Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 150

TV’s Frink said:

Does it bother you at all that Wikileaks might be weakening the CIA’s ability to protect us?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/world/asia/north-korea-missile-program-sabotage.html?_r=0

Note: The key word is “might,” but still.

This is a major problem with Wikileaks, which I think is definitely a tool of Russia at this point, and it forces us to address the line between whistleblowing and subverting American interests and security.

TV’s Frink said:

NeverarGreat said:

TV’s Frink said:

NeverarGreat said:

TV’s Frink said:

The Trump Administration can’t shake this Russia thing…I guess because they keep lying about it and at some point lies do actually matter.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-08/trump-met-russian-ambassador-during-campaign-at-speech-reception

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/carter-page-russia-trip-trump-corey-lewandowski-235784

The first event seems exceedingly benign, and reads as a form of ‘gotcha’ politics.

Granted…in isolation. However, there’s this disturbing pattern of Trump and his pals lying or misleading about Russia.

Yeah, and that’s just the problem. For people who have the mental model that Trump is a serial liar (most of the Democratic party), this is just one more data point to buttress the argument. However, for those with the mental model that Trump has been the unfair target of a smear campaign by the mainstream media (which is most of the Republican party), this is further proof that the MSM has it out for him. After all, would you be able to remember everyone you shook hands with at every event if you were running for president? So continually reporting on this may have the opposite of the intended effect for the people they most want to convince.

I might not be able to remember everyone’s hand I shook, but if I was asked over and over if I shook anyone’s hand who also had a hat on, I’d probably either remember or say I couldn’t remember. I wouldn’t keep insisting I hadn’t if I had or if I wasn’t sure.

I think anyone in Trump’s position would be more cautious with their words, but then again, this is Trump. He’s not a reasonable, cautious, or political person, and got elected because of it, so he thinks that he doesn’t need to police his own statements. He’s largely right. To the extent that his lies and exaggerations damage the dignity, intelligence, and decorum of the presidency, they are seen as features of his presidency by many of those who elected him. I think that is an incredibly short-sighted line of thinking, since the government is now seen as an asylum for the incompetent and the delusional. If his lies become prosecutable, he should be removed from power before he does something genuinely destructive to the country.

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Everyone who is registered as a Democrat went to polls and voted for which Democrat they wanted to represent the Democratic party in the General Election.

Out west, things get murkier. At least in my state, you don’t register as a member of a particular party at all, so technically everyone in the state is an independent. At primary time, you basically decide right on the spot which party’s primary you’d like to influence this year and choose that ballot (or attend that caucus, or both because yes we’re weird that way). It’s not quite an open primary, but we love open primaries out here and it’s the closest we can get to that ideal without the parties suing the crap out of the state. The parties claim they can restrict primary access to their own members; the public reminds the parties who’s paying for these elections in the first place, and a tense standoff is maintained.

Now some of that independence is obviously fictional. We have more self-reported independents (as opposed to the meaningless registration numbers) than most states, but lots of those are leftists who are choosing between third parties and Democrats, and rightists choosing between third parties and Republicans. The percentage actually choosing between Democrats and Republicans probably isn’t that different than other states, although we do have a lot of ticket-splitters, and we were one of the last refuges of the fabled liberal Republicans before they went extinct (or more accurately became Democrats).

We also have a long history of messing with the primaries of other parties. Since the primaries are occasionally just formalities with a single plausible candidate, and you can choose at the last minute which primary to vote in, people often talk about crossing over to the other side to vote for the weakest/craziest candidate on the other side, to improve their own party’s chances. However, that sort of talk has lately fallen out of fashion since it makes the situation a lot more dire when your party loses. Now people talk about crossing over to vote for someone they could stomach, if not vote for, which I guess is moderation coming back into fashion.

I’m registered independent in MA and it’s the similar for me, pick which ballot you want when you show up. Haven’t done the “vote on the other side” thing though.

Ditto in Arizona. Registered Independent and can choose which primary to vote in.

Also: My poor country. Jeez.

Yeah, I was just coming back after a hiatus and felt that was the best way to sum up the last ten pages.

This feels political, even if it’s a comic about a fictitious land:

Alderaan said:

moviefreakedmind said:

This is a major problem with Wikileaks, which I think is definitely a tool of Russia at this point

Wrong.

Lol. Your pretending to know everything extends to a variety of subjects, doesn’t it?

Alderaan said:

Well I am smart enough to not fall for the blame-everything-on-the-Russians bs.

I don’t blame everything on Russia, I’m just not naïve enough to think that they’re a benign force.

Wikileaks goes back a lot further than the recent election cycle,

Which is why I said, “at this point”.

and they made a name for themselves outing U.S. abuses against civilians in the war on terror,

Hence my reference to the difference between whistleblowing and subverting American interests and security.

which is a common cause with the Russians. It’s pretty clear they are just anti-government,

Anti- which government?

and the idea that Assange or anyone there is a Russian agent is about as stupid as it gets.

I never said that.

If the Russians were the source for Wikileaks dumps, then you know it stands to reason the U.S. could source them with intel on Putin and the Russians as well, right? But since it ain’t workin’ like that, you should be be able to figure out logically that all of their info is coming from inside Washington D.C., not Russia.

I don’t get what your point is here. Just because something very specific hasn’t happened doesn’t mean that your invented alternative is immediately true.