Conversation

Notices

1. Bob Mottram (bob@social.freedombone.net)'s status on Sunday, 03-Dec-2017 18:19:27 EST Bob Mottram
   This whole Russia thing seems very suspect to me. If for a microsecond we go with the hypothesis that uberleet Russian haxors are placing TEH EVIL ADS onto the books of faces. If we assume all that nonsense to be true - and it might be - then this does still does not amount to much of a heap of colour selected M&M's.
   
   Lots of other countries and organizations are doing the same thing. Soft power and propaganda mind games are not unique to Russia.
   
   What I think this is really about is a power struggle over who gets to "control the message", as Tony Blair used to put it. Is it the state or a megacorporation? In the old days of broadcast the manufacturing consent model was enough for statist hegemony, but right now it looks as if it's Zuckerberg's timeline algorithm and the folks who push it around that gets to decide what apparitions pop up within the popular psyche.
   
   https://www.justsecurity.org/46565/mark-zuckerberg-its-time-act-radical-transparency
   1. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 03-Dec-2017 18:37:11 EST lnxw48a1

      in reply to
      @bob I think the Russia thing distracts the nation from facing the reality that the #DNC put Trump in office when they scared away every other potential candidate (besides Bernie Sanders, whom they made sure would not be nominated). The dangerous part is that if they don't field a better candidate next time, he could be re-elected.
      
      Let me say it again: The Democratic National Committee put Trump in office.
      
      They need to admit that and decide how to prevent a repeat.
      1. tekk (tekk@social.tekk.in)'s status on Sunday, 03-Dec-2017 18:42:04 EST tekk

         in reply to
         @lnxw48a1 This. Any outside interference might as well be investigated, but the fact of the matter is that the DNC had the polling data, and they very intentionally, very explicitly picked the only candidate who could lose.
         1. tekk (tekk@social.tekk.in)'s status on Sunday, 03-Dec-2017 18:49:35 EST tekk

            in reply to
            I mean, not that O'Malley, to pick the other other horse, was any better politically than Hillary was, but at least he hadn't had a going-on-30-years' hate parade going on him.
      2. Sorokin Alexei (xrevan86@loadaverage.org)'s status on Monday, 04-Dec-2017 15:18:09 EST Sorokin Alexei

         in reply to
         @lnxw48a1 I don't think he can be re-elected. But I think Hillary Clinton will try again and successfully this time rendering the first and only positive accomplishment of Trump useless.