Who cost Hillary the election???

[idb]

It was clearly because of the ineptness of the FBI and The Deep State.
We are told that they were working to get her elected and they obviously cocked it up.
They're worse than the Keystone Cops...why is anyone concerend about them?

did the 'keystone cops' actions change your vote?

View attachment 205092

What I suspect is that Obama set up the Russian mess, not that Russia didn't interfere, in his own deceitful way to help Hilary and then left a trap for Trump after he won.

Wow...that's some three dimensional conspiracy shit!
Obama's even smarter than I thought!

Not at all a conspiracy theory. When the FBI found out the Russians hacked the DNC it was treated like a low level concern. The hack stayed in place for quite a while. Obama and Comey did squat. Then after Trump won it became a huge deal for Obama and he went wild putting every agency he could on it.

That's simply untrue.



But in the end, in late December, Obama approved a modest package combining measures that had been drawn up to punish Russia for other issues — expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds — with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic.

Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyberweapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. The project, which Obama approved in a covert-action finding, was still in its planning stages when Obama left office. It would be up to President Trump to decide whether to use the capability.

Beset by allegations of hidden ties between his campaign and Russia, Trump has shown no inclination to revisit the matter and has denied any collusion or obstruction on his part. As a result, the expulsions and modest sanctions announced by Obama on Dec. 29 continue to stand as the United States’ most forceful response.

They (The Whitehouse) also worried that any action they took would be perceived as political interference in an already volatile campaign. By August, Trump was predicting that the election would be rigged. Obama officials feared providing fuel to such claims, playing into Russia’s efforts to discredit the outcome and potentially contaminating the expected Clinton triumph.
To some, Obama’s determination to avoid politicizing the Russia issue had the opposite effect: It meant that he allowed politics to shape his administration’s response to what some believed should have been treated purely as a national security threat.

The early options they discussed were ambitious. They looked at sectorwide economic sanctions and cyberattacks that would take Russian networks temporarily offline. One official informally suggested — though never formally proposed — moving a U.S. naval carrier group into the Baltic Sea as a symbol of resolve.

What those lower-level officials did not know was that the principals and their deputies had by late September all but ruled out any pre-election retaliation against Moscow. They feared that any action would be seen as political and that Putin, motivated by a seething resentment of Clinton, was prepared to go beyond fake news and email dumps.

Obama’s secret struggle to punish Russia for Putin’s election assault


On December 9th, 2016, Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller published a very important piece in the Washington Post that revealed a behind the scenes tussle between President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

They wrote that by mid-September, the Obama White House was looking to take action on Russia and asked, in a secret meeting with the Gang of 12 – a bipartisan group of House and Senate leaders – for a show of “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against Russian meddling in the election.

Guess what Obama got.

A big fat no, led by Mitch McConnell. A kick in the gut to democracy and patriotism by the Republican Senator.

“McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.”

And again, in case anyone missed it, “In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.”


But it was Mitch McConnell who threatened Obama, warning him that McConnell would see it as partisan politics if the President were to protect the United States against an attack from a hostile foreign power. McConnell refused to join the President in a show of solidarity against the Russian attack.

We always land here, at McConnell’s grotesquely unpatriotic obstruction of President Obama and distorted-by-hyper-partisanship-lens leadership.

This is on McConnell. The Russian attack on our election and the current, ongoing destruction of our democracy are Mitch McConnell’s legacy.
Russian Election Meddling Is All On Mitch McConnell, Not Barack Obama

 

[Mike473]

With the email/server investigation and all the bad press,

and with the exoneration bashing of Comey right before the DNC convention,

And the fainting, and she's sick crapola that followed...

And the reopening of the email investigation 11 days before the election announcement/letter of Comey to Congress...

And the russian bots forwarding all bad press and even made up bad press on her

And the Russian trolls who still post on this board

And all the right wing media that pushed all of this out to the people via their News and all their internet sites

And the russian propaganda passed around by right wing sites

and Cambridge Analytica

And the Russian / NRA connection on campaign ads

And with the DNC, DCCC, and Podesta emails being stolen...

and of course Wikileaks, with giving a right wing Reporter what was going to be leaked ahead of time so they could write stories about their interpretation of the emails which was mostly false narratives...

And the coordination of the wikileaks dumps with what was going on with the two campaigns at the time of the dumps, like the first wiki leak dump was the day or two before the DNC Convention....hoping to divide Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters at the convention....

the next one was when the Trump Access Hollywood tape story broke and the Russians were interfering in our election story that broke for the first time, hardly got noticed....

YES, She lost due to the Electoral Process

But,
3 million MORE CITIZENS voted for her than President Trump....

with all of the Murphy's Law things, and UNLAWFUL things that happened of which I listed above....

Let alone all of her own mistakes of ignoring some of her base Democratic voters....and being boring....

and having third party candidates in the race etc etc etc....

So, everyone can come off and say she was a poor candidate and all now that the election is over, cuz she did not win...

BUT, with all of those things, she still managed to get many more votes of US Citizens than Trump,

and many less votes than she would have gotten if there had not been so many things like Comey's interference and the Stolen emails and wikileaks interference listed above by the Russians.....

We are rewriting history to say she did not do well, she did extremely well considering all that she faced.

How would the election have turned out without the Access Hollywood tape?

 

[DennisJW]

did the 'keystone cops' actions change your vote?

View attachment 205092

What I suspect is that Obama set up the Russian mess, not that Russia didn't interfere, in his own deceitful way to help Hilary and then left a trap for Trump after he won.

Wow...that's some three dimensional conspiracy shit!
Obama's even smarter than I thought!

Not at all a conspiracy theory. When the FBI found out the Russians hacked the DNC it was treated like a low level concern. The hack stayed in place for quite a while. Obama and Comey did squat. Then after Trump won it became a huge deal for Obama and he went wild putting every agency he could on it.

That's simply untrue.



But in the end, in late December, Obama approved a modest package combining measures that had been drawn up to punish Russia for other issues — expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds — with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic.

Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyberweapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. The project, which Obama approved in a covert-action finding, was still in its planning stages when Obama left office. It would be up to President Trump to decide whether to use the capability.

Beset by allegations of hidden ties between his campaign and Russia, Trump has shown no inclination to revisit the matter and has denied any collusion or obstruction on his part. As a result, the expulsions and modest sanctions announced by Obama on Dec. 29 continue to stand as the United States’ most forceful response.

They (The Whitehouse) also worried that any action they took would be perceived as political interference in an already volatile campaign. By August, Trump was predicting that the election would be rigged. Obama officials feared providing fuel to such claims, playing into Russia’s efforts to discredit the outcome and potentially contaminating the expected Clinton triumph.
To some, Obama’s determination to avoid politicizing the Russia issue had the opposite effect: It meant that he allowed politics to shape his administration’s response to what some believed should have been treated purely as a national security threat.

The early options they discussed were ambitious. They looked at sectorwide economic sanctions and cyberattacks that would take Russian networks temporarily offline. One official informally suggested — though never formally proposed — moving a U.S. naval carrier group into the Baltic Sea as a symbol of resolve.

What those lower-level officials did not know was that the principals and their deputies had by late September all but ruled out any pre-election retaliation against Moscow. They feared that any action would be seen as political and that Putin, motivated by a seething resentment of Clinton, was prepared to go beyond fake news and email dumps.

Obama’s secret struggle to punish Russia for Putin’s election assault


On December 9th, 2016, Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller published a very important piece in the Washington Post that revealed a behind the scenes tussle between President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

They wrote that by mid-September, the Obama White House was looking to take action on Russia and asked, in a secret meeting with the Gang of 12 – a bipartisan group of House and Senate leaders – for a show of “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against Russian meddling in the election.

Guess what Obama got.

A big fat no, led by Mitch McConnell. A kick in the gut to democracy and patriotism by the Republican Senator.

“McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.”

And again, in case anyone missed it, “In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.”


But it was Mitch McConnell who threatened Obama, warning him that McConnell would see it as partisan politics if the President were to protect the United States against an attack from a hostile foreign power. McConnell refused to join the President in a show of solidarity against the Russian attack.

We always land here, at McConnell’s grotesquely unpatriotic obstruction of President Obama and distorted-by-hyper-partisanship-lens leadership.

This is on McConnell. The Russian attack on our election and the current, ongoing destruction of our democracy are Mitch McConnell’s legacy.
Russian Election Meddling Is All On Mitch McConnell, Not Barack Obama

BS.... What I said is true. The FBI treated the hack on the DNC like it was nothing until the final months of the election they knew for months but Obama did little until after Trump won.

 

[idb]

View attachment 205092

What I suspect is that Obama set up the Russian mess, not that Russia didn't interfere, in his own deceitful way to help Hilary and then left a trap for Trump after he won.

Wow...that's some three dimensional conspiracy shit!
Obama's even smarter than I thought!

Not at all a conspiracy theory. When the FBI found out the Russians hacked the DNC it was treated like a low level concern. The hack stayed in place for quite a while. Obama and Comey did squat. Then after Trump won it became a huge deal for Obama and he went wild putting every agency he could on it.

That's simply untrue.



But in the end, in late December, Obama approved a modest package combining measures that had been drawn up to punish Russia for other issues — expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds — with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic.

Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyberweapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. The project, which Obama approved in a covert-action finding, was still in its planning stages when Obama left office. It would be up to President Trump to decide whether to use the capability.

Beset by allegations of hidden ties between his campaign and Russia, Trump has shown no inclination to revisit the matter and has denied any collusion or obstruction on his part. As a result, the expulsions and modest sanctions announced by Obama on Dec. 29 continue to stand as the United States’ most forceful response.

They (The Whitehouse) also worried that any action they took would be perceived as political interference in an already volatile campaign. By August, Trump was predicting that the election would be rigged. Obama officials feared providing fuel to such claims, playing into Russia’s efforts to discredit the outcome and potentially contaminating the expected Clinton triumph.
To some, Obama’s determination to avoid politicizing the Russia issue had the opposite effect: It meant that he allowed politics to shape his administration’s response to what some believed should have been treated purely as a national security threat.

The early options they discussed were ambitious. They looked at sectorwide economic sanctions and cyberattacks that would take Russian networks temporarily offline. One official informally suggested — though never formally proposed — moving a U.S. naval carrier group into the Baltic Sea as a symbol of resolve.

What those lower-level officials did not know was that the principals and their deputies had by late September all but ruled out any pre-election retaliation against Moscow. They feared that any action would be seen as political and that Putin, motivated by a seething resentment of Clinton, was prepared to go beyond fake news and email dumps.

Obama’s secret struggle to punish Russia for Putin’s election assault


On December 9th, 2016, Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller published a very important piece in the Washington Post that revealed a behind the scenes tussle between President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

They wrote that by mid-September, the Obama White House was looking to take action on Russia and asked, in a secret meeting with the Gang of 12 – a bipartisan group of House and Senate leaders – for a show of “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against Russian meddling in the election.

Guess what Obama got.

A big fat no, led by Mitch McConnell. A kick in the gut to democracy and patriotism by the Republican Senator.

“McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.”

And again, in case anyone missed it, “In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.”


But it was Mitch McConnell who threatened Obama, warning him that McConnell would see it as partisan politics if the President were to protect the United States against an attack from a hostile foreign power. McConnell refused to join the President in a show of solidarity against the Russian attack.

We always land here, at McConnell’s grotesquely unpatriotic obstruction of President Obama and distorted-by-hyper-partisanship-lens leadership.

This is on McConnell. The Russian attack on our election and the current, ongoing destruction of our democracy are Mitch McConnell’s legacy.
Russian Election Meddling Is All On Mitch McConnell, Not Barack Obama

BS what I said is true.

BS what I said is true.

You must curse that dyslexia!
I know you meant to write "True, what I said is BS".

 

[frigidweirdo]

We're coming up on 2 years after the Presidential election, and the Democrats/Liberals are still crying over Hillary's epic loss. Hillary herself has blamed everyone & everything, except herself which is quite self defeating. Too bad she didn't have the fortitude to just stand up & admit her own responsibility. But I'm not interested in that.

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how??? Nevermind the current or ongoing narrative of Mueller's investigation. Who do YOU think is responsible & why or how???

If you are or were a Hillary supporter...…..were you or anyone you know influenced in any way to either vote against her? Or not vote at all???(which is a vote for someone, in and of itself mind you)

The biggest thing was the system.

Trump got -2.8 million
Obama got + 5 million and +9.5 million
Dubya got -500,000 and +3 million
Clinton got +8 million and +5.8 million


Not since Jimmy Carter has a Democrat got less than +5 million to get elected.

In that time Republicans have failed TWICE (that's half their presidents) to gain the popular vote, and Dubya managed to win with only 3 million.

In fact if you do the math, the Republicans have a massive advantage, especially with smaller states.

Wyoming is the smallest, staunch Republican.
Vermont is next. Staunch Democrat.
North Dakota, staunch Republican
Alaska, staunch Republican.
South Dakota, staunch Republican.
Delaware, staunch Democrat.
Montana, staunch Republican

These are the states of less than 1 million as of 2010.

2 Democrat, 5 Republican.

Those states are some of the least populated AKA least amount of Electorates......and it is the Electoral vote count that determines the Presidency.

So tell me, did anything or anyone influence your vote??

I'm struggling to see the connection between what I wrote and what you wrote.

These states are the least populated. Each state has at least 3 electoral college votes. This means that a state the size of Wyoming, half a million people, gets three votes. That's 6 votes per million people.

A state like California has 55 electoral college votes. At 40 million people, that's just over one vote per million people.

Do you see the problem?

You don't like State rights?

Well, actually, if states actually had anything.

The problem is that you have a system of massive Federal power over the states, but then a way of electing the federal government that isn't fair.

You can talk about States' rights, but Wyoming gets three times more power to a vote than California, but neither state actually gets any power.

Candidates don't care about either state.

What rights do the 38 states who are being ignored in Presidential election get, exactly?

 

[skye]

KARMA cost Killary the election....

It was just too much evil in one person....it cost her the election and her health....mental and physical...that's how it works.....

You want to be a bitch? be a bitch then.

 

[Wyatt earp]

We're coming up on 2 years after the Presidential election, and the Democrats/Liberals are still crying over Hillary's epic loss. Hillary herself has blamed everyone & everything, except herself which is quite self defeating. Too bad she didn't have the fortitude to just stand up & admit her own responsibility. But I'm not interested in that.

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how??? Nevermind the current or ongoing narrative of Mueller's investigation. Who do YOU think is responsible & why or how???

If you are or were a Hillary supporter...…..were you or anyone you know influenced in any way to either vote against her? Or not vote at all???(which is a vote for someone, in and of itself mind you)

To me it was all that egotistical SOB comey ...



If he didn't open his fat mouth right before an election Hillary would of won



.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

We're coming up on 2 years after the Presidential election, and the Democrats/Liberals are still crying over Hillary's epic loss. Hillary herself has blamed everyone & everything, except herself which is quite self defeating. Too bad she didn't have the fortitude to just stand up & admit her own responsibility. But I'm not interested in that.

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how??? Nevermind the current or ongoing narrative of Mueller's investigation. Who do YOU think is responsible & why or how???

If you are or were a Hillary supporter...…..were you or anyone you know influenced in any way to either vote against her? Or not vote at all???(which is a vote for someone, in and of itself mind you)

To me it was all that egotistical SOB comey ...



If he didn't open his fat mouth right before an election Hillary would of won



.

Do you really believe that?

 

[Issa]

I honestly Think that lot of people didn't wanna vote for both, also The FBI and Russia gave the orange a little push.

Issa, you have proved you are pretty crazy, uneducated and pretty clueless in previous threads so your theory might soothe your butthurtness but it denies the fact The Donald won in a LANDSLIDE.

How can you live as a bigot and racist in American? Unless if you are in a shithole in the middle of nowhere with bunch of hillbillies. Lol

You yourself have repeatedly made derisive comments about white people, so I don't think you have much room to talk about bigotry.

And no, I'm not going to go fishing through all your comments to find the examples. You know you've done it. I know you have. Let's not try and play games about it.

I say to the racist ones....I'm white genetically, married to one and have white kids....if that helps.

It doesn't. You are accountable for your words regardless of your skin color. Maybe that's something we as a society need to agree on...

Accountable ? Like the bullying , name calling, attacks, racist comments that the orange does every day? What's your take on that?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Who cost Hillary the election???

hillary and the DNC elite

she never should have ran

 

[Mac1958]

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how???

I voted for Hillary - more accurately, though, it was more a vote against Trump. I knew that I'd have to vote for the Democratic candidate, no matter who it was, if either Trump or Cruz got the GOP nomination. My guess is that there were two main elements contributing to her loss:

First, she was just a lousy candidate. While her gender certainly got her many votes for reasons of shallow Identity Politics, she just had too much baggage, had a bit of a questionable past on issues and simply wasn't particularly likeable. Image is, sadly, everything in contemporary American politics, and she just doesn't cut the mustard.

Second, 2016 was The Great Pushback, a huge electoral Fuck You, directed at contrived Identity Politics and phony Political Correctness. I knew it would be substantial, but holy shit, I had no idea it would be like this. Just barely enough people had had enough of the illiberal, authoritarian Regressive Left to shove its bullshit right down its throat.

This horrified liberal Brit saw exactly what I saw:
.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how???

I voted for Hillary - more accurately, though, it was more a vote against Trump. I knew that I'd have to vote for the Democratic candidate, no matter who it was, if either Trump or Cruz got the GOP nomination. My guess is that there were two main elements contributing to her loss:

First, she was just a lousy candidate. While her gender certainly got her many votes for reasons of shallow Identity Politics, she just had too much baggage, had a bit of a questionable past on issues and simply wasn't particularly likeable. Image is, sadly, everything in contemporary American politics, and she just doesn't cut the mustard.

Second, 2016 was The Great Pushback, a huge electoral Fuck You, directed at contrived Identity Politics and phony Political Correctness. I knew it would be substantial, but holy shit, I had no idea it would be like this. Just barely enough people had had enough of the illiberal, authoritarian Regressive Left to shove its bullshit right down its throat.

This horrified liberal Brit sees exactly what I saw:
.

I have seen this guy before over some other issues and I agree with him on most things. Bare bones honesty is refreshing.

Yes, Hillary lost because she was a lousy candidate. She had nothing, no policies, no definitive plans on major issues facing the country. She spent too much time & money blasting Trump and his supporters.

I am & always was a 'Never Hillary'. I didn't like her and it had nothing to do with all the scandals surrounding her over the years.

1. I didn't like it when she cleaned out the WH when they left. Just not an honorable move, IMO

2. I also thought she was too power hungry by running for President on her husbands coat tails. I had voted for Bill & at the time liked his efforts, but I didn't think it was proper for her to run as well. I felt the Clintons as a whole, had their shot so move on

I voted against Hillary although I would have preferred not to vote at all. Considering the whole political climate, not voting at all could have help her and I didn't want that. Same with voting Stein or Johnson, since they don't have enough power to win.....so I voted Trump. Whether I like him or not still remains to be seen, but he is our President

If the election had been between Trump & Sanders, I would have voted Sanders

 

[Mac1958]

If the election had been between Trump & Sanders, I would have voted Sanders

Of all the fascinating and bizarre elements of that campaign, I thought that among the most interesting was the cross-section of voters who really liked both Sanders & Trump. The "establishment" of both parties totally missed it, and it should have been clear as a bell to them. There a LOT of people who have HAD it.
.

 

[Kosh]

Who cost Hillary the election???

Hilary did, thinking she did not need to campaign, just raise money for the broke DNC.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

Some folks care about the nation.

Sure, the problem is the definition of "the nation" though

You applauding the “abnormal” presidency is a sign that you are not among us.

Well, we're all in the Twilight Zone together so I guess I'm among you

But I'm not a citizen of the exceptional homeland if that's what you mean

 

[JoeB131]

Of all the fascinating and bizarre elements of that campaign, I thought that among the most interesting was the cross-section of voters who really liked both Sanders & Trump. The "establishment" of both parties totally missed it, and it should have been clear as a bell to them. There a LOT of people who have HAD it.

Not really.

Both Sanders and the Fuhrer appealed to the imaginary grievances of the White Working Class.

But you do have a point, Stormy Mac. A lot of people have given up on Democracy in general. The GOP nominated a Nazi and the Dems almost nominated a Communist. It doesn't bode well for the future.

After Trump crashes the economy, the Dems might nominate someone like Bernie who will make things worse.

 

[JoeB131]

Who cost Hillary the election?

I think the primary blame does belong with Hillary. She should have taken 2008 as a hint that even Democrats don't like her that much. Instead, she decided to rig the game in the primaries to not give them a choice.

I also blame the Media, who promoted Trump because he was good for ratings, and as a result validated his racism and paranoia as legitimate issues. The media was too smart for the room. They thought the drooling morons who tune in would be able to see through Trump.

I blame people who voted third party. Yes, Hillary v. Trump was an awful choice.. But when given a choice between a crook and a Nazi, you vote for the crook.

 

[candycorn]

Who cost Hillary the election?

I think the primary blame does belong with Hillary. She should have taken 2008 as a hint that even Democrats don't like her that much. Instead, she decided to rig the game in the primaries to not give them a choice.

I also blame the Media, who promoted Trump because he was good for ratings, and as a result validated his racism and paranoia as legitimate issues. The media was too smart for the room. They thought the drooling morons who tune in would be able to see through Trump.

I blame people who voted third party. Yes, Hillary v. Trump was an awful choice.. But when given a choice between a crook and a Nazi, you vote for the crook.

Brutally truthful.

I wonder if the OP was really as moronic as to believe that folks like me who supported Hillary think that the Russian attempts to influence the election was the largest element of her losing. The hacking didn't help. The false stories didn't help. And of course, the fact that the GOP didn't have any such embarrassing releases of confidential information obviously point to collusion. But HRC is responsible. As you stated, the lessons of 08 should have made her and her team hyper vigilant in trying to shore up the base.

Still, given the American penchant for not letting a party control the oval for a 3rd consecutive term; she really shouldn't have been as dominant as she was in the PV or the polling. It points to the good job Obama did that the voters were willing to give the Democrats a 3rd term if not the electors.

 

[Care4all]

With the email/server investigation and all the bad press,

and with the exoneration bashing of Comey right before the DNC convention,

And the fainting, and she's sick crapola that followed...

And the reopening of the email investigation 11 days before the election announcement/letter of Comey to Congress...

And the russian bots forwarding all bad press and even made up bad press on her

And the Russian trolls who still post on this board

And all the right wing media that pushed all of this out to the people via their News and all their internet sites

And the russian propaganda passed around by right wing sites

and Cambridge Analytica

And the Russian / NRA connection on campaign ads

And with the DNC, DCCC, and Podesta emails being stolen...

and of course Wikileaks, with giving a right wing Reporter what was going to be leaked ahead of time so they could write stories about their interpretation of the emails which was mostly false narratives...

And the coordination of the wikileaks dumps with what was going on with the two campaigns at the time of the dumps, like the first wiki leak dump was the day or two before the DNC Convention....hoping to divide Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters at the convention....

the next one was when the Trump Access Hollywood tape story broke and the Russians were interfering in our election story that broke for the first time, hardly got noticed....

YES, She lost due to the Electoral Process

But,
3 million MORE CITIZENS voted for her than President Trump....

with all of the Murphy's Law things, and UNLAWFUL things that happened of which I listed above....

Let alone all of her own mistakes of ignoring some of her base Democratic voters....and being boring....

and having third party candidates in the race etc etc etc....

So, everyone can come off and say she was a poor candidate and all now that the election is over, cuz she did not win...

BUT, with all of those things, she still managed to get many more votes of US Citizens than Trump,

and many less votes than she would have gotten if there had not been so many things like Comey's interference and the Stolen emails and wikileaks interference listed above by the Russians.....

We are rewriting history to say she did not do well, she did extremely well considering all that she faced.

So what from your list changed your vote? Or someone you know?

It did not change my vote, but it did cause division between the Bernie and Hillary voters which WAS THEIR PLAN.....

The Russian push was not to get people to vote for Hillary, it was to get people to NOT vote for Hillary....to divide the Democratic voters....to make people stay home or vote third party instead of Clinton.

Specifically as the indictment spells out..... IF YOU READ IT, you would understand more....

 

[Care4all]

With the email/server investigation and all the bad press,

and with the exoneration bashing of Comey right before the DNC convention,

And the fainting, and she's sick crapola that followed...

And the reopening of the email investigation 11 days before the election announcement/letter of Comey to Congress...

And the russian bots forwarding all bad press and even made up bad press on her

And the Russian trolls who still post on this board

And all the right wing media that pushed all of this out to the people via their News and all their internet sites

And the russian propaganda passed around by right wing sites

and Cambridge Analytica

And the Russian / NRA connection on campaign ads

And with the DNC, DCCC, and Podesta emails being stolen...

and of course Wikileaks, with giving a right wing Reporter what was going to be leaked ahead of time so they could write stories about their interpretation of the emails which was mostly false narratives...

And the coordination of the wikileaks dumps with what was going on with the two campaigns at the time of the dumps, like the first wiki leak dump was the day or two before the DNC Convention....hoping to divide Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters at the convention....

the next one was when the Trump Access Hollywood tape story broke and the Russians were interfering in our election story that broke for the first time, hardly got noticed....

YES, She lost due to the Electoral Process

But,
3 million MORE CITIZENS voted for her than President Trump....

with all of the Murphy's Law things, and UNLAWFUL things that happened of which I listed above....

Let alone all of her own mistakes of ignoring some of her base Democratic voters....and being boring....

and having third party candidates in the race etc etc etc....

So, everyone can come off and say she was a poor candidate and all now that the election is over, cuz she did not win...

BUT, with all of those things, she still managed to get many more votes of US Citizens than Trump,

and many less votes than she would have gotten if there had not been so many things like Comey's interference and the Stolen emails and wikileaks interference listed above by the Russians.....

We are rewriting history to say she did not do well, she did extremely well considering all that she faced.

How would the election have turned out without the Access Hollywood tape?

Did the Russian government's Military intelligence hack in to and steal and then release the Access Hollywood tape on Trump?

Or did they have the stolen emails of the DNC released by wikileaks within an hour or two of the access Hollywood tape release to take the heat off of Trump and put it back on Hillary?