On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 7:50:02 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:10:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


I confess to being a little torn on this. Not sure how I feel.

For the sake of argument, I'll stipulate that Russia was responsible
for hacking into the DNC email accounts and Hillary's campaign manager's
account. Let's agree that the hacked emails were then made available to
Wikileaks, as most claim.

For a while some Hillary supporters were suggesting that not only were
the emails hacked but Russia also changed some of the wording in them to
make matters worse for Hillary. Those claims died though after copies
of the original emails were found on Anthony Weiner's laptop that he
shared with his wife.

So, what really caused Hillary to lose the election? I am certainly not
advocating Russian hacking of personal emails but the act of hacking
isn't what caused her to lose. It was the content of the emails that
caused her to lose.

I don't even believe that. The electorate was so split, a little dirty
dealing by the Clinton folks was not likely to have changes anyone's
opinion. Everyone was already well aware that she was not trustworthy
and the ones willing to vote for her did not care. Biden summed it up
best. She just ignored the working class in flyover country and
preached to the choir on the coasts. Even when she stumped here, she
went to Miami/FtL and Orlando.
as for the hack
I still say, only a Clinton could call the truth "disruptive" and
"manipulation". How can the same people who cheer Snowden and
Ellsberg, condemn leaking the truth about the DNC? (whoever did it,
there is still a suspicion that some of it came from Bernie folks)

Whoever did it did the job the media should have (wouldn't?) do. They exposed Hillary's perjury and corruption.

Say, isn't there a lady democrat AG in PA getting ready to go to jail for far less than Hillary's crimes? The difference is Kane was bucking the system. Hillary *is* (or was!) the system. The good people of the US are tired of it.