One of the things that affected discussion of this race is the involvement of NatSec experts into electoral politics.
-
-
Here's the thing: Except for security people who looked at voting cyber years ago, most who did this year didn't know how devolved voting is
-
It was crystal clear in comments they had never worked a precinct, seen how they're tallied up, seen party observers get printouts
-
More importantly, they drummed up a hypothetical (albeit real) fear Putin would hack election, even while proven vote suppression happening
-
We may one day find that vote suppression made the difference in WI and NC.
-
Then on the other side, the CI people introduced us to kompromat. As if there's not an English word for that: rat-fucking.
-
Not to say Putin's involvement wasn't important. But things that proved critical--playing up Hillary scandal and down Trump's--rat-fucking
-
As I've noted, Roger Stone, a close Trump aide, was rat-fucking when Putin was still in law school. Did he & Putin work together? Maybe.
-
But I can assure you, Roger Stone did not need Putin to teach him how to corrupt democracy. Just ask Eliiot Spitzer if you don't believe me.
-
I raise this for two reasons. 1) Fearmongering abt foreign issues w/o addressing homegrown fragility and corruption got us into this mess.
-
2) Even if Putin did have a big role, if he did, it worked because of all that prior work.
-
Finally: Hillary was running v Trump. Not Putin. But she spent energy talking abt what a thug Putin is not what a fraudster Trump is.
-
Remember that powerful moment in Hillary's Convention where those defrauded by Trump U spoke? It disappeared as we beat up Putin instead.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
If I was a Dem I'd blame WikiLeaks... most damaging of all.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.