The myth that is driving Robert Mueller's collusion investigation was being pushed by the Clinton campaign and the Obama White House in the immediate aftermath of the election.
Only Russian "meddling" kept Hillary Clinton from being elected president.
CNN continues to perpetrate the myth with this story on the Mueller indictments.
If the allegations of the indictment prove true, it seems probable that the Russians were successful in their multimillion-dollar effort to influence the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. Of course the answer to this complex question will never be definitively known. Polling cannot tell us whether voters might have chosen differently if the Russian influence operation hadn't happened.Spouting this myth makes a pundit seem wise and observant. It's actually a load of crap. The indictment of 13 Russian trolls and some oligarchs only proves Russia spent a lot of money trying to influence the election. But pundits who use the Russian meddling story to try and "prove" something about the election outcome are talking through their hats. Mueller proved Russian attempts to meddle in the election. He came nowhere near proving that it mattered.
What is known, however, is that the election was close and voter shifts in just a few significant states could have changed the Electoral College vote count in a presidential election in which Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.
Once more, and with feeling: Hillary Clinton lost because she was the absolute worst Democratic candidate in the history of that party. No one else in the 218 years of that party comes close. Not Jimmy Carter. Not Adlai Stevenson. Not Al Smith. Not any Democrat who ended up getting creamed on election day.
The biggest problem with the myth that Russian meddling cost Hillary the election is the sublime ignorance of those promulgating it about the American voter. Russia could have bought a billion dollars in ads and not changed any minds. How do we know? Hillary bought half a billion bucks in ads and lost.
The polls barely flickered between the end of the conventions and the election. Voters had made up their minds about both candidates far in advance and nothing would have moved the needle enough to give Clinton the presidency.
In some Democratic circles, it's considered a sexist sacrilege to blame Hillary for her own loss. Indeed, the second favorite reason she lost among Hillary partisans is that evil white men denied her the presidency because, sexism. That codswallop will persist on the left even after the first woman is elected.
She will probably be a Republican.
(Via: PJ Media)
Blog Author's Comments: Out of nearly 137 million votes cast in the 2016 election, not one person has come forward and stated that they were tricked into voting for the wrong person because of the Russians. Not one. The polls were correct: she was ahead, and she won the popular vote--just not in the places she needed to do so. But, who cares? So she got a huge amount of votes in major liberal, far-left states like California, New York, New Jersey. She is now a two time loser in 2008 and 2016.
The Clinton people/voters say the Electoral College removes the value of the individual vote. But, every individual vote counts in every single state. It’s a brilliant concept thought up by very astute people. The Russian goal to create discord, disruption and chaos was minimal - the Mainstream Media did a much better job at that and continues to do so. It must have been the Russians that called 20,000 people and told them to attend all of the Trump rallies.
No comments:
Post a Comment