• bobo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’ll never understand why people attribute to the Russian government what was in the obvious best-interests of the Republican Party and the conservative movement.

    Maybe because there was a demonstrated and provable coordinated effort by the Russian government in the 2016 election to get Trump elected? Look up project lakhta. Russian election interference and the efforts of the domestic conservative movement can (and do) exist simultaneously.

    What do you have against attributing to the Russian government actions that are demonstrably attributable to the Russian government?

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ll be real, I have my suspicions regarding that whole scandal in 2016 because following the election there were like 2-3 days of quiet introspection by the Dems and then they aligned on “the Russians were pushing fake news that tricked everyone!”

      My pet conspiracy theory is that it was already known within the political campaigns that these misinformation campaigns were happening and they chose to at that point publicize them and use that as their scapegoat. Same with the Russian spies they publicly outed that trump spoke with.

      • bobo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        My pet conspiracy theory is that it was already known within the political campaigns that these misinformation campaigns were happening and they chose to at that point publicize them and use that as their scapegoat. Same with the Russian spies they publicly outed that trump spoke with.

        Your framing is off. It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s true that it was already known. The FBI investigation of Russian interference began before the election, not after. The investigation was being publicized before the election.

        If you want to nurse a conspiracy theory about it, whatever. But you’re going to appear ignorant when you advance a conspiracy theory without doing the bare minimum of research into the known facts. You’re just creating a fictional narrative based on your “suspicions.” You’re not being “real.” You’re being ignorant.

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I called it a conspiracy theory because it’s really just based purely off of observation and gut instinct and not facts. Good to know my gut instinct happened to be right though!

          • bobo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Your takeaway from my reply is that your instinct was correct? You’re going to make a great conspiracy theorist.

            • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Meh my “conspiracy theories” just aren’t exciting enough because they tend to be too grounded in things that are actually likely in the real world and explaining weirdness in what is presented to the public with a guess as to what happened behind the scenes, like that the sonic movie was a joke pitch that somehow got greenlit so then they had to actually make the movie and to try to make it decent