Daily reminder that there is STILL no evidence of any russian hacking conspiracy and that democrats are just sore losers

Daily reminder that there is STILL no evidence of any russian hacking conspiracy and that democrats are just sore losers

youtube.com/watch?v=1aQ-NxEMrHU

bonus reminder: democrats actually thought pissgate was real

Other urls found in this thread:

pcgamer.com/internet-security-expert-links-massive-botnet-ddos-attacks-to-minecraft-disputes/
dhs.gov/news/2016/12/29/joint-dhs-odni-fbi-statement-russian-malicious-cyber-activity
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Guess you missed Trump saying at his press conference it was infact Russia

>no evidence of any russian hacking conspiracy
President Trump said that he believed that it was likely the Russians based on the intelligence briefing he received. What is clear is that the Russians didn't affect the outcome of the election through any means other than exposing the DNC and Hillary Clinton for what they really are.

>This guy that killed all those people was Muslim!
RACIST. BEING MUSLIM DOESNT MAKE YOU A TERRORIST

>This guy that shot a mosque is of the alt-right! He also probably played video games, was a member of costco and sports illustrated.
ALL ALT-RIGHT ARE MURDERERS. POST THIS EVERYWHERE

They hated so much that we made a connection between muslims and terror attacks but now they're doing it because it fits their agenda.

>What is clear is that the Russians didn't affect the outcome of the election through any means other than exposing the DNC and Hillary Clinton for what they really are.

the conspiracy is that Trump is some secret KGB manchurian candidate guy though. This is objectively wrong and democrats are just being butthurt sore losers when they put this idea forth

also a reminder that hilary won the popular vote.

Yep. Sanders was the only hope the working folk of the US had for a better, fairer future, but the DNC machine fucked him up the arse to try and keep an establishment candidate in power that would carry on propagating the status quo, and fucking the poor while convincing them they were helping them.
Ironically, the working folk have now elected Trump, who will fuck them, the environment and the planet. Way to go, you dumb fucking seppo cunts.

>muh popular vote

its cute when children bring this up because they are too dumb to understand the EC.

>Intelligence agencies investigate Hillary
>PRISON PRISON PRISON

>Intelligence agencies investigate potential voter manipulation by a country with special interests
>LUL U LIBTARDS R JUST MAD U LOST. FAKE NEWS FAKE NEWS.

Bonus round

>Voter manipulation by another country
>NOTHING CUD EFFECT VOTING SYSTEM. MAGA.

>Win election
>JOSE VOTED 5 TIMES. VOTER FRAUD VOTER FRAUD.

Where's the logic?

>Sanders was the only hope the working folk of the US had for a bette

is that why by and large all workers, including the fucking midwestern and northern unions, who have been die hard loyalist to the democratic party, all voted Trump?

Sanders only appealed to millenial college kids with promises of debt relief / free schools. Thats a very niche market and its no wonder he lost. He offered NOTHING to the rest of America.

Sanders didn't know what a black person was

Dubs of truth

another reason. He offered literally nothing to minorities in the form of gibsmedats, a huge chunk of democratic supporters.

we all know how the EC works. the point is, it's the stupidest thing we have ever implemented with regards to voting and elections.

You tell me, where is your logic? Tell me something, when you read "Intelligence agencies" on whatever rag you chose to read it from, did it occur to you to find out what "Intelligence agencies"? If you did you at all, you may have found 1 agency, the CIA. Upon finding out it was the CIA you may have wanted to find all the related reading items. Upon reading it yourself you have found that there is zero evidence that Russians "hacked" anything related to the presidential election. As in nothing at all.

It's online you logic deficient faggot. All yo have to do is read the report. Rags trotted out "Intelligence agencies" as a way to make it seem like it's just agreed upon among multiple agencies. It's what they do, exaggerate the news/headlines for views. That's their business, money.

Now, think about your logic carefully. You may learn something. Never appeal to authority.

So, you're telling me that you only believe something when it fits your agenda? You are really sounding like a liberal.

It was made so that dumb people's votes wouldn't matter as much.

There is evidence and President Trump has acknowledged that Russia tried to influence the election

Noone thinks Pissgate is real, any more than anyone believes that Obama is a muslim, Hillary murders babies or george bush did 9/11

I am happy that trump won as I do not think I could stomach 4 years of listening to conservatives crying about how the system was rigged against a political outsider whilst the extreme right started stockpiling weapons to take back their country by force

Sure, Trump's presidency is a dumpsterfire, but the prospect of the armed insurrection that the extreme right threatened with would have been so much worse for the country.

wrong. it was made so the slave owning rednecks in the south would ratify the Constitution. then we had to kick their ass in the civil war. round 2 coming up.

>it's the stupidest thing we have ever implemented with regards to voting and elections.

no it isnt. Youre just having a hissy fit because your shitty public school failed to teach you anything in social studies class.

No its not.
The theory is that Russia is destabilizing America by getting Trump elected.
Equally as retarded because the President doesn't have any real power unless he has congress backing.

>the conspiracy is that Trump is some secret KGB manchurian candidate guy though.

Yeah, thats the conspiracy

In real life Russia released the hacked DNC e-mails in order to drive a wedge between Hillary and Bernie supporters in a bid to undermine Hillary's integrity, drive away potential democrat voters and push undecided voters either towards Trump, third party candidates or, best case scenario, apathy.

You need to learn how to differentiate between conspiracy theories and real life my friend.

Orly? please explain it to me. remember, I'm a fucking moron so please don't use big words.

>Noone thinks Pissgate is real,

lol yes they fucking did. Even after Sup Forums told you all it was fake, there were still people holding onto it. Their hatred of Trump was so much that they held onto this stupid fucking idea because they were DESPERATE for a scandal.

Read the whole sentence

>any more than anyone believes that Obama is a muslim, Hillary murders babies or george bush did 9/11

The internet is a powerful rumourmill my friend. I think you will enjoy your stay here.

I mean after all, would people just go online to tell lies?

>pcgamer.com/internet-security-expert-links-massive-botnet-ddos-attacks-to-minecraft-disputes/

Hillary Clinton fear mongering and everyone assuming it was Russia

the EC forces a politician to focus on the whole country as opposed to a few key "winning places"

If it was just a pure popular vote, then candidates would obviously just focus on the most populated areas, the top 10 or so cities, in order to win. This means they would ingore the well being of the vast majority of the country.

But the EC prevents this. Now, they cant just focus on a few key places because there is none. They have to appeal to the nation as a whole.

>But user, what about swing states! Its unfair how they get to decide the fate of the country like you say cities would in a pure popular vote!

not true because unlike populated cities, which will never really change at all, swing states change all the time. And politicians never know what states will change and which ones will stay the same. Again, this all makes them focus on the whole country as opposed ot a few key areas. Just look at Wisconsin. They have a long democratic voting history, but Hillary didnt even visit the state ONCE this election, while Trump campaigned hard there. This is a state that voted for Obama twice, and they switched over to Trump.

"democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner" thats the whole idea behind it. The entire US political system is to prevent mob rule and any one branch from becoming too powerful.

0/10 troll or didn't read what I said, or you meant to reply to someone else, because what you said has nothing to do with what I said. Either way, 0/10 in your reply.

you're talking about the logistics of how to win an election. I'm talking about the underlying fairness of the process.

>appeal to the vast majority of the country
you mean appeal to the sparsely populated land area of the country? we voting by square mile now?

it all boils down to 1 thing. do you believe that 1 person's vote should be worth more than another's? because someone in Wyoming counts 4 times more than a person from California.

just answer that one question and I'll stfu.

also, name another country on the planet that uses a similar system.

...

>you're talking about the logistics of how to win an election
no shit, its an election system. What else would I talk about in reference to it?

>because someone in Wyoming counts 4 times more than a person from California.

this is bitching over semantics and you know it. In either system, California still outranks wyoming and it isnt even close. You obviously watched that shitty "ruins everything" show and got all your information from there.

>also, name another country on the planet that uses a similar system.

what the hell does this have to do with anything? Why would it being in other countries determine if it works or doesnt work here?

You didnt even address any points I made, but heres your 2 seconds of google research

>Other countries with electoral college systems include Burundi, Estonia,[7] Kazakhstan, Madagascar, Myanmar, Pakistan, Trinidad and Tobago[8] and Vanuatu. Both the French Senate and the Seanad Éireann (Senate) in Ireland are chosen by electoral colleges. Within China, both Macau[9] and Hong Kong each have an Election Committee which functions as an electoral college for selecting the Chief Executive and formerly (in the case of Hong Kong) for selecting some of the seats of the Legislative Council, those seats abolished in 2004, and succeed by Geographical constituencies.

>did it occur to you to find out what "Intelligence agencies"? If you did you at all, you may have found 1 agency, the CIA.

Oh really?

dhs.gov/news/2016/12/29/joint-dhs-odni-fbi-statement-russian-malicious-cyber-activity

do you believe that 1 state should be worth more than others ?
because at the end your country is a union of states, not people

this literally says nothing
vague terms like history of cyber attacks and should protect ourselves.

>because at the end your country is a union of states, not people

No shit. People and their votes mean nothing in this country.

It's just a pantomime to keep the people under the illusion that they have an influence on the election, when in reality it is all decided at the top

We are slaves kept amused by sockpuppets, nothing more.

Guess you missed the fact that he said he doesn't know if they effected the election, or if it was some other kind of hack. We hack Russia all the time and they retaliate. So the report could have been showing any signature of a Russian hack in any department of government.

>believing anything the inbred turbo virgins on Sup Forums say

Affected*
And nobody ever said they hacked the actual election you goofy goober. That wasn't the point.

Go break a window and run back into the crowd about it.

>this country
they dont mean anything everywhere in the world

money decides what happens, people just follow blindly in the hopes that they'll get some crumbs if they stick close to the ones holding the money

i can't believe i have to respond to this autist.

>what else would i talk about in reference to it?
the EC is a failed system. that's my point. i'm not talking about re-litigating the election. Trump won based on the current rules. period. no debating that.

>California still outranks Wyoming
in what? population? yes; i agree. what's your point?

>what the hell does another country have to do with anything?
it shows we're fucking stupid. the countries you listed are shit and most aren't representative democracies like the US

please tell me the points you are making.

>there is no point
Good to know

>no evidence of russian hacking
>doesn't know if hacking effected the election

keep moving those goalposts faggot

inb4 you still on about that shit? It happened because we said it did welcome to the liberal fox news...I don't know why you wanted this but were going to fuck with you until trumps out so enjoy. PEACE DICK

Nice meme.

you suck at debating, there is no linear logic on the shit you say

oh okay. so let's let the rural states always win? because urbanization is happening and no one wants to live in those shitty states. sounds fair.

>you suck at debating
ad hominem. you're apparently a master.

>linear logic
might apply to math and science. we're dealing with humans.

It says that ODNI and the FBI are in agreement with the CIA.

If you knew how to read, or if you wanted to do anything other than obfuscate the argument, then you would know that I was refuting the point that only the CIA was accusing the Russians of interfering.

>coming to Sup Forums to inb4 people but not knowing how to greentext
Actual dick.

Nice argument against meme

you are too dumb to understand how the system works

you want a couple urban area to decide the election, disregarding other 40+ states

its not 1 rural state the decided
its a collection of all the states, whoever wants to win, needs to come up with a platform that convinces the biggest number of states
Trump got 3000+ of the electoral colleges with his ideas
shitlary got less than 60 ? something pathetic like that

can you understand what governing for the whole country means ?
you liberal faggots seriously need to take your heads out from your asses and see that the world doesnt revolve around you

>the EC is a failed system.

Why? because a guy you dont like won?

>in what? population? yes; i agree. what's your point?

my point is that your point is stupid. There is no way in which wyoming outranks California. If we used a pure popular vote system, then California still wins because it has a much larger population. In the current EC system, California is the LARGEST state and has fifty fucking five points while wyoming has 3. Thats 55 vs 3, and you are trying to argue that the 3 has an unfair advantage.

>the countries you listed are shit

Estonia, Hong Kong, Macau, Ireland, and France arent shit user.


This is all just you trying to move the goalpost anyway in some emotional rant. Youre not even making any actual arguments against the EC system. I explained it to you as if for a child, just like you asked, and you still fail to understand it for some petty partisan political reason. youre a real piece of shit and a stupid person, I want you to know that.

a discussion is about dealing with facts, logic applies there in the same sense where it applies everywhere, even if you want to talk about human and emotions
logic can understand emotions
emotions cant understand logic
you are bound to always make a fool of yourself if you cant understand that

how is breaking windows going to help?

yup

Not at all. How about we make the election day a national holiday so that people don't have excuses not to go and if that fails to motivate people then we could always start fining those who don't vote.

It's a sad state of affairs that people do not give a shit about the democracy teir ancestors died for and that we have created a ruling poiltical class abusing people's apathy towards voting

>ad hominem.

thats not what an ad hominem is. Also, saying "ad hominem" isnt an automatic win like stupid people think it is.

Theres also something called the "fallacy fallacy"

you are horrible at debating since you moved away entirely from the EC debate sense even you realized you lost it.

faggot do you even read my post? i'm not debating how the system works. i'm debating that it's not how it SHOULD work.

it wasn't 1 rural state. it's all the rural states that, by proportion, have a greater say in who gets elected.

hillary sucks.

governing for the whole country =/= pandering to states where trees outnumber people

hey dude, we might not be on the same political end of the spectrum but I like you

no. because it's stupid that 1 person's vote counts less than anothers'. and that's what the EC does.

it's about percentages, retard. 40 million / 55 is less than 700K / 3. california gets 1 EC vote for every 700K people. wyoming gets 3 for every 700K people.

hong kong and macau arent countries. france is okay. but ireland and estonia don't have nearly the number of people we have. so i'll give you 3 others in the entire world. and i guarantee they don't have as many retards as we do.

i think you are also a gigantic piece of shit and someone that is not intelligent whatsoever. so we agree on that.

everyone read your post, it was dumb and pointless, it just made clear that you didnt read, or didnt understand anything that people have been trying to discuss with you even after dumbing it down like explaining to a 1st grade student
its clear that you dont understand how the election system works if you still think its unfair, or the most obvious, that you are just a whinny baby that never cared about the system until your candidate lost, and now you wanna blame the system instead of your retarded candidate
(or blame russians...lel)
blame rednecks, blame rural states, blame those cis white demons, blame hitler

its all you do, cry and blame others

holy fuck...

I UNDERSTAND THE FUCKING SYSTEM AS IT IS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A FAIR SYSTEM.

full stop.

my candidate wasn't Shillary. she's a bigger piece of shit than Trump and that's saying something.

i'm not blaming anyone but the system.

>pissgate
Fuck, is it bad that i wanted that to be a real thing?

it is a fair system, you dont understand it if you missed that point
its not perfect, but its far better than just 1:1 vote representation you were implying that would be better because muh california needs to decide the result, fuck all rednecks

fair is subjective not objective.

it's not perfect, which is why i want it changed. it doesn't have to be trashed, but the way it currently exists favors rural america more than urban america.

it's a fact that urbanization is happening. therefore, for the foreseeable future, the rural vote will dominate the urban vote should thing not change.

just answer my one question.

is it fair that 1 person's vote counts less than anothers'?

that's all i'm asking for.

again; we're not talking about States. we're talking about people.

do you think that corporations are people too?

yes its totally fair
if you understand that its not the people that decides directly who gets elected, its the number of colleges a candidate can win
do you think its fair that 1 college can inflate their numbers to make their votes be worth more than other colleges ?

it wouldnt be fair in a system where the number of people decides who gets elected
BUT THATS NOT WHAT YOU HAVE ANYWAYS

you want a fair system ? make one where only tax payers get a vote, and proportional to the amount of tax payed
no tax, no say on how the country should be run
and excluding people that work for the government too obviously

>we're not talking about States
kek
you are talking about the united states, not the united people
despite what you say, it seems you really didnt understand the foundations of how your country works before starting to complain

Multiagency Intel report says Russia. Fuck comrade trump.

...

>it's not the people that decide...
last time. i know this. that's what the EC is. i am not disagreeing with that.

>do i think it's fair that 1 college can inflate their numbers to make their votes worth more than other colleges?
no. that's why i think it's bullshit that rural Wyoming does this under the current system. which is why i think 1:1 should be the system.

>make one where only tax payers get a vote
are you inferring illegal immigrant votes? are you talking about payroll taxes or sales taxes?

>proportional to the amount of tax paid (sic)
so we're talking about the rich determining every election?

>didn't understand the foundations of how your country works
ibid. the EC was created so that slave owning southern states would ratify the constitution.

ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL = foundation of the US

never answered my question on the fairness of one person counting more than another.

>Daily reminder that there is STILL no evidence of any russian hacking conspiracy


It's real, and you're a gullible fool believing the lies of an autocrat, because you're too stupid to filter reality from propaganda.

Hate to break it to you...


"Durr, but Breitbart said it wasn't true!"

>What is clear is that the Russians didn't affect the outcome of the election through any means other than exposing the DNC and Hillary Clinton for what they really are.


Well... that and the stupid conspiracy theories they created from those emails....

and the wesbites and social media articles they created to push those theories...

and the series of bots and trolls pushing those fake news articles around social media.


All those things together tipped the very close election into the favor of Trump.

So, yeah, Russia DID INDEED help Trump get elected.


Move the goal posts again, fuckface.

>I am happy that trump won as I do not think I could stomach 4 years of listening to conservatives crying about how the system was rigged against a political outsider whilst the extreme right started stockpiling weapons to take back their country by force
>Sure, Trump's presidency is a dumpsterfire, but the prospect of the armed insurrection that the extreme right threatened with would have been so much worse for the country.


The two silver linings in Trump's win is your point above...

And the fact that the economy will undoubtedly take a small dive no matter who is in office, and with Trump's win, he'll take the blame.

>no. that's why i think it's bullshit that rural Wyoming does this under the current system. which is why i think 1:1 should be the system.
and you fail to see that 1:1 would mean california do the same, you are not proposing a viable solution, just a change that will benefit you instead

>are you inferring illegal immigrant votes? are you talking about payroll taxes or sales taxes?
talking about income taxes, no idea why you mention illegals, they obviously shouldnt have a say anywhere
nor students for example, if they arent contributing, finish their studies and when they start to contribute they can have a say

>so we're talking about the rich determining every election?
you mean rich people pay taxes ?

>never answered my question on the fairness of one person counting more than another.
I did, more than once actually
I dont know if you ignored or just missed the point as usual

>1:1 would mean California would do the same
wrong. 1:1 as in 1 vote = 1 vote. no electoral college bullshit where a select few decide for everyone. popular vote period.

>no idea why i mention illegals
because they pay sales tax and spend money in their community. you're a hard liner on illegals, i suppose.

>nor students
so even if they're of legal voting age, they don't count. got it. kek.

>rich people pay taxes
yes. if you are talking about nominal taxes = how much your vote counts, then they would always determine who wins. if you're talking about a percentage of taxes they pay from the amount of income they make, then that's a separate argument.

>i did, more than once actually.
i didn't see it explicitly answered. so i'll take it as a 'no.'

lol, you wanna say you understand the system and then you say
>wrong. 1:1 as in 1 vote = 1 vote. no electoral college bullshit where a select few decide for everyone. popular vote period.
which is exactly what the system was designed to counter
its hilarious

everything else can be simplified with, you want people that dont contribute, or contribute less, having a say on what to do with the contributions
and then you wanna talk about fairness ?
how is it fair that people who dont contribute decides what to do with the money of other people who contributed ?

fair would be a proportional system
>rich people would decide everything then

if they pay more taxes, yes
why would it be wrong for them to have a say on where the money they pay is going to be applied ?
isnt that exactly what you want too ? have a say on where your money is applied ?

the moment you can understand why its fair for other people to get the same thing you want for yourself, you'll see how the points you are defending are completely unreal
until then we'll be hitting our heads against a wall here, trying to discuss something the other person refuses to see

okay, man. whatever you say. i don't have time for this shit.

i got to get back to work so i can make money and pay taxes and have my vote count as much as a nigger's did back in the day.

have a good one.

lol, typical
no arguments, so leave still trying to pretend you are better

okay. you want to keep going? give me a minute. i have to finish up a proposal and then i'll come back.

For people to say Russia hacked the election implies they altered the actual vote tallies. I haven't really seen anyone saying that is the case. All that happened was that the DNCs and Hillary's bs was revealed to the world and it pissed people off. Especially the Bernie supporters. It takes a fucking crazy person to reach out to people you fucked over and expect them to get behind you.