View Full Version : Did Russia influence the election?
I decided not to post this in the politics section because I think it goes beyond that. I've been pretty checked out of politics for the last few years, so while I constantly hear about certain things, I'm not following them or really looking into them much. One thing is the investigation into Russia tampering with the 2016 election. I listened to the Joe Rogan podcast today with Renee DiResta and was pretty fascinated with the info on what the Russian company was actually doing as far as social manipulation of people in the US. So here are links to the Joe Rogan podcast, and also the podcast from a few weeks before with Sam Harris if you think that you don't like Rogan. I've only listed to the Rogan one. I think it's pretty interesting the depths and specificity that Russia went to, to accomplish whatever it was that they were after. I'll conclude by saying that if you don't think that this affects you personally, there is a very strong chance that it does. If you're on any social media (including here), it definitely does, and even if you aren't, there is a pretty small chance that you aren't at least in contact with people who've been directly engaged in this campaign. Give it a listen, it's fascinating.
ETA: This doesn't really answer the question in the title, because I don't really think that they know. It just demonstrates the things Russia did from collected data, and it's way more than I ever imagined.
*Protip, if you listen on Sticher or something similar, you can speed up the play back and knock this out in less time. I find that 1.5x speed doesn't take much to get used to but 2x right off the bat is tough to adjust to. Pretty sure you can adjust the speed with YouTube as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAGZcGi1OP8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0CK49d4rxc
Russian trolls are nothing new on JR. Looks like it's done on both sides.
Listening at 1.5 or 2.0 sounds like Minny Mouse.
Try and listen to it this week.
Great-Kazoo
03-18-2019, 22:43
I don't believe they did anything to give the election to trump. IMO they did or do the same thing all PAC's do, only better.
It's definitely done on both sides from what I gather.
*Protip, if you listen on Sticher or something similar, you can speed up the play back and knock this out in less time. I find that 1.5x speed doesn't take much to get used to but 2x right off the bat is tough to adjust to. Pretty sure you can adjust the speed with YouTube as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0CK49d4rxc
Right there in the Youtube settings (gear) icon is the speed. I almost always listen at 1.25 or 1.5
Great-Kazoo
03-18-2019, 23:23
Here are a few question for the OP and anyone else.
At what point after the candidates were selected, on the R & D side, did you know who you were voting for?
Do you also believe there were as many "undecideds" going in to election night as the media said there were?
Did you believe, based on the media's non-stop blabbering about the Super Delegates. HRC was going to run away with the electoral college?
I ask, since the questions are based off the 24/7 ass kissing of the media for HRC. Who i believe did more to try influencing the election that any russian bot.
So the US influences foriegn elections. Why is anyone surprised that a foreign government influences ours?
The question is too narrow in my opinion. The objective isn't election interference, per-se. Not like the US, where we desire certain people in to influence favorable politics with our nation state. Russia invests heavily into simply causing discord, division, and separation, and they have for many years (decades, actually) but they've advanced it a lot recently. They're already known for having probably the most prolific espionage engine (arguably we may be more so, depends on perspective). However, their espionage pales in comparison presently to their efforts to sow discord.
Even before Trump was nominated, it's an easy yes- they tried to "influence" the election, as they have many times past, not exactly hidden information. Not so much for people to win, just for us to hate each other. What gets surprising is it's not limited to that. Think things like B.L.M., Antifa, etc. have some "hands" in them as well.
And it all comes down to a simple equation. Our enemies will never declare war upon us because the costs - both in life and finance, as well as the risk is too high. It's almost asymmetrical what would occur in declared WAR. But we have an asymmetrical weakness they can permanently exploit in peace time: A free press (sort-of). They try to incite hatred and division among ourselves - and you might argue, they've been wildly successful. It's easy to get controversial garbage to run nationwide here, it's click-bait and our press engine runs on it.
However, they are all but immune from the same. If we spend resources and operatives to try to sow the same kind of discord, Russia and China just publish patriotic bullshit in their press and ignore it. Their end-game should be obvious, they want America to cannibalize itself. China, to be the only, uncontested superpower, Russia, because of old history. I don't really see a path where they don't ultimately succeed.
Obama spent millions in tax dollars to influence the Israeli election. Hillary colluded with the Russians and British to make the fake dossier. The DNC has voted to allow foreigners to vote in our elections. It doesn't matter any more. We have been sold out.
The Russian troll farms go beyond the election. They are involved in day to day current events as well. If you see some anti gun meme or pro gun meme or you visit and post in the comments section of an online news article there is a good chance that those memes or some of the article response posts are from a Russian troll farm. After mass shooting events it has been found that these troll accounts will post inflaming info on both sides of the conflict in order to spread division. The photo that was posted that strparted the Covington controversy was from a troll account. These troll accounts have been found to create opposing side demonstrations accross the street from each other. The list goes on and on, the election was just a small side show.
Here are a few question for the OP and anyone else.
At what point after the candidates were selected, on the R & D side, did you know who you were voting for?
Do you also believe there were as many "undecideds" going in to election night as the media said there were?
Did you believe, based on the media's non-stop blabbering about the Super Delegates. HRC was going to run away with the electoral college?
I ask, since the questions are based off the 24/7 ass kissing of the media for HRC. Who i believe did more to try influencing the election that any russian bot.
After the contestants were finalized I knew I was voting for Donald Trump, there is no way on God's green earth I was gong to vote for a communist criminal like HRC.
The media was wrong on every point they tried to make.
Aren't the super delegates a DNC creation, they don't have anything to do with the Electoral College. I certainly thought that HRC was going to win, I was very surprised and pleased the next morning to see that Donald had won.
The Russians had nothing on the US media for election influence.
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2019, 19:54
I certainly thought that HRC was going to win, I was very surprised and pleased the next morning to see that Donald had won.
This is exactly where I was in thought when I went to bed that night.
Here are a few question for the OP and anyone else.
At what point after the candidates were selected, on the R & D side, did you know who you were voting for?
Do you also believe there were as many "undecideds" going in to election night as the media said there were?
Did you believe, based on the media's non-stop blabbering about the Super Delegates. HRC was going to run away with the electoral college?
I ask, since the questions are based off the 24/7 ass kissing of the media for HRC. Who i believe did more to try influencing the election that any russian bot.
Once it was down to Trump and Hillary, I knew I wasn't voting for president at all. I voted for everything else but President. The news told me that if I voted anything but Hillary, then Trump would win. People on here and my family screamed at me (in person) and said that I just gave the presidency to Hillary.
I didn't give thought to who was undecided.
The Russians had nothing on the US media for election influence.
I completely agree that the media was/is a huge factor to influence people. However, I question if it is more or less than the effects of social media. People have turned into such cowards nowadays and they tend to only stick to their own tribes and don't actually talk to people in person who they might not agree with politically. I think a LOT more Russian influence is in social media than people realize, as def90 was talking about.
Great-Kazoo
03-19-2019, 20:57
Once it was down to Trump and Hillary, I knew I wasn't voting for president at all. I voted for everything else but President. The news told me that if I voted anything but Hillary, then Trump would win. People on here and my family screamed at me (in person) and said that I just gave the presidency to Hillary.
I didn't give thought to who was undecided.
don't actually talk to people in person who they might not agree with politically. I think a LOT more Russian influence is in social media than people realize, as def90 was talking about.
I've tried having conversations with those who have a different political opinion then i do. Some will listen, politely, then decied or already made up their mind. I'm a nazi, racist who hates XXXX and X.
Usually that happens after i explain to them, after asked why i don't accept Muslims. That Islam / Muslims consider women 2nd class citizens, homosexuality only merits a death penalty. Oh they also (devout ones) have no issue imprisoning you for consuming alcohol, like that beer> your drinking.
Pointing out a religion and people they are so accepting of, are in direct conflict with everything they believe. Usually sets them off, big time.
Throw in the urban areas with the largest number of lower income "People of Color" are located in decades old democratic areas. Which BTW, also have a higher incarceration rate for minorities. [panic]
Tribalism is certainly not restricted to any one party. The point is that when people don't talk to each other in person where usually things remain polite enough to at least have a discussion, they go back to their online echo chambers where the outside influence runs wide and deep.
Great-Kazoo
03-19-2019, 21:40
Tribalism is certainly not restricted to any one party. The point is that when people don't talk to each other in person where usually things remain polite enough to at least have a discussion, they go back to their online echo chambers where the outside influence runs wide and deep.
What democratic or leftist web sites are you accepted at, without judgement?
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2019, 21:43
Tribalism is certainly not restricted to any one party. The point is that when people don't talk to each other in person where usually things remain polite enough to at least have a discussion, they go back to their online echo chambers where the outside influence runs wide and deep.
I don't think this is wholly true. I have my opinions based on my interpretations. I do have the ability to listen and comprehend differently minded ideals, however, that doesn't necessarily mean that I retreat to like minded rhetoric in a safety zone of sorts. I can listen to someone's opinion without telling them to kiss my ass, and I don't need to get it affirmed elsewhere either. If that covers my probably less than super articulate fashion that it could have been articulated.
What democratic or leftist web sites are you accepted at, without judgement?
I used to post on Runner's World many years ago, until I got banned. It was pretty much exactly the same as here, but on the opposite side of the aisle. There was a cool old hippy over there who is basically conservative by today's standards (not a socialist). Also, I interact with a variety of people in person and generally don't limit what I listen to as far as media too much. When people go tribal, they all sound and act the same, just on whatever side. When I first got into politics and decided I was more conservative than most and was vocal about it, I was on another local board (that many other people on here came from) and it was the same thing.
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2019, 22:06
I guess I don't understand comparing many people at one location, to many people at another one....and seemingly expecting a difference somehow.
imo the vast majority of people kind of suck in some way or another, it seems like looking for the smallest percentage of thoughtful mix that you desire. From what I'm seeing, you're not going to find that aspect plentiful from people as a collective anywhere. I bet you can find some that will try to convince you ya can.
Just trying to understand ya, brother.
It looks like we've gotten off track. I'm trying to highlight that people bolster their beliefs and never challenge them by existing in online echo chambers. That serves to drive a further wedge between people.
Kazoo was asking what liberal sites I'm on without judgement, which is none. But I don't think that I exist here without judgement either, so it's a moot point there.
Me talking about everyone being the same is a left over of years of reading discussions of why X is better than Y because Z (and both X and Y cite Z as their reasons). I guess no one really asked that in this conversation and I've fallen into my own narrative. Really, I just thought that the extend and attention given to the US by another country is fascinating and I wanted other people to check out the same info and get their take. I thought Rogan had an excellent point when he mentions that all most people in the US know about Russia is Putin = bad and vodka and hot Russian brides (today) and women with mustaches (1980's). Where as you have people in Russian who understand our culture well enough to sometimes seamlessly integrate (online at least) and know exactly which social buttons to push. That's a lot of attention coming our way.
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2019, 22:33
You're a thoughtful and inquisitive person, Irving. I admire that.
I get where you're coming from, and it's also an example of what I just said at the same time. It's cool, man.
Bolstering beliefs and echo chambers seems limited to the modern era, but it's basic cognitive dissonance. Everyone suffers it to some extent, it is an adaptation in our biology (surviving in periods of time when our situations were not changeable, e.g. make lemonade out of lemons) In certain types of the population it seems to have been increasing in severity, but that is not backed in any study. Basically (most) people severely modify reality to conform to their beliefs - finding excuses to discard facts that disagree with their current mind set, and finding excuses to believe facts that are otherwise unbelievable. Our political issues today can almost entirely be pointed at this syndrome, but it's not limited to D, R, or anyone else. This is the same reason why mothers will also usually protect a boyfriend when confronted with an abuse accusation of their own child. (the fact that their boyfriend/spouse could abuse their child is too drastic of a change to their currently accepted belief). This is the same reason people suffering Nigerian scammers refuse to believe they have been scammed and keep sending money - and hesitate to believe it even after it's been proven and their family intercedes.
This is also precisely what Russia has been exploiting for a long time - and yes, very heavily on social media, among many other mediums. Their goal is to increase discord, with the end game of a dis-functional, or potentially even entirely divided U.S, which no longer poses a threat to their own country. The D's are incorrect thinking it's only election influence upon the R side, while the R's are incorrect in believing there is none, or it is limited. Things like "Q", "BLM", "Antifa", etc. they have heavy troll involvement on, in all sides. Basically if you begin to start a controversy - including mass shootings and guns, or a conspiracy (like Q) Russia will divert a lot of resources into trolling all sides and trying to piss people off. I also heavily suspect that "Q" is entirely created by the Russia, tbh. The more people that fall into the dissonance trap and treat the divisiveness like a faith-based religion of hate on both sides, the more that they succeed.
Tribalism is certainly not restricted to any one party. The point is that when people don't talk to each other in person where usually things remain polite enough to at least have a discussion, they go back to their online echo chambers where the outside influence runs wide and deep.
Not entirely true.
Studies and analysis of social media data have found that, by and large, those who lean conservative or libertarian tend to follow outlets and engage with people who are outside of their political spectrum, but not the other way around.
On top of that, by and large Red Tribe types have no choice in whether they engage with Blue Tribe ideals; after all, the press, the music industry, film and television are all managed by people who inject Blue Tribe politics into their products. Furthermore, Silicon Valley is heavily in the tank for the Blue Tribe, and this comes through in spades when you examine the policies that they implement on social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube where they've been steadily closing the Overton Window on "acceptable" conservative and libertarian ideas through the use of shadow bans, deplatforming, demonetization, and outright bans.
Frankly, your assertion that conservative types don't engage with leftist concepts, ideas, and policies is flat out ridiculous.
Justin, please post a link for said: " Studies and analysis of social media data have found that, by and large, those who lean conservative or libertarian tend to follow outlets and engage with people who are outside of their political spectrum, but not the other way around."
I don't know where to find it, but one example is among left wing journalists who have been found to only follow other left wing journalists in their social media circles, where as conservatives would follow people from both sides. That opens up the discussion about whom is more out of touch with the world and them and should be especially embarrassing for journalists.
Justin, you've been on here a long time. You can't tell me with a straight face that you've never seen members of this very board talking about how they've, over the years, unfriended all the people they don't agree with politically; first on social media, then eventually culling friends in real life.
Obviously we can't broad brush every person into a certain behavior, but to cherry pick what I actually said (people tend to retire to their own camp) to say that it's flat out ridiculous that conservatives don't interact with the other side is equally ridiculous.
You think the might be a difference between a publicly elected politician and a rancher in his 60's and what people they tend to mingle with?
Justin, please post a link for said: " Studies and analysis of social media data have found that, by and large, those who lean conservative or libertarian tend to follow outlets and engage with people who are outside of their political spectrum, but not the other way around."
Democrats Are 3 Times More Likely to Unfriend You on Social Media, Survey Says
http://fortune.com/2016/12/19/social-media-election/
Liberals are more likely to unfriend you over politics — online and off ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/10/21/liberals-are-more-likely-to-unfriend-you-over-politics-online-and-off/
Poll: Dems more likely to unfriend people due to political posts
https://thehill.com/homenews/311047-poll-dems-more-likely-to-unfriend-people-due-to-political-posts
“Merry Christmas” vs. “Happy Holidays”: Republicans and Democrats are Polar Opposites
https://www.prri.org/research/poll-post-election-holiday-war-christmas/
I don't know where to find it, but one example is among left wing journalists who have been found to only follow other left wing journalists in their social media circles, where as conservatives would follow people from both sides. That opens up the discussion about whom is more out of touch with the world and them and should be especially embarrassing for journalists.
I'd not heard that, but I find it completely unsurprising.
Justin, you've been on here a long time. You can't tell me with a straight face that you've never seen members of this very board talking about how they've, over the years, unfriended all the people they don't agree with politically; first on social media, then eventually culling friends in real life.
A half-dozen cranky old farts on a lightly trafficed social media backwater don't even amount to a rounding error.
Obviously we can't broad brush every person into a certain behavior, but to cherry pick what I actually said (people tend to retire to their own camp) to say that it's flat out ridiculous that conservatives don't interact with the other side is equally ridiculous.
Sorry dude, but the data was collated. You can see the links above. And it is flat out ridiculous to claim that conservatives don't have interaction with the other side. Statistically, leftists are more likely to stay in their echo chambers than conservatives on social media. Additionally, short of living completely off the grid with zero interaction with current culture, there is no way to avoid leftwing/Blue Tribe talking points.
Consevatives have no recourse but to interact with Blue Tribe ideals if they want to actually take part in society.
Or do you really want to try to argue that TV, movies, the internet, tv news, newspapers, etc. have anything approaching a semblance of objectivity or balance?
You think the might be a difference between a publicly elected politician and a rancher in his 60's and what people they tend to mingle with?
Not particularly relevant to the situation at hand.
I think with the vast majority of media outlets leaning left, it's pretty easy to watch a wider variety of news sources without leaving your political bubble if you're on the left.
On a lighter note, if anyone wants to hear what it would be like if Great Kazoo ever went onto Joe Rogan, listen to the episode with comedian Nick DiPaolo.
BushMasterBoy
03-21-2019, 15:45
Maybe it is just an protozoan. 25% of the US is infected on average.
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/4/357/62015
I have both side of wack jobs of political spectrum.
Sadly both nuts mainly care about social issues and not the economy.
Stupid.
wctriumph
03-21-2019, 17:17
I can say this; a formerly good friend and mentor got real mad at me because I disagreed with his ascertain that the electoral college was obsolete and should give way to popular vote and accused me of having no understanding of why it should be abolished. I simply told him that I have a complete understanding of the reasons the electoral college was put into practice and it has served the country well. I told him that he was my friend and brother and that I respected his opinion and asked that he respect mine. Never heard back from him and I no longer see his posts and cannot message him. I guess he unfriended me.
That's a shame and no one is immune.
Great-Kazoo
03-21-2019, 20:52
On a lighter note, if anyone wants to hear what it would be like if Great Kazoo ever went onto Joe Rogan, listen to the episode with comedian Nick DiPaolo.
link, for those us us too entitled to surf the web ;)
link, for those us us too entitled to surf the web ;)
This is the most recent one that I was listening to when I posted that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_CeQlkMC_g
Looks like he's been on before, but I haven't heard any others.
Justin, thank you. The links you posted are all pulling their information from the study done by the Pew Research Center. You said there are studies and analysis that say "those who lean conservative or libertarian tend to follow outlets and engage with people who are outside of their political spectrum, but not the other way around. ' The link you posted are not about following outlets or engaging with groups outside their political spectrum, they are about unfriending. In regard and specific to "following outlets" and "engaging with groups outside their political spectrum", the Pew Research study actually suggest the opposite. :
Yeah, well, I don't have perfect recall for news articles I briefly read on a coffee break three years ago, so I hope my transgression is forgiven.
Overall, the study finds that consistent conservatives:
* Are tightly clustered around a single news source, far more than any other group in the survey, with 47% citing Fox News as their main source for news about government and politics.
This is unsurprising. After all, so far as I can tell, there's only one available news source that actually caters to them.
* Express greater distrust than trust of 24 of the 36 news sources measured in the survey. At the same time, fully 88% of consistent conservatives trust Fox News.
Skepticism of any news source should be warranted, as most news outlets are biased, and any news source that claims they aren't biased is just selling you on marketing.
* Are, when on Facebook, more likely than those in other ideological groups to hear political opinions that are in line with their own views.
Maybe on Facebook, perhaps. And especially in 2016 back when the sorting algorhythms were arguably more neutral, but since then most social media companies have been actively adjusting their sorting algorhythms to shape traffic to fit their ideological outlook as well as actively deplatforming people and groups they disagree with.
* Are more likely to have friends who share their own political views. Two-thirds (66%) say most of their close friends share their views on government and politics.
I have a hard time believing that leftists truly are in favor of having friends with a diversity of views that sample from the right side of the spectrum, especially given how strident leftists have gotten about shouting down even stone cold moderate conservatives.
By contrast, those with consistently liberal views:
*Are less unified in their media loyalty; they rely on a greater range of news outlets, including some ? like NPR and the New York Times? that others use far less.
This seems obvious, though. If the bulk of news outlets that exist cater to your ideological outlook, it becomes far easier to get your views reinforced from multiple outlets.
*Express more trust than distrust of 28 of the 36 news outlets in the survey. NPR, PBS and the BBC are the most trusted news sources for consistent liberals.
I fail to see why this is good. To me this signals a distinct lack of critical thinking on the part of those consuming news from those sources.
*Are more likely than those in other ideological groups to block or ?defriend? someone on a social network ? as well as to end a personal friendship ? because of politics.
The point I was originally attempting to make.
*Are more likely to follow issue-based groups, rather than political parties or candidates, in their Facebook feeds.
Interesting.
The way I interpret this is that while people that lean conservatively DO NOT tend to follow outlets and engage with people who are outside of their political spectrum, because as per the report they are 1) more tightly clustered around a single news source,
Again, they cluster around a single outlet because that's literally the only outlet that exists.
2) are in echo chamber like FB groups where they are more likely than those in other ideological groups to hear political opinions that are in line with their own views &
Again, the content of those facebook groups is and has been largely modified to conform with the standards enforced by Facebook, standards which lean heavily in favor of the sort of technocratic lefist ideology that's become part and parcel of silicon valley culture. Additionally, the study doesn't take into account the fact that even if some conservatives opt to retreat into groups of likeminded people that they still are going to be exposed to leftwing ideology from literally every other source of media in American culture by default. In order to find likeminded people, their only option is to seek them out in specific enclaves.
3) are more likely top have friends that share the same views, it is easy to say friends and never have disputes or differences in these situations.
Maybe. This would certainly seem to reinforce the perception of massive internal struggle between various factions of the left.
Where as the report says libs tend to rely on a 1) greater range of news outlets and 2) Are more likely to follow issue-based groups, rather than political parties or candidates in their Facebook feeds.
Again, a greater variety of outlets doesn't really matter when it turns out they're all peddling the same thing. Talking about how you like to drink Coke, Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper doesn't change the fact that you're still drinking sugar-laden soda.
Also, I don't understand how following groups that advocate for specific issues is somehow perferable to following a party or candidate. They're all going to be advocates for their own causes.
So it is far more likely that their will be disputes and differences when there are opposing views. Some people can be very nasty, rude & aggressive when you disagree with their views. I've seen it happen here on this board, on FB & in person, to others and to myself. If someone has so little respect for you that they yell, scream, call you names or get in your face because you disagree with their political position, well then they arent getting unfriended because they of the political issue, but because of the way the behave when discussing the political issue, that's just my task based on actual experience. We can disagree and discuss respectfully and factually all day long, but resort to calling me a "dumb b*t*h" or anythin like that, well we might not be friends after.
I've not seen any evidence that people who lean moderate, moderate right, right, or even libertarian are, on the whole any more vitriolic or violent than those on the left. Frankly, quite the opposite in my experience. While Conservatives may get heated in rhetoric, it doesn't change the fact that violent street protests, doxxing, and other legal but ethically dubious tactics are almost exclusively tactics developed and employed by the left.
Here is the link to the full and complete Pew Research study : https://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/
Neat!
Maybe it is just an protozoan. 25% of the US is infected on average.
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/4/357/62015
The activity of Toxoplasmosis Gondii in rats causes them to lose their fear reaction to cats.
Now, couple that with the study claiming that conservatives have a much more robust fear reflex than leftists.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mind-in-the-machine/201612/fear-and-anxiety-drive-conservatives-political-attitudes
Anyone else get trolled by the Disney-Fox merger every few months?
Every rare now and again after a few months I come across a headline, I forget it and it's like... Disney bought Fox? What? That doesn't smell right....
Well folks, It's 21ST CENTURY FOX. Media leaves out the "21ST CENTURY" bit, 100% of the time. For clicks. #$$#ing $#%#er heads.
Just remember that the next time you read a post or a meme that has slightly broken english or obvious mispellings there is a good chance it’s a Russian or other foreign entity post.
Great-Kazoo
03-23-2019, 08:15
Just remember that the next time you read a post or a meme that has slightly broken english or obvious mispellings there is a good chance it’s a Russian or other foreign entity post.
Or someone who doesn't have / use spell check
The following few days and possibly more will be interesting since Mueller decided to release his report yesterday. IMO it's less than condemning as Important .gov issues released on the weekend usually are a dud, maybe.
It's already been reported that there are no more indictments as the investigation has concluded.
The lefties will have a fit because they've been in disbelief of the election results and fed this collusion story ever since....and Trump isn't being frog-marched to jail.
Zundfolge
03-23-2019, 09:35
Just remember that the next time you read a post or a meme that has slightly broken english or obvious mispellings there is a good chance it?s a Russian or other foreign entity post.
Or yet another product of the American public/union education complex.
Or yet another product of the American public/union education complex.
Bingo...I was originally taught to read and wright phoenetically. That completely messed me up for spelling. I read at well above what level I should be but spelling is a nightmare. To give you an example of the phoenetical system:
Nif (there would be a hard bar over the I instead of the dot) = knife
It uses symbols over the letters like what is seen here but I was taught more symbols than this shows:
https://www.towson.edu/academics/commencement/documents/phonetic_spelling_guide.pdf
So...I change schools and they are using normal spelling and it was like seeing a foreign language. I couldn't read anything. I had to start from scratch. Going from minimal letters in a word to all these extra letters my mind now thinks everything should have extra letters thrown in and even spell correct often cannot figure out what I am trying to type.
I often joke that if the liberals can blame guns for violence then I can blame the keyboard for my misspellings but the truth is the public school system is responsible for me being unable to spell.
Zundfolge
03-23-2019, 12:29
I've not seen any evidence that people who lean moderate, moderate right, right, or even libertarian are, on the whole any more vitriolic or violent than those on the left. Frankly, quite the opposite in my experience. While Conservatives may get heated in rhetoric, it doesn't change the fact that violent street protests, doxxing, and other legal but ethically dubious tactics are almost exclusively tactics developed and employed by the left.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3CXyTcXmtXc/UWRrgl_Yx_I/AAAAAAAAC-I/Z_VxMx9j_CY/s1600/star_trek_gun_logic.jpg
(you can easily replace "pro gunners" with Republicans/conservatives/libertarians and "anti-gunners" with Democrats/progressives/leftists and it still works).
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.