An even better idea: find a candidate that people like, someone who could beat the least popular candidate in history. That might work better than endless excuses about marginally relevant sideshows.
Don't you think it would be better to both 1) get better candidates 2) stop foreign states from successfully interfering in our elections via propaganda and hacking private systems?
edit - disappointed this got flagged, it's only political because certain parts of the users turn it into flamewars. Russia intelligence was attributed as the hackers behind the DNC intrusion by top firms, and is accused of systematically coordinated the timing of damaging info with Wikipedia, the Trump campaign, and networks of social bots to successfully flip the election. Then Trump damaged NATO alliances and softened his part's platform on Ukraine/Crimea, among other things. Regrettable that we can't have a mature conversation about this critical and topical subject.
One can logically believe both - that HRC was a flawed candidate who should not have run, and that the allegations of Russian interference (mainly through an intense, mostly false propaganda campaign in favor of one candidate) are troubling and should be investigated to their fullest extent. In fact, if you believe the former, the latter should at least concern you as a citizen.
I'm still 'salty' that Bernie wasn't on the Democratic ticket.
I feel like he was actually addressing the issues of the country and could have appealed to much of the electorate that ended up voting for Trump; at least the parts of it that weren't voting for Trump based on his more headline-grabbing (and other kinds of grabbing/threatening) attributes.
I always groan nowadays whenever I see a nytimes.com or washingtonpost.com byline. What "anonymous sources say" Trump/Russia theory are they going to try to get us to believe now? I thought it would go on for a month or two and then the news would be readable again, but it just keeps on going.
So Melvin Redick of Harrisburg, PA really existed then? Glad you figured that one out. Not sure why I could not see it was Hillary's fault he wasn't real.
[+] [-] paulsutter|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway5752|8 years ago|reply
edit - disappointed this got flagged, it's only political because certain parts of the users turn it into flamewars. Russia intelligence was attributed as the hackers behind the DNC intrusion by top firms, and is accused of systematically coordinated the timing of damaging info with Wikipedia, the Trump campaign, and networks of social bots to successfully flip the election. Then Trump damaged NATO alliances and softened his part's platform on Ukraine/Crimea, among other things. Regrettable that we can't have a mature conversation about this critical and topical subject.
[+] [-] flunhat|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mjevans|8 years ago|reply
I feel like he was actually addressing the issues of the country and could have appealed to much of the electorate that ended up voting for Trump; at least the parts of it that weren't voting for Trump based on his more headline-grabbing (and other kinds of grabbing/threatening) attributes.
[+] [-] narrator|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheIronYuppie|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asveikau|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IBM|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jackmott|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] irishcoffee|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]