@PrincessAwesome she didn’t do it nearly as overtly as trump but she still did it IMO. She fed into those “Russian cyber attack” conspiracy theories really hard
@NoahB Those were accurate - the important thing is that Hillary never alleged fraud or tried to claim the election was invalid. “Both sides”ism doesn’t really work here.
@QuixoticSoul i agree with you mostly. i dont think both sideism is really valid in this case. trump defo made a way bigger issue out of it. but hilldog was throwing out the russian cyber attack conspiracies and ppl ate it up all the same
@NoahB I mean, FSB hacked her shit, released it at a damaging moment, and ran a bonafide psyops on the American people. Those are my peeps and I’m proud of them for doing their jobs - but it happened. I think Hillary has a right to complain, which is a very different thing than claiming the election was not legitimate.
@QuixoticSoul they did do that. and I don't think the FBI was exactly helping things either. but the democrats played it up well beyond the parameters of that. they acted like that was the only reason they lost when there were many other (way bigger and self inflicted) factors in her loss.
@NoahB Well it was proven that the Russians did interfere in the election. So what she actually did was state the truth. As opposed to the Trumpist theories about a dead dictator rigging our election.
@PrincessAwesome it true in the same sense as kid yelling from the bleacher would mess up the focus of an athlete performing at an event. Not saying it didn't happen but the russian interference thing was way way way over blown on the impact they had on the election.
@NoahB The impact of Russian interference is difficult to quantify, but it could easily have been substantial - and the election was very very close. Clearly, if Hillary fought a better campaign, she could have won - but with two lackluster and unpopular candidates, impact of any chicanery gets magnified.
Anyway, Russian intelligence apparatus is quite smug about ‘16.
