2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy does the "hacker left" (wikileaks, anonymous, etc.) want Trump to be president?
With the way they've gone after Dems and not the GOP, it's pretty clear that their intention is to try to put Trump into the White House. I don't fully understand why they would want that.
I can understand why they don't like Hillary or Obama. But whatever they don't like about Hillary, Trump is going to be much worse. He's much more authoritarian, it's impossible to think he will go easier on whistleblowers than Obama has. Hackers have an anarchist streak, and Trump is running on a "law and order" message. Hackers generally don't have allegiance to any particular nation, and Trump is a nationalist, racist, xenophobe.
Doesn't make much sense. Maybe its like the Susan Sarandon argument: they want Trump not because of what he stands for, but because he will make things "really explode".
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Post removed
DanTex
(20,709 posts)think
(11,641 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)think
(11,641 posts)spin that one Dan...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html
DanTex
(20,709 posts)In fact, even just the word "rules" isn't in there. The only one spinning here is you.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 23, 2016, 12:30 PM - Edit history (1)
Section 4. The National Chairperson shall serve full time and shall receive such compensation asmay be determined by agreement between the Chairperson and the Democratic National Committee. In
the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee,
particularly as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination process, the
Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and
campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the
Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party
Presidential nominating process.
LINK: http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/DNC_Charter__Bylaws_9.17.15.pdf
So I'd say yes, violations of the DNC Charter's bylaws did occur in the primary nominating process, based on the content of the emails and other documents from wikileaks/Guccifer2
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The Sanders campaign broke rules with the data breach, so I can understand some DNC staffers being upset with that. But at this point, who cares? It's general election time.
The real violations of not just rules but laws are from the people who hacked into private emails of DNC members. And did so to try to help Trump become president. Why do you think the hacker left wants Trump?
Triana
(22,666 posts)"Who cares?"
YOU do evidently, based on your OP.
I'm not re-litigating anything. You said there was "no mention of rules".
I showed you the rules.
You state you don't "see" violations.
Good enough.
I was just responding to your "no mention of rules" comment with the fact there are indeed rules and they were indeed violated (whether you "see" that or not though it's right in front of you). And I was responding to your OP. Which seems to want to "re-litigate" the primary and attacks the Left while it's at it.
Maybe you should remove it before someone alerts on it for that.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I'm sure there are people on the internet that think that the hacked emails show rules violations. After all, there are people on the internet that believe anything. But that's not what the NYT reported, contrary to the claim of the poster I was responding to.
TeacherB87
(249 posts)That continue to read nonsensical things into the information their processing. They need to go whine about how unfair everyone was to Bernie somewhere else. Clinton is the nominee:
Response to TeacherB87 (Reply #68)
Triana This message was self-deleted by its author.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)That clearly isn't true.
But it is true the NYT didn't mention rules, yes.
Doesn't mean they don't exist and weren't broken. If they didn't exist and weren't broken, the NYT and others wouldn't be writing such articles and you wouldn't be so defensive about them, using inference of their non-existence to justify.
Sorry.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)was claimed in the post I was responding to. And I was right, and the other poster was wrong.
I understand that there are rules, I never said there weren't any. But the rules obviously don't preclude members of the DNC sending each other personal emails.
But let them fume and harp on this, I guess they need to put their energy somewhere if it's not going to supporting Clinton-Kaine
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... party in the US taking a standard position when one of their candidate statistically locks up a primary race.
WTF man!?!?
think
(11,641 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... ass'd foot stomping.
Whatever, even FAUX news was saying the emails about supporting here where in Apri
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... up in the primaries and you know it or should know it.
Fuckin bullshit here repeating false winger memes on DU to disparge one of the candidates !!
think
(11,641 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)I think there's more going on under the surface than meets the eye.
MADem
(135,425 posts)The only people who don't see this, who refuse to acknowledge that Snowden stayed in the Hong Kong consulate (had a birthday cake and pizza there, as well) and not the MIRA hotel where he met Greenwald, are those who choose to not acknowledge what is pretty doggone obvious.
I am of the view that Snowden was turned when he was working in Yokosuka Japan, around the time, or before, he took a vacation to HK with his girlfriend. He's a one man Walker family, IMO.
hueymahl
(2,415 posts)Talk about tinfoil hat theories!
MADem
(135,425 posts)then?
The WAPO is tinfoiling a bit, too!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/report-snowden-stayed-at-russian-consulate-while-in-hong-kong/2013/08/26/8237cf9a-0e39-11e3-a2b3-5e107edf9897_story.html
And there is reason to believe that the Russians traded some of their agent's secrets to China in exchange for his safe passage:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/edward-snowdens-departure-from-hong-kong-filled-with-intrigue-questions/2013/06/24/631d3a1a-dcc4-11e2-9218-bc2ac7cd44e2_story.html
Snowden was burned before he left Hawaii--he'd been notified that there were discrepancies in his clearance renewal--serious ones, too (education falsification is a grounds for termination, and termination triggers a review of every keystroke he'd ever made). He waved the processors off, and then ran like hell--he was busted.
But hey, keep believing that he's sincere and a "truth teller" if it makes you feel better.
The reason we don't talk about this is because our team fucked up big time, first, by letting a snarky clown with a GED burrow so deeply into our security infrastructure without proper vetting and a rigorous clearance process, and second, by not catching him after he'd been feeding crap to the Russians for a number of years. It was partially his desire to give himself a post-graduate degree from a UK university that really did him in--hubris is quite a thang...!
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-snowden-idUSBRE95K01J20130621
hueymahl
(2,415 posts)I'll check those out.
charlyvi
(6,537 posts)is doing good work on this too.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Timing sure seems interesting.
MADem
(135,425 posts)one--he knows he could hoodwink Trump with a little bullshit and flattery, and Trump would eat it up with a spoon.
Putin has LONG been in Assange's corner. I suspect Assange has gotten a little dough from Moscow to make his stay in Knightsbridge more comfy.
See this pro-Putin paper for some archival Putinesque Poutrage over Assange's situation:
https://themoscowtimes.com/news/putin-bristles-over-leaked-us-cables-3644
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Putin definitely wants Trump to be president. How much would Putin love it if Trump broke up NATO?
MADem
(135,425 posts)if you flatter him enough.
Trump is sly like a fox, but he's totally obtuse when it comes to himself. He really thinks he's the greatest thing since sliced bread, that he's handsome, that he's not a balding, overweight, puffy orange fool with a really bad weave on top of his head. He has a form of dysmorphic disorder where, while most of us see him for the slob that he is, he looks in the mirror and sees Prince Charming looking back at him. He really thinks he's lovely!
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)and they are highly motivated by the same misogynist and sociopathic libertarian ideals as the Trumpettes.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
MrScorpio
(73,626 posts)MineralMan
(146,192 posts)One edge is actual progressives on the left, who appear to be willing to insist on having their principles fully supported by our national government, despite all evidence that such is not possible in a country as diverse in its politics as the United States. The other edge is honed by the right, which understands that sowing discontent among Democrats and others even farther to the left is a strategy that helps them retain control to some degree.
The bottom line is that our nation, politically, is heavily weighted toward moderation. With 320 million or so citizens, it is a nation where political opinion runs the gamut from far left to far right, in a bell-shaped curve with population as the y-axis.
The overwhelming majority of the population is under the center of that curve, distributed fairly evenly. That is why our presidential elections are usually relatively evenly balanced between the two parties.
There is no way to change that distribution, really, except through time and education. So, if the far right can convince the far left not to vote or to waste their votes on candidates and third parties that cannot win, the election swings to the right of center. If the far right fails, it swings to the left of center.
So, much of the discontent and fractiousness of the left is being avidly encouraged by the right.
And that's how it goes, really. It's our job to convince people on the left to vote for Democrats, because the alternative leads to movement backward rather than forward. It's that simple. We will either win or lose in 2016, based on that alone.
Fortunately, we have an obscene orange-haired rodent running for President on the right. That will move many moderates who normally vote for Republicans to vote for our Democratic candidate. Hillary's selection of Tim Kaine, rather than someone like Elizabeth Warren is based on that principle. It was a smart move, in terms of Democrats winning in 2016.
Most progressive Sanders supporters will vote for Hillary, in the end. We will win, though, because many centrist and moderate Republicans will also vote for Hillary, thanks to the insanity that is Donald Trump.
We will win. We will win, because this nation is not insane, despite being pretty wacky in its choices sometimes.
MADem
(135,425 posts)"Obscene orange-haired rodent" is deserving of extra points, too!
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)If a naked mole rat had hair, it would be orange, I'm sure.
MADem
(135,425 posts)JHB
(37,133 posts)...Nature's belching contest champs!
TexasProgresive
(12,148 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)wildeyed
(11,240 posts)And anyone can claim to be Anonymous.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)These people are NOT from the Left. They are EXTREME RIGHT because they support Trump!
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)how many do you know?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Anecdotal evidence is evidence of nothing.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Wikileaks is nothing but a propaganda arm of Putin.
So if you want to be a Putin supporter, that is your right, go ahead.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)I have about much love for Putin as I have for Drumpf.
there you go again, spouting a big pile of metabolic byproducts
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Response to MohRokTah (Reply #44)
Post removed
hueymahl
(2,415 posts)Maybe they just despise hypocrisy in all its forms?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Or more specifically, everything they do is in support of Putin because they are bought and paid for minions of Vladimir "KGB" Putin.
hueymahl
(2,415 posts)Serious question. It will change my outlook if you have anything credible. Otherwise, you are just spouting pure conjecture to support of what you want to be true.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)hueymahl
(2,415 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)hueymahl
(2,415 posts)Any links at all? I have not seen that theory advanced elsewhere.
enchantedlearner
(1 post)Russian hackers infiltrated the DNC's database, and now those same documents are being posted to Wikileaks.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cyber-researchers-confirm-russian-government-hack-of-democratic-national-committee/2016/06/20/e7375bc0-3719-11e6-9ccd-d6005beac8b3_story.html
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)The GOP is their buddy...clear they are trying to throw the election to Putin loving Trump.
hueymahl
(2,415 posts)An alternative explanation is they like to expose hypocrisy, and they don't really give a shit which ruling party they expose. Hackers generally tend to trend anarchist.
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)And by exposing the party who's nominee is the only person who can defeat Trump, they support Trump and Republicans which is why I despise Greens and the far far left. They accomplish nothing good and elect Republicans.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If not to help Trump, why is Wikileaks going after the Dems and not the GOP?
MADem
(135,425 posts)And that IS what this post is about--not "the left" but "the hacker left." They are 2 different things entirely.
It's like a false flag operation, only without a false flag--just Guy Fawkes masks and other silliness.
The idea that there are a large mass of dedicated lefties pounding on keyboards is attractive to genuine lefties, though, and certainly, there are a few--but their efforts and desires and goals are easily co-opted by those who don't actually want to "bring the whole system down," they'd much rather obtain information that will put them at an advantage.
Some on the left want to believe that this whole process is organic and grassroots, and not fomented by Putin and his gang of infiltrators and disruptors, mainly because they often don't question things that sound (too good to be) true.
Fight the power is a great counterculture meme, but it is awfully funny how no one is fighting that RUSSIAN power, when that nation is an authoritarian shithole where journalists are murdered every day. And no one asks these inconvenient questions (for example, why does Assange studiously avoid criticism of Putin?) because they ruin the easy "Hate America First" narrative that some--not all, but some--like to tout.
And it's not just Putin--our crew does it too. It's not a lucky accident that we've managed to get a lot of the Anonymous hackers--we nab one, and use him to reel in massive numbers of cohorts out there farting around, breaking into stuff, and stirring up trouble. Informants will do anything to avoid a lengthy sentence, and who can blame them?
Now, all that said, there are certainly some efforts that originate from the left and far left that don't have Putin's paws on them, but if Putin can find advantage, you can be sure he'll put his sticky fingers in the pot. It's how he rolls.
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)to pick up the pieces and build their utopia, once the orange orangutan has thrown enough shit to f__k up the fan.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)Hi you!
qazplm
(3,626 posts)then the person who is mostly on your side, but not all the way. They are "sell-outs," they are "worse than the other side."
Kaine is pro-choice, 100% rating but because he's personally against abortion then he is at best just like people who are anti-choice and worse according to some.
ismnotwasm
(41,921 posts)And clearly manipulative
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)glennward
(989 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)If you look at the ideological divide among older voters, you see divisions along liberal versus conservative lines (voting-rights versus alleged-voting-security, workplace-gender-equality versus workplace-deregulation, domestic-labor-rights versus global-corporation-profits, etc.).
If you look at the ideological divide among younger voters, you see more divisions along populist versus establishment lines (fix-the-rigged-system versus status-quo, bankster-regulation-and-justice versus Wall-Street-and-financial-sector-deregulation, legal-and-economic-equality versus rules-do-not-apply-to-the-rich).
The Republican Party is shifting from a conservative message to a right-wing-populist message.
Trump is trying to redefine the Democratic Party as the party of the elite, the party of the status quo, the party of the establishment, the party of rules-do-not-apply-to-the-rich, the party of globalization of trade, etc.
This is the Republican Party's transition year and I'm not sure they can win this year. If they succeed in this redefinition of the parties, we lose the Senate and lose much ground in the House in 2018 and lose the presidency in 2020.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)They don't support any establishment. The question is why they support Donald Trump.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)Which means that, yes, they are supporting Trump.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)primary, Jeb (and to a lesser degree Rubio, Kasich, etc) were the establishment, and the "hacker left" would have undoubtedly exposed the Republican establishment had it prevailed.
Now that Trump has been nominated, he has become the establishment. They will likely focus on that establishment, but Trump has only just become the establishment.
The "hacker left"'s exposure of the corrupt and dishonest underside of the establishment is what they do. It is more anti-slime than partisan. If it seems like there is a focus on Democrats, that only because the Democratic Party is far more establishment than Trump. To they extent there was a Republican establishment, it lost its own primary. The Democratic Party establishment's underside is being leaked.
kcr
(15,300 posts)That was funny. No, I think it's more likely that it was Putin tinkering with our election because he wants Trump. If it's your contention that hackers just want to attack establishment, then they would attack GOP, too. The one sided nature of this attack tells a different story.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)And they haven't gone after Trump either. So it's pretty clear that, at least so far, their actions are pro-GOP and now pro-Trump.
Maybe the reason they are pro-Trump is that they think he's not the "establishment." In which case they are nuts.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)I have explained here....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2279970
Many of these people are angry because they see the Democratic party attempting to curtail internet freedoms just as much as the Republicans would. They don't like the Obama admin's policies concerning the NSA and the internet. They see him as taking Bush ideas on surveillance and expanding them instead of reducing them.
And they have a point. Remember in 2008, we (progressives) all railed against Bush and things like the Patriot Act. Yet, Obama and Democrats in Congress continues to renew that legislation. Our government won't give up the power it assumes regardless of which party wins elections.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)But whatever they are, they are currently acting as allies of Trump. Even though Trump stands for the opposite of everything they profess to believe in.
mopinko
(69,809 posts)still waiting.
UCmeNdc
(9,589 posts)Putin thinks Trump is a fool and is quite manipulatable.
SunSeeker
(51,378 posts)AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)Interestingly, the Russians didn't care about hacking into the GOP server. And Trump has ties with the Russian mafia not to mention he also is BFF's with Putin.
yardwork
(61,418 posts)They seem to have another agenda entirely.