How much did Russian hacking affect congressional races?

[KingOrfeo]

Inquiring minds want to know.

On Dec. 13 The New York Times published an article that laid out how the hacked material was used in various House races. At first the hackers just released a lot of personal information, which was used by hostile individuals to harass and threaten the candidates. Then the hacks and dumps by the person or group known as Guccifer 2.0 became more sophisticated and targeted certain close races, releasing politically valuable tactical information:

The seats that Guccifer 2.0 targeted in the document dumps were hardly random: They were some of the most competitive House races in the country. In [Annette] Taddeo’s district [in Florida], the House seat is held by a Republican, even though the district leans Democratic and Mrs. Clinton won it this year by a large majority.

To prepare for the race, the D.C.C.C. had done candid evaluations of the two candidates vying in the primary for the nomination. Those inside documents, bluntly describing each candidate’s weaknesses, are considered routine research inside political campaigns. But suddenly they were being aired in public.

Taddeo lost her primary race to another Democrat named Joe Garcia who used the hacked material against her. And then this happened:

After Mr. Garcia defeated Ms. Taddeo in the primary using the material unearthed in the hacking, the National Republican Campaign Committee and a second Republican group with ties to the House speaker, Paul Ryan, turned to the hacked material to attack him.

In Florida, Guccifer 2.0’s most important partner was an obscure political website run by an anonymous blogger called HelloFLA!, run by a former Florida legislative aide turned Republican lobbyist. The blogger sent direct messages via Twitter to Guccifer 2.0 asking for copies of any additional Florida documents.

By September, the hacker had released documents in close House races in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, Illinois and North Carolina, working with Republican bloggers who disseminated the information for them. They also posted information on Rep. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair, even though he was effectively running unopposed.

Both Luján and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wrote letters to Ryan asking him not to use the material and received no response. His spokeswoman told the Times that Ryan had no control over how the stolen information was used. Nonetheless, there were some Republicans who refused to do so, saying it was inappropriate. They were rare.

I don’t think anyone believes it’s likely that Paul Ryan personally colluded with the Russians in this operation. The fact that many Republicans, some affiliated with the National Republican Congressional Committee and a group closely affiliated with Ryan, eagerly used it to win their campaigns is not surprising. But it is highly unlikely that Republican strategists or party officials with strong knowledge of the House campaigns didn’t collude with the hackers at some point, because it’s difficult to believe that Russians would have which House races to target without some help from people with expertise concerning the 2016 map.

Republican congressional leaders must be thanking their lucky stars daily that the Trump administration is such a scandal-ridden Dumpster fire. If things ever calm down in the White House, somebody might just turn his or her attention to the question of what Paul Ryan knew and when.

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

I'd say minimal. Hillary missed out on over 6 million black people that she assumed would vote for her like they voted for Obama. I remember asking a black tenant of mine why he voted for Obama. His reply:

"I wanted to see a black man as president."

When I asked him if that was all; did he like any of his policies, etc. He replied that he had no idea what his policies were and furthermore, did not care. That's why Hillary didn't get those votes. A little more surprisingly is that she didn't get as many votes from women that she was expecting. I'd have to go with the hypothesis that she was so unlikeable that women were like, "I'd like to see a woman for President...but not that bitch."

 

[Rightguide]

There is no "evidence" of any effect on the election of Russian hacking. This is the lie the DNC had to establish before they could point to casual meetings with Russians by Trump associates as a subversive activity worthy of "investigating."

The real subversion may be the links between Obama and the Russians, between the Democrats and the Russians. It was Obama who offered to collude with the Russians:

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

This was Obama suggesting a unilateral cut in American nuclear weapons, not a quid pro quo requiring a Russian reciprocation.

 

[KingOrfeo]

There is no "evidence" of any effect on the election of Russian hacking.

But there is evidence of the hacking, and you know it was done for a reason.

How did we get to the point where Russia backs the GOP?!

The real subversion may be the links between Obama and the Russians, between the Democrats and the Russians. It was Obama who offered to collude with the Russians:

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

This was Obama suggesting a unilateral cut in American nuclear weapons, not a quid pro quo requiring a Russian reciprocation.

So what? He was going to do what he was going to do regardless of whether the Russians had been previously advised about it.

 

[Rightguide]

But there is evidence of the hacking, and you know it was done for a reason.

How did we get to the point where Russia backs the GOP?!

There's zero evidence of a link between Russia and Wikileaks. The Russians and most foreign government are hacking ua every friggin day as we do them.

Thats the whole point of the silent coup being conducted by the Democrats, that Trump and the GOP is in bed with the Russians. Which is a lie.

So what? He was going to do what he was going to do regardless of whether the Russians had been previously advised about it.

So, he intended it to be a private message of unilateral acquiescence.

So then why did he see fit to pass that along to Putin in private? He didn't know the mike was live.

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

The Russians and most foreign government are hacking ua every friggin day as we do them.

It's obvious that the GOP doesn't care, and is willing to lose that war.

 

[BotanyBoy]

But there is evidence of the hacking, and you know it was done for a reason.

To expose Clinton and the DNC for what they are.

How did we get to the point where Russia backs the GOP?!

The Russians are also sick of the US plutocracy.

It's obvious that the GOP doesn't care, and is willing to lose that war.

GOP doesn't care because that war is one of idiots.

If you don't want your information hacked, don't digitize it and leave it exposed like the Democrats.

 

[Porkwarrior]

What will cook most Blue voters noodle is that it probably wasn't Russians that hacked the DNC email server. The annoying part for me that's pretty much ignored is that Hillary was using a private server because then it's not subject to FOI requests.

Hillary, is, was, and always will be, a giant steaming pile of shit whose only life ambition is to rob your country blind.

Whether it was Russians or a teenager from Ohio that exposed her shit is irrelevant.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Thats the whole point of the silent coup . . .

There's nothing silent about this.

So, he intended it to be a private message of unilateral acquiescence.

So what?

 

[Rightguide]

There's nothing silent about this.



So what?

Obviously your bias keeps you from putting it together. Probably ought to go back to law school, but forget the correspondence school.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Obviously your bias keeps you from putting it together.

Putting what together? There's nothing improper about a POTUS communicating with a foreign head of state.

 

[Rightguide]

Putting what together? There's nothing improper about a POTUS communicating with a foreign head of state.

Communicating his acquiescence to unilateral nuclear disarmament. Their warheads now exceed ours. Obama actions with Iran opened up Russian trade with Iran. Obama's lack of actions in the Middle East allowed Russia to dominate the battlespace. Obama and Hillary's actions transferred 20% of American Uranium to Russia, Schumer meets with Putin in NY in 2003. We need a detailed federal investigation of Democrat connections with the Russian government.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Communicating his acquiescence to unilateral nuclear disarmament.

So what? The Russians would have found out anyway when he announced it publicly.