Manipulated to hate each other.

[FoxtArt]

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-troll-russia-disinformation-campaign-trump-2017-10?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=topbar&utm_term=mobile&referrer=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2anz9kDMgV52k14SQataiPZmbu2RK6iSaEgl9d9 p0kJDBumVVIO8_I3Xg

While this has a trump slant and is myopic, bear in mind that foreign influence is inserting itself - on both sides - wherever there's a divisive crack that can be exploited. Much of the intolerance each side feels for each other is more product of this manipulation than reality. This is a long running campaign by multiple foreign nations; spanning back at least three decades, but with significant increases in $ and effort in the last few years as it's finally seen great success.

[iego]

People have to (re)figure out that Government and Money, are not good for them.

Vote less Government and less fake money.

The people themselves are doing fine

Until the fake money runs out.

-John

[eddiememphis]

Term limits

[iego]

Start by balancing the budget.

-John

[Gman]

Social media is not helping.

[sampson]

I could be wrong.

If it wasn't for all the government spending and growth of the government, I think this situation might be the best of both worlds.

We get more transparency and more politicians are being investigated for wrongdoing and they have to watch their p's and q's.. and government is made to look like the fraud that it is.. also lefties can't pass their ridiculous socialism garbage. And Republicans are limited in scope as to what they can do.

My 2cents as an optimist and libertarian

[FoxtArt]

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/

An an-point article in more depth, and lacking the slants. Gives you details on how they build and operate. Also shows some of the trolls get more activity than even POTUS himself.

[Zundfolge]

The Democrat party has done 1000 times more to get Americans to hate each other than the Russians ever could. They have also interfered in our elections more than the Russians did.


FFS it was Hillary Clinton that called Trump Supporters a "basket of deplorable" that are all sorcts of evil https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEOjGlctQGU

it was Obama that called us all bitter clingers.

Dozens of high level, Democrat operatives and politicians and MSM stooges have called Trump "literally Hitler" and anyone that doesn't openly hate him and call for his death and/or imprisonment a dozen times a day are "fascists", "Nazis" and all sorts of evil ... But no, a handful of fucking Ivans shitposting on the fucking Chans/Reddit/Facebook are a giant fucking cabal somehow tricking Americans into hating each other. Seriously, fuck off.

[Justin]

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/

An an-point article in more depth, and lacking the slants. Gives you details on how they build and operate. Also shows some of the trolls get more activity than even POTUS himself.

Rolling Stone.

LOL.

OK, Boomer.

[Great-Kazoo]

Rolling Stone.

LOL.

OK, Boomer.

I know the legit breaker of a false narrative about rape on college campus.

[spqrzilla]

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/

An an-point article in more depth, and lacking the slants. Gives you details on how they build and operate. Also shows some of the trolls get more activity than even POTUS himself.

You wrote that with a straight face?

[Justin]

I know the legit breaker of a false narrative about rape on college campus.

Even worse, they consider themselves the primary gatekeeper for what passes for good music these days.

Thankfully, no one else does.

[Bailey Guns]

Rolling Stone.

LOL.

OK, Boomer.

LOL... Yeah, that.

[Zundfolge]

I know the legit breaker of a false narrative about rape on college campus.

Gell-Mann Amnesia effect.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Point I tried to make to my mother's god-daughter (a dyed-in-the-wool extreme liberal and Hillary Clinton supporter) is that foreign nations have tried to influence American politics since at least the Wilson administration. The scandal isn't whether foreigners are trying to influence our politics and policies, the scandal is whether our politicians and bureaucrats are responding or using those foreign influences for their own gain. On that score, Hillary stands condemned (or should be) while there's no evidence that anyone of any nationality has any influence on Trump. The guy is an arrogant sonuvabitch and egocentric beyond all belief -- the good part about that for the American citizen is that those foreign operations and the embedded American bureaucracy really have little or no influence on Trump -- unlike how the Clintons have been knowingly used by the PRC and others for decades or how Obama told Med-whatever to "tell Vlad" he'd have more freedom of action "after the (2012) election".

The thing that aggravates me the most about this sturm-und-drang is that the Democrats are accusing Trump and the Republicans of exactly what the Dems have been doing for decades.

[Great-Kazoo]

What's real manipulative is when things get deleted . Especially if it's countering what someone else said. Just saying

[Irving]

So did anyone actually read the Rolling Stone article? Every six months or so someone starts a thread about "I can't believe I read this article from such and such source." Then everyone acts surprised, every single time.

Even more frequently someone posts some news item and remarks, "won't see THIS in the main stream media!" 9 out of 10 times, someone immediately posts links to the same story from every news media source under the sun. 8 out of 10 times, I already scrolled past 3-5 versions of that article long before the thread was even started. Again, every single time.

So rather than just shit on the source, has anyone actually read it to see if the information within lines up with other sources they've read on the subject? I can tell just be reading under ten sentences in the article that it isn't talking about whether other countries are influencing our politicians, but the populace. Does anyone think that outside sources are directly influencing politicians? News article titles sure, but do any actual, real life people believe that?

[Great-Kazoo]

So did anyone actually read the Rolling Stone article? Every six months or so someone starts a thread about "I can't believe I read this article from such and such source." Then everyone acts surprised, every single time.

Even more frequently someone posts some news item and remarks, "won't see THIS in the main stream media!" 9 out of 10 times, someone immediately posts links to the same story from every news media source under the sun. 8 out of 10 times, I already scrolled past 3-5 versions of that article long before the thread was even started. Again, every single time.

So rather than just shit on the source, has anyone actually read it to see if the information within lines up with other sources they've read on the subject? I can tell just be reading under ten sentences in the article that it isn't talking about whether other countries are influencing our politicians, but the populace. Does anyone think that outside sources are directly influencing politicians? News article titles sure, but do any actual, real life people believe that?

Only those who believe Trump stole the election. One that was ran under another administration's watch.

Unfortunately there are people who for some reason don't have the brain capacity to think for them self. Those are easily swayed in to believing what they hear & read. Without doing any homework of their own. That's on all sides of the political aisle.

[Bailey Guns]

So did anyone actually read the Rolling Stone article? Every six months or so someone starts a thread about "I can't believe I read this article from such and such source." Then everyone acts surprised, every single time.

Even more frequently someone posts some news item and remarks, "won't see THIS in the main stream media!" 9 out of 10 times, someone immediately posts links to the same story from every news media source under the sun. 8 out of 10 times, I already scrolled past 3-5 versions of that article long before the thread was even started. Again, every single time.

So rather than just shit on the source, has anyone actually read it to see if the information within lines up with other sources they've read on the subject? I can tell just be reading under ten sentences in the article that it isn't talking about whether other countries are influencing our politicians, but the populace. Does anyone think that outside sources are directly influencing politicians? News article titles sure, but do any actual, real life people believe that?

What you're saying here isn't without merit.

On the other hand, reputation of a source has a lot to do with the way people react. And Rolling Stone has a well-earned reputation for having a very radical, leftist slant on pretty much everything. It's no different than someone saying, "I just heard/read this on the Alex Jones website." Most rational people will almost immediately dismiss that whether it's deserved or not. I'd react the same way to someone using CNN as a source for a story promising "the truth about Trump".

[bellavite1]

Divide Et Impera

[buffalobo]

So did anyone actually read the Rolling Stone article? Every six months or so someone starts a thread about "I can't believe I read this article from such and such source." Then everyone acts surprised, every single time.

I read the article and have read others stating similar. The authors discussed disinformation campaign aimed at populace. Your over use of "every" cost you some credibility. I typically do not comment on content unless I have read the material. Maybe wisecracks or a little trolling, but not commentary.

Even more frequently someone posts some news item and remarks, "won't see THIS in the main stream media!" 9 out of 10 times, someone immediately posts links to the same story from every news media source under the sun. 8 out of 10 times, I already scrolled past 3-5 versions of that article long before the thread was even started. Again, every single time.

Meh, wah.

So rather than just shit on the source, has anyone actually read it to see if the information within lines up with other sources they've read on the subject? I can tell just be reading under ten sentences in the article that it isn't talking about whether other countries are influencing our politicians, but the populace. Does anyone think that outside sources are directly influencing politicians? News article titles sure, but do any actual, real life people believe that?

In the case of Rolling Stone rag I personally will always shit on them. I don't like them. If their case/argument is good it will stand thru it. I think the article has some merit.

Dude don't be naive, politics is influence. Everyone is trying to influence politicians, citizens, other politicians, business interests, foreign interests and it works.

[Irving]

I just wanted to know how many people shitting on the source actually read the article before they posted. I assume zero, since no one had anything to say about the article beyond who published it.

[Great-Kazoo]

I just wanted to know how many people shitting on the source actually read the article before they posted. I assume zero, since no one had anything to say about the article beyond who published it.

I read it. But based on (as mentioned) their bias. it's hard to wallow through their perspective on things. Without knowing how bad they fucked up when it came to running that massive rape story. Which turned out to be a lie. Among other things.
When it comes to anything political i have to do a hard search to find a non biases slant to the truth.


A few foreign sources seem to play the bias down to tolerable.

[sampson]

It is a common tactic to dispel an argument without engaging in it. There aren't many sources that wouldn't fall prey to this by either Team A or Team B.

[Gman]

I didn't read it and I didn't shit on it. I understand where Rolling Stone is coming from. I'm not going to give them any clicks since I don't even care for their commentary on music, much less politics.