But when you get into that territory, you actually have more players that were far more disruptive. You have Hillary and the DNC using Russians to give stories to their “investigator”. You have the investigator that hated Trump and had no problem creating an unverifiable fairy tale and calling it opposition research. You have corrupt intelligence officials that would do anything to have Hillary as POTUS and/or to get rid of Trump. These officials had no intention of even attempting to verify the opposition research, but decided to use it as a basis for obtaining FISA warrants to spy not only on Americans, but on an entire political candidate’s campaign. And you have a media that blasted 24/7 nothing but lies and innuendo to try to make the entire scam work. Now…when you compare social media ads and possibly a computer hack and release of emails that had no quantifiable effect on voters with the outrageous circus created by the Dems and the subsequent lies and violation of laws along with the propaganda the US citizenry was subjected to for years, who was actually the bad player here?

seawulf575's avatar

@stanleybmanly so you have to have someone to blame for Hillary running a crappy campaign, for the DNC selling the candidacy to Hillary despite the fact Bernie ran a better campaign, and for the fact the entire attempted coup failed so you blame it all on Putin. Sorry….I just can’t connect those dots. But please…go ahead and continue to believe it. That sort of thing spreading through the left will ensure another 4 years of Trump.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . Your response (in this subject) is typical, boring, and wrong.

You are correct, that the role Russian interference played, is not quantifiable. And the DNC, plain sucks, at politics, like backing Hillary.

The rest, is nonsense. At least, in my case. Especially considering that I didn’t play a role in the “voting game.” And I don’t accept all media as scripture. Your logic is extremely flawed.

Months ago, Trumpers cried about the Mueller investigation, as a witch hunt. Now that it clearly wasn’t, you’re kind changed their minds on that VERY quickly. And site it, as a vindication, of ALL Trump’s wrong doings. In spite of the fact, that it practically accused him of obstructing justice.

It’s crystal clear that you will never admit that there has NEVER been a worldwide conspiracy to get Trump out of office. It’s crystal clear that you give Trump a pass, on all things that you would have crucified ANY Democrat for. Enjoy your false reality. I respect the sheer willpower it must take, to keep yourself so deliberately obtuse, despite your clear ability to be objective in other subjects.

Ask yourself. What is more realistic, billions of people are conspiring against Trump, or everyone is just listening/watching Trump continue to voluntarily destroy himself through countless lies, and false declarations? Again. Trump, himself, is his own worst enemy.

As far a the stability of the US, it was already a puddle of gasoline, and Trump’s lies, and inflammatory rhetoric was the match. Putin must have felt his agenda galvanized, or even fortuitous, to see the opportunity to try to get Trump elected. He simply took advantage, of a crazy amount of anomalous variables, or perfect storm.

Remember, Trump himself, called the election process illegitimate, before he even knew he won…

Between him, and Russia, America’s democracy, and population, HAVE BEEN destabilized. Check mate Putin… With America in turmoil, he has no real deterrent, to not proceed with his expansionist agenda. And Trump, is too naive, to understand, or is being manipulated, or blackmailed, into helping Putin.

I try to give Trump credit, for some things. I try to give him chances, to change things for the better. But he just can’t/won’t stop hurting the country. He has a better relationshipwith our enemies, and foreign dictators, than he does with our allies. Most other countries work around Trump, in matters of international interest. Not only is America not “Great Again,” it’s relationship/sway with the rest of the world, is at an all time low… Even the economy, which was supposed to be his strong suit, is sliding…

In the game of life, Russia has taken steps forward, and America, has taken steps back.

As far as “big wow,” in Russia spreading false propaganda on Facebook. There is no bigger platform, to spread such BS. Facebook has the attention of overy 2 billion users. To deny it had no effect, is again being deliberately obtuse. THAT, is where your great conspiracy lies. Not in the media, playing Trump’s own words, or Trump making voluntary, ridiculous declarations that show his true colors, and letting the world judge him by his own self defeating bullshit…

We both know, that all politicians are pieces of crap. Trump is only different, because he proudly displays it…

Now. If you’ll excuse me, I’m in the middle of a hurricane. I’ll check in, when I can, to continue this circular argument…

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888, you just don’t see it, do you? Your arguments skirt everything that has come to light. And you had to create things and attribute them to me. I never said their was billions of people conspiring against Trump or that there was a worldwide conspiracy to get Trump out of office. But look at the facts. Pull off the blinders and look. The Steele Dossier was opposition research, populated largely with information gathered from the Russians. It was bought and paid for by Hillary and the DNC. Any arguments so far? These are facts. The FBI never really verified the information in it before using it as a basis for FISA warrants. That, too is a fact. These FISA warrants were used to spy on an opposition political campaign….opposition to the party of the sitting president and the candidate of that party. That is a fact. Mueller’s team was populated by people that were vocal about not wanting Trump in office and that indicated they had actions they could take if it happened. Now, there is speculation as to what those actions would be, but to have that sort of bias and to be put on an investigation against the person you were vocal about seems extremely odd.
So let’s review these facts and your statements.
Trumpers cried about the Mueller investigation being a witch hunt. So you use opposition research as the basis for violating American’s rights and then use vocal opponents of Trump to conduct the investigation…what would you call it? And when Mueller’s investigation starts with the assumption that the Steele Dossier was verifiable fact without actually checking it, what would you call it? And yes, when it came to the end of that investigation and there was a conclusion that Trump did nothing with Russia, of course we (Trumpers) were happy.
Your statement about Trump’s countless lies and false declarations as well as inflammatory rhetoric is opinion. I remember many on the left…the Trump haters…that said his statements about his campaign being spied on was a lie, that when he said the Steele Dossier was bogus was a lie, that when he said he didn’t collude with Russia to win the election it was a lie. Face it…the Never Trumpers call everything he says a lie and they are often wrong. That’s not to say he hasn’t lied…just that much of the claim that he lies about everything is brought on by hateful rhetoric on the left. And speaking of rhetoric…we have had this discussion many, many times. Much of his “inflammatory rhetoric” is opinion from the left. For example, he says Baltimore is a rat and rodent infested mess and the left says “See? More of his racist rhetoric!!!!” I guess if you look at the world through a lens of hatred and feel that creating whatever story you want is the way to go through life, then he has had tons of inflammatory rhetoric.
You continue to claim Putin worked to get Trump elected. But again…you cannot show one iota of evidence that says any of Russia’s supposed efforts did anything. So you are taking your conclusion and presenting it as a fact to bolster your arguments.
Trump did say that it was likely that Hillary would steal the election. After all, she stole the candidacy from Sanders. But here’s an interesting point you seem to miss. Hillary threw out the claim that Russia hacked the DNC computers and that they were interfering with the election. Do you remember Obama’s response to that claim? He specifically said that they had investigated the Russia interference and that it would have no impact on the election…that the will of the American people would be seen. Funny how you don’t want to acknowledge that when you are talking about people predicting things about the legitimacy of the election.
You then claim that between Trump and Putin our democracy has been destabilized. Again…you are taking your claim and presenting it as fact. You still have not shown to what extent Russia’s supposed actions impacted anything. AND you are entirely ignoring the facts about the attempted coup d’etat by the DNC and the intelligence folks.
And yes, Facebook ads are a big wow. How many ads cross your screen in a given day? Do you stop to read them all? I don’t. And when I see ones that support some position I don’t like, it certainly doesn’t make me suddenly support that position. That is where your claims fall apart. You cannot show even one person that said “You know, I was a Hillary supporter until I saw this ad on Facebook” You can’t even show one person that says “I didn’t know who to vote for until I saw this ad on Facebook”. And the 2016 election was pretty polarized because most people didn’t support the path America was on under Obama. a poll in July of 2016 showed 70+% of the people polled felt America was on the wrong path. Hillary promised more of the same, at an accelerated rate. Trump tapped into the idea that Washington DC was corrupt…something many people still believe…and that the politicians were selling our country out. They were entirely different views and there weren’t a whole lot of people in the middle ground. So your worry that Russia influenced people is to believe that people that felt the country was going in the right direction suddenly said “Nope…I am voting for the guy that disagrees with my point of view”.
Good luck with the hurricane. Our preps are in place and we are going to ride it out here at the Seawulf estate.

stanleybmanly's avatar

GOOD LUCK! There’s certainly an excess of hot wind blowing FROM the Seawulf estate!

seawulf575's avatar

Yes, Mr. Harding.

LuckyGuy's avatar

Of course they will do it again. For the price of a couple of cruise missiles they weakened the country by very effectively split it into angry factions. Look at some of the “dialogs” we see above.
They found someone with no government experience who could be easily manipulated by uninformed public opinions, not facts. That enabled them to weaken the State Department, place a wedge between the Intelligence agencies and the president, isolate the US from our Allies, start a lose-lose trade war with the largest holder of US treasury bonds, and put the country further into debt at record highs. (As we speak, their tool is tweeting negative comments about NOAA and NASA for not exactly predicting the path of the latest hurricane thereby weakening their credibility.)
The next step will be to attack the US stock market and dollar.

Thanks to the data supplied by FB and Twitter they know every person who forwarded their messages. They will target those people directly to make interference harder to stop.
We now know it only cost them $100,000 to start a “Lock him/her up! Lock him/her up!” campaign – a drop in the bucket.
Yep. Be ready for it.

Yellowdog's avatar

Russia has been interfering in our elections since the 1940s. Nothing new here, except, since Devin Nunes advised Obama in 2014, no one acknowledged it. And no one on the Left pointed a finger until Trump actually won the election.

The Left in the U.S. is bashing Trump at every turn, especially in the Democrat-controlled media. They have done the destabilizing of the U,S, at least since Obama;s second term and especially since the election of Trump.

Hillary had no trouble getting the dossier from Russia into the American media. Don’t you think Russia wanted her instead of Trump? What did they do to support Trump and block Hillary?

jca2's avatar

@Yellowdog: You think Russia wanted someone experienced in world politics or would they rather have an amateur who would be easy to manipulate?

jca2's avatar

@Yellowdog: From the definition of “Whataboutery” from Wikipedia:

Use by Donald Trump
US President Donald Trump has used whataboutism in response to criticism leveled at him, his policies, or his support of controversial world leaders.[4][80][81] National Public Radio (NPR) reported, “President Trump has developed a consistent tactic when he’s criticized: say that someone else is worse.”[4] NPR noted Trump chose to criticize the Affordable Care Act when he himself faced criticism over the proposed American Health Care Act of 2017, “Instead of giving a reasoned defense, he went for blunt offense, which is a hallmark of whataboutism.”[4] NPR noted similarities in use of the tactic by Putin and Trump, “it’s no less striking that while Putin’s Russia is causing the Trump administration so much trouble, Trump nevertheless often sounds an awful lot like Putin”.[4]

When criticized or asked to defend his behavior, Trump has frequently changed the subject by criticizing Hillary Clinton, the Obama Administration,[81] and the Affordable Care Act.[4] When asked about Russian human rights violations, Trump has shifted focus to the US itself,[80][72] employing whataboutism tactics similar to those used by Russian President Vladimir Putin.[4][82]

After Fox News host Bill O’Reilly and MSNBC host Joe Scarborough called Putin a killer, Trump responded by saying that the US government was also guilty of killing people.[4][72][83] Garry Kasparov commented to Columbia Journalism Review on Trump’s use of whataboutism: “Moral relativism, ‘whataboutism’, has always been a favorite weapon of illiberal regimes. For a US president to employ it against his own country is tragic.”[43]

During a news conference on infrastructure at Trump Tower after the 2017 Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, a reporter linked the alt-right to the fatal vehicle-ramming attack that was inflicted against counter-demonstrators, to which Donald Trump responded by demanding the reporter to “define alt-right to me” and subsequently interrupting the reporter to ask, “what about the alt-left that came charging at [the alt-right]?”[84][85] Various experts[who?] have criticized Trump’s usage of the term “alt-left” by arguing that no members of the progressive left have used that term to describe themselves[86][87] and furthermore that Trump fabricated the term to falsely equate the alt-right to the counter-demonstrators.[88][89]

Yellowdog's avatar

Just reading the last paragraph, you failed to mention that the violence at Charlottesville, with clubs, chains, and blowtorches, was instigated by Antifa, who went after some rather innocuous persons.

The “rally” was the protest of the removal of a Civil War memorial.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Let me get this straight @Yellowdog:
The reason the young lady was killed during the Charlottesville and other violence was Antifa ??? KKK, skin heads and others with a violent agenda had nothing to do with it and the cause of violence was Antifa !

Your lack of logic totally befuddles me !

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . First off, I hope you are doing well with the hurricane.

As far as your post. You should reread it. You contradict yourself multiple times. The rest was sufficiently covered by the responses below it.
Except for @Yellowdog . The right showed up with guns. One man fired into a crowd. Another drove his car into a crowd.
If you bothered to delve into the history of former, and current ANTIFA movements, you would know full well, that ANTIFA is a reactionary movement. They only exist, BECAUSE of the alt-right. You’re effectively blaming the vaccine, for the disease…

The alt-right only exists, because of cultural ignorance, racism, intolerance of non-Christians, and fear of losing their white privilege by eventually becoming a minority.

jca2's avatar

The beauty of the Wiki article is that it has citations and you can look at the original sources for everything, @Yellowdog.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Why look at sources, when you can just listen to whatever Trumpers say?

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 “You think Russia wanted someone experienced in world politics or would they rather have an amateur who would be easy to manipulate?” Hillary?!? Please. She did absolutely nothing. She did nothing as First Lady, she did nothing as a Senator, and she did nothing as Sect of State. Except lose control of classified materials. Oh! and let’s not forget the millions and millions pouring into the Clinton Foundation while she was Sect of State that all dried up when she lost to Trump. She is an experienced shyster plain and simply. And given that Trump has been harder on Russia than Obama ever was, I wouldn’t say he is easy to manipulate. Your entire premise is nothing more than liberal talking points that are not based in reality at all.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Even Hillary’s “nothing,” dwarfs Trump’s experience.

seawulf575's avatar

@Tropical_Willie Actually, if you get down to the nuts and bolts, yes…the young lady was killed in Charlottesville due to the violence of Antifa and BLM. There was a group of people that obtained a permit, in accordance with the law, to protest the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee…a figure that was an important figure in our history. Antifa and BLM showed up with weapons and shields to pick a fight. They did NOT have a permit to protest in that area. So they showed up and started all the mayhem. Had they not shown up, the protest would have ended peacefully and no one would have known about it, really, and no one would have been hurt or killed. So yeah…if they weren’t so busy trying to stir shit, that young lady would not have gotten killed. Certainly the idiot driving the car would not have gone in search of someone to run over.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 as does her corruption.

seawulf575's avatar

And @MrGrimm888 I hope you, too are doing well with Uncle Dorian visiting. So far I haven’t seen much other than some random rain and periodic wind. But he hasn’t shown up here yet. Supposed to blow through town tonight. Knowing me, I’ll sleep through it.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The truth is that the Russians wanted the fool in and they got their wish. Now once again, did they get their money’s worth? We can disagree on the extent of their success, but whatever their influence, the results more than vindicate any exertions applied.

jca2's avatar

Trump comments about Russia over the years. He’s very complimentary and almost gushing with his praise. Read on:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/donald-trumps-statements-putinrussiafake-news-media

jca2's avatar

@Yellowdog: Also, take note of the fact that both me and @LuckyGuy have provided links. All that you have done is posted your opinions.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 did you actually read that citation you just gave? I didn’t get the message that he was complimentary and gushing. He did say, in the 2013 when he had investments going on there and was looking at holding the Miss Universe pageant there, that Russia was an amazing place and that he met many wonderful people. That is probably very true. He also, as time went by, talked about the threat Russia could pose to us and how it would be better for us to work with them than against them. That, too, is true. It’s sort of the same attitude Obama had about Iran, but I found Iran far more radical than Russia. Nothing there really spoke to him “gushing” about Russia or Putin.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . Thanks for your concern. I just got power back, and now we’re just getting tropical storm stuff. Which we’re quite used to here. Lots of trees, and debris, is everywhere, but crews are already fixing stuff, and clearing the roads. The flooding wasn’t as bad, as predicted, but the Charleston peninsula is under a few feet of water. Overall. I think we got lucky. Hopefully you will as well. Good luck sir.

Peace n love.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Glad to hear you fared well. We, too, made it through just fine. Never even lost power. As predicted, I slept through it. We had some winds, but they were really only seeing around 70 mph at the worst places. Some damage from tornadoes around the area, but nothing real close to me. Some flooding, but again…not by me. Part of the saving grace, I think, is that it went through at low tide. Could have been a lot worse. Seems Wilmington dodged a pretty serious threat this day.

MrGrimm888's avatar

That’s good news @seawulf575 . I am glad you made it through unscathed, as well. And yes. Tides, are a main variable, regarding storm surges, and rainfall accumulation.

seawulf575's avatar

And flooding. The rivers around here will flood like crazy if it is high tide and we get a big storm surge.

Yellowdog's avatar

The dossier was Russian disinformation, disseminated by the Hillary campaign.

Russia and Putin were overwhelmingly on the side of Hillary Clinton. The Dossier exists, and duped Americans for over two years. It is pretty hard to get around the reality of the dossier and its impact before and after the election.

seawulf575's avatar

@Yellowdog But the dossier is only one piece. It could never have been effective at all without the assistance of a corrupt intelligence community and a complicit press.

flutherother's avatar

Any more of this and I’m going to come over there and bang your heads together.

seawulf575's avatar

@flutherother…any more of what? Truth? Honesty? Why would you want to bang our heads together for that?

MrGrimm888's avatar

Let them continue to show their ignorance. As they say. “Stick with what you’re good at.”...

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther