The Russians meddled in our system. We can't regain power by making THAT the argument

[Ken Burch]

for voting Democratic.

It happened. We need to talk about it, as we need to talk of many other issues. It needs to be investigated.

But the simple truth is that people who didn't vote for us in the past(or didn't VOTE in the past) will not start voting for us if we make the assertion that the Russians meddled our CENTRAL case for why they should vote for us.

It's not dismissive of the Russian question simply to point that out.

It simply reflects the fact that most voters will never see Russian meddling as the most important issue in American politics.

[kcr]

1. You're right. Much better to pretend it didn't happen.

[JHan]

3. this is sort of like the argument..

that voters don't care... now who benefits from that meme?

[kcr]

4. Yeppers.

It's pretty obvious.

[Ken Burch]

6. Our chances of winning benefit from recognizing it.

It's enough to just say it should be investigated.

[JHan]

9. Yeahhh I still don't get it.

No dems are campaigning on russia alone so all i have for you is an "eh?" = *Insert shruggie meme*

Also Dems can't win it seems: If they don't talk about Russia enough or don't froth at the mouth about impeachment it means Dems are giving Donald a pass.

if Dems talk about russia it means Dems talking about russia too much and "politicizing" it and ignoring "bread and butter" issues, despite evidence to the contrary.

ergo, both positions = bullshit spin.

[Ken Burch]

13. I agree with you that Russia meddled.

But why center it when the voters don't and when centering it can't beat the Right?

BTW, I AM a Dem...don't ever imply that I'm talking about the party as an outsider.

[JHan]

14. I've already answered your questions though.

As a Dem it's especially strange you think Russia is the only thing Democratic Reps are talking about - again I have to question whether you and I are living in the same reality?

[Ken Burch]

17. Out there in real life Dems are talking about domestic issues-the only issues that can gain us votes

It's in here where it's sometimes "Russia!, Russia! Russia!" 24-7 that the problem is.

[JHan]

20. Then maybe you're tired hearing it on the news, in that case I'd recommend,

in case you haven't already...focus on what your rep is doing.

Many Americans are concerned about what happened in 2016, and they should be but I've seen no "centering" on Russia by Democrats in the main. Some reps like Maxine Waters have consistently brought attention to the seriousness of it ( from since January this year to her credit) I haven't heard her constituents complain. Schiff and others involved in congressional investigations, understandably talk quite a bit about it. Further, Dems are uniquely challenged by a chaotic administration and have to fight battles on many many fronts. And they need our support.

I must say I find your arguments a tad strange.

[MrsCoffee]

23. Well goodness, its a good thing you are out there in real life knowing the only issues that can

gain us votes. The rest of us have been trapped inside this pretend world of DU 24-7 and rely on people like you who promote the idea that Russia is a distraction or unimportant to tell us what really matters. And always in such a humble, benevolent fashion.

Thank you for your service.

[Ken Burch]

25. I'm not saying "Russia is a distraction" I've said it isn't MORE important

than everything else under the sun.

Why should we make it a major issue on the campaign issue when it can't sway votes our way? It's not going to turn nonvoters into voters or swing votes from other parties to us.

[MrsCoffee]

26. Lol.

[NurseJackie]

50. LOL! Nobody is doing that.

Why should we make it a major issue on the campaign issue when it can't sway votes our way

Nobody is doing that!

I've said it isn't MORE important
than everything else under the sun.

Then why would anyone glom on to this and behave as if it is?

All I'm saying is that if someone says one thing then does another thing entirely opposite, then it's difficult to take them seriously. I think we can all agree on that.

[brer cat]

72. Is there some evidence you can cite

that elections are won or lost by what is or is not discussed on DU? If not, then I think this is much ado about nothing. If you don't want to read about Russia, there is an ignore feature you can utilize to remove them from your sight.

[Ken Burch]

76. Interesting that you'd state that elections are NOT won or lost based on what's posted on DU.

That means that you're admitting that threads in the fall of '16 calling on the Clinton-Kaine campaign to change strategy and tactics and were posted out of a sincere desire to help the party win were not in any sense to blame for the Red Hat Putsch, and that threads supporting Bernie in the primaries weren't to blame for it either.

I haven't said NEVER discuss Russia's role-my point was simply that threads accusing progressive Dems of being dupes of Putin don't help is in '18 or '20, and that ascribing Trump solely to Russia doesn't help us beat him(or whoever they nominate to succeed him after he keels over from one two many "two Big Macs, two Filet-of-Fish, chocolate milkshake" mid-morning snacks) in 2020.

The Putin meddling should NEVER be used as an excuse to shut down debate over the party's future. We NEED open, respectful discussion and a willingness to try new things-new tactics and strategies were what led us to a comeback THIS november, and I salute Tom Perez for his openness on that.

[brer cat]

81. Since I have never claimed that DU had any power over national elections

I don't get the point of your comment. And you are moving the goal posts again which is a waste of my time.

Have a nice evening.

[NurseJackie]

83. Discouraging anyone from talking about it is a way to blame ONLY Hillary...

... for our party's loss last year (as if it was a perfectly normal election and to push the myth that "Hillary lost it fair and square'').

[JHan]

84. +++++++++

[betsuni]

85. +1

[NurseJackie]

86. "Who benefits from that meme?" Easy! Anyone who wants people to falsely believe...

... that it was Hillary's message and the Democratic Party's platform that was "flawed" or "undesirable".

"Who benefits?" Anyone who wants to push the myth that Hillary was the "wrong choice" and the party "could have done better". Anyone who wants to argue that "identity politics" and social equality and human rights and women's rights and lgbt rights are losing issues.

It's becoming a regular and predictable bullshit meme that's being used to "lay blame" and to try and convince Democrats that the party that it should have embraced some "other" ideas and philosophy. It's a vanity-laced, after-the-fact, history-rewriting and fact-ignoring bullshit meme that's being used to make the argument that the only way to "save" the "rejected" Democratic party is for the party to become something that it's not.

Look, here's the thing... it just makes me sad (and angry) that some people put their own pride and vanity above unity and success. All I'm saying is that in the end, it serves no good purpose for anyone to try and "rewrite" history.

I think that reasonable and mature and patriotic Americans can agree on that, can't we?

[Ken Burch]

5. It's not as though the only options are to totally center it OR ignore it.

I'm just saying that leading with it can't gain us votes.

[kcr]

7. Anyone can say anything they want. It doesn't become fact. Point out who's running with it.

Who's claiming that should be the main focus of the Dem platform and deciding to run based on that. Name names, Ken Burch.

[Ken Burch]

15. That's what the endless threads going on about Putin are about.

Putin meddled. It's just that, since it's impossible to get THIS Congress to investigate it, we can't do much more about it until we flip at least one house of Congress in the midterms. What I'm saying is, win the midterms the only way we can, by leading on domestic issues, and THEN investigate.

(btw...it's not acceptable to demand that anyone "name names" here-that would be "call outs" and those are forbidden on this board).

[kcr]

18. Politicians are public figures, so not forbidden. Nice try.

And yeah. It's pretty obvious that the "endless threads about Putin" make you uncomfortable. But hey, you're admitting it now. Baby steps.

[MrsCoffee]

24. Well said.

[Ken Burch]

28. Threads about Putin are a waste of time.

They don't "make me uncomfortable"-you've got no call to insinuate that I'm a Russian apologist-it's that they achieve nothing, just as the Cold War was useless and pointless.

I despise Putin and have always made that clear.

[kcr]

29. But of course you're free to insinuate that others on DU have a motive for their Putin threads

Naturally.

[NurseJackie]

52. Thank you for speaking the truth!

It's good to hear "out loud" what everyone is politely thinking privately to themselves.

[CanSocDem]

57. It's not just the "Putin threads".

And admitting that I 'have no dog in this fight', it is still tiring to see much of DU going on about how everything will be better if Trump is impeached for treason, immorality or corruption, whatever the outrage of the day.

My advice is like the OP- forget about or acknowledge that Russia reads your mail and concentrate on the issues that 'should'
be important to every American.


.

[JHan]

2. It's potentially the biggest scandal in Presidential History..

( in fact it already is)

even if some people in the midwest don't give a fuck.

And I am not aware of any Dem campaigning on Russia alone.

So I don't get your post.

[Ken Burch]

10. And it's enough that calls for investigation have been made.

I'm not saying don't talk about it...press it in Congress, obviously-but it's futile to make it a major campaign issue because most voters don't center it. It's more important to lead with fighting cuts in social spending, attacks on reproductive choice, incresed social repression and police violence, environmental deregulation, and increased economic inequality.

Those are what get people to the polls.

After 2018, THEN we can investigate.

[JHan]

11. I must be living in some weird universe when I've heard quite a bit of Democrats

talking about issues other than Russia.

[Demsrule86]

46. It is a campaign issue...huge.

[Demsrule86]

49. You know who besides you and some others I have seen here want to turn the page?

The Republicans. They too want to concentrate on 'other issues'.

[pnwmom]

8. How about: Trump and Pence and their enablers are traitors for conspiring with an enemy.

Traitor Trump and Traitor Pence.

Works for me.

And it's just silly to pretend that the Democrats in 2016 didn't give people STRONG reasons to vote for them, on economic issues, civil rights, environmental issues and more. Hillary won 2.7 million more votes and the Dems in Congress won more votes -- because voters preferred them and their policies.

The problem was that, because of a slave-era relic -- the Electoral College -- the Presidential votes of Democrats don't count as much as those of Republicans. And because of gerrymandering the House votes of Democrats don't count as much.

[Ken Burch]

12. Did you read my OP? I wasn't talking about that campaign.

I'm talking strictly about the post-election focus on Putin's role. We can't get it investigated before the midterms, and only a focus on domestic issues can gain us votes in the midterms.

I'm saying that most voters don't center Russian meddling as an issue. We can't take over Congress and start passing progressive bills by centering Russia on the campaign trail.

Win the midterms on domestic issues(the ONLY issues that bring out the voters) and THEN start the investigation.

[delisen]

19. Are you thinking that Putin's interference has ended?

and there is no interference happening in 2018 election cycle?

It is embarrassing and depressing that there were people on the left who unknowingly supported and distributed Russian propaganda and"fake news" but It needs to be addressed because there is no indication it has ended.

We need to be warning voters. One reason it was effective in 2016 was because the facts were withheld from us.

[Ken Burch]

22. It's a thin line between "warning" and saying "Trump is ALL because of Russia".

Are we going to get to a place in this party where ANY dissent from the approach of the party insiders is labeled "Russian propaganda"? Is the next thing going to be a claim that the Sanders campaign was a Kremlin "black-ops" operation?

How far will this be taken and is it going to end up with a blacklist or something?

As to 2018, I'd say the best weapon against Russian involvement is a passionate enthusiasm-based campaign for change that builds a lead in the polls too big to be meddled with...a campaign that mobilizes all who've been shafted by Trump by offering policies that help them.

[delisen]

37. Who might say Sanders campaign was Kremlin-"black ops" operation?"

Think you are going over the top here unless you have some indication that campaign was infiltrated.

[Ken Burch]

39. Obviously I was using hyperbole there.

But since we've had accusations that "the progressive wing of the Democratic Party" are a bunch of Putin dupes, it's only a matter of time until that insinuation starts being made.

[NurseJackie]

82. So, it's not hyperbole after all, is it? If it's "only a matter of time" (as you say)...

...it's only a matter of time until that insinuation starts being made.

So, it's not hyperbole after all, is it? If it's "only a matter of time" (as you say), then it's more like a veiled accusation. It's a way of telling someone "Hey! I expect the worst out of you." or saying "I don't trust you."

All I'm saying is that I don't think that's very helpful, or conducive to creating an atmosphere of mutual respect and trust.

[JI7]

16. we had a Virginia Governor's election where they discussed many issues. same with other elections.

there is nobody who is making russia the only issue .

but it is important that it needs to be discussed and dealt with.

and it affects other strategy with their spreading of lies .

[Ken Burch]

21. Among other things, it should not be used to discredit dissenting Democratic voices-

No one in this party should be accused of being a "dupe" simply because they don't fall in line exactly with what our party leadership wants.

Russia helped put Trump into power, but it isn't playing a role in internal Democratic politics, it isn't the cause of any calls for primary challenges or policy changes, and no Democratic progressives deserve to be white, dark blue and red-stripe baited.

Disagreement and discussion is JUST disagreement and discussion.

[JI7]

27. it does play a role when people try to downplay or deny Russia's involvement in the election

[Ken Burch]

32. It's not downplaying Putin to reject the idea that HRC was certain to win if he hadn't been there.

Look, I WANTED her to win in November. But what good does it do for the future to insist that the result was solely "Putin, Comey, vote suppression"

Those all played some role, but we can't put together a winning campaign for the future if we refuse to acknowledge that the party (not the candidate-she did the best she could) could have done some things better and should do things at least somewhat differently I the future?

Those who've questioned the absolute decisiveness of the Russian factor do so, in general, because it's worrisome that there seems to be this insistence that we can ONLY confront that factor by denying any shortcomings at all in our efforts; and, seemingly, by rejecting any calls to change anything internally or by labelling any critique and any suggestions for the future as disloyalty to our part and a personal attack on our most recent nominee and the earliest supporters of that last nominee.

Would you be willing to agree that it's possible to acknowledge Russia having some role WITHOUT using that to silence any and all discussion of where we as a party should go from here? That it doesn't have to be "either/or"?

[JI7]

35. You are always downplaying it just as this thread is doing

[Ken Burch]

41. No. I acknowledged that it played a role.

Why do I have to buy into the claim that it mattered more than anything else in order to prove I'm not "downplaying".'

It was a factor.

No presidential race is ever decided by one thing.

[Demsrule86]

47. And there it is...I will oppose anyone who primaries a sitting Democrat in the age of

Trump period....and my ban is lifelong against this individual our group (like our revolution) as it shows poor judgement...no money and no help...and I vote against anyone they endorse in any primary...of course since our revolution is supporting Republicans (one out in Jersey I hear), I can vote against their Republican candidates in the general as well. If Nina Turner or one of this group is on any news program, I turn it off. They are dead to me.

[David__77]

62. I suppose youll be opposing Tulsi Gabbards primary opponent.

...

[Demsrule86]

70. I don't like Tulsi...but there should be no primaries this year ...not with Trump so yes I am

opposed to a primary opponent for any Democrat...we have nothing...save the money for taking out the GOP ...not each other.

[David__77]

73. I can understand that position.

I’m in general agreement that resources and attention should be focused on defeating the president and the Republican Party.

[Demsrule86]

74. Yeah, we have no power whatsoever... I can live with Tulsi...but not f'ing GOP types.

[betsuni]

30. Another "Democrats have no argument besides (fill in the blank)."

Democrats have no argument besides "Trump is bad."
Democrats have no argument besides "The Russians meddled in our system."
Democrats don't stand for anything.
Democrats have no clear convictions/compromise/triangulate.
Democrats don't talk about jobs/don't care about the middle/working class.
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Never one single example of a Democrat ever actually doing this.

[Ken Burch]

36. I AM a Democrat. Don't talk to me like I'm not.

And I've never said we had NO argument besides those things, nor have I been a "both parties are the same" type.

What I've said was that the choice was made not to make the arguments we could have made by emphasizing what was in our platforms, rather than focusing mainly on running to stop the other party.

And I have offered examples of that...the examples being most of the fall presidential campaigns we've run since 1980, with the exception of Obama's campaigns...the only campaigns since 1980 where we ran by trying to win the argument.

What do you want me to do? Pretend that most of those campaigns were progressive or effective?

[betsuni]

54. Oh, Ken.

How would Carter have focused "mainly on running to stop the other party" in 1980? Running against another party is only effective when the other party has been in power for years. As usual, I have no idea what you're going on about.

Loved the "I AM a Democrat. Don't talk to me like I'm not." I like it when you take charge like that, very exciting.

Also, loved your comment to me after making assumption after assumption about DUers being centrists and obsessed with Hillary Clinton, that "You're making a lot of assumptions about me, from what I can guess." Too funny! You edited it out, good call. Again, just a reminder, we can all see what you post here.

[NCTraveler]

31. One of your more transparent ones.

This feels like a serious step back. It felt like you were upping your game for a little bit.

If you are not willing to keep up in the slightest, yet want to discuss as if you know what’s going on, debate is impossible. Please put in the minimal effort of reading the news.

[Ken Burch]

33. I don't have a game or a hidden agenda.

n/t.

[NCTraveler]

34. Thats a bold statement considering facts in evidence.

You really just trashed yourself with that comment. If true.... ouch. Sorry.

[Ken Burch]

38. I have no hidden agenda and you know it.

There are no "facts in evidence" supporting the insinuation that I'm playing games here. OR that I'm some sort of troublemaker or disruptor.

I campaigned for the ticket and respect SoS Clinton(I've repeatedly said she should be on the Supreme Court, which is as much proof as anyone can offer that I don't hate her).

I said a few harsh things in the primaries, ALL of which I apologized for-none of which made any difference in the final result. Not sure which of those you don't feel I've put to rest as yet.

I agree with you or virtually every issue-I simply supported a different primary candidate. Doing so was not a crime.

I have nothing to do with JPR, Jill Stein AND Putin, and have repeatedly demonstrated that fact.

I've frequently expressed admiration for Kamala Harris in recent months as I've learned more about here and would be happy to see her nominated.

All I've called for since the election is dialog, unity and a common program that by strongly supports all justice struggles. I've done so without disrespecting anyone or refighting anything.

And I've repeatedly called on Bernie not to run for president again, so you don't even have that as an issue with me.

You have no reason to treat me as a suspicious character, an illegitimate voice on this site, or an enemy of the Democratic Party,

Either SAY what you're accusing me of, and offer something close to proof, or give it a rest.

I truly don't know why you get like this with me, because I've treated you with nothing but respect as long as we've excanged posts.

[NurseJackie]

53. Who was it that thought she should have WAITED about eight our twelve years to write her book?

Oh. My. God! "EIGHT TO TWELVE YEARS" ... YEARS!!!

All I'm saying is that anyone who might say something like that isn't showing much respect or support.

I've frequently expressed admiration for Kamala Harris in recent months as I've learned more about here and would be happy to see her nominated.

Yeah. Right. Uh-huh. Don't try to pretend that all that other stuff didn't happen.

[OilemFirchen]

60. I'm gonna side with you here, Ken.

Your agenda is definitely not hidden.

[NurseJackie]

78. ###

[boston bean]

40. The biggest conspiracy of criminal families including foreign crime families

Working together to elect a russian crime family assest to the presidency and you don’t think it matters to people.

Damn. That is strange.

[Ken Burch]

43. I didn't say it didn't matter to anyone, and I didn't say don't talk about it.

I said it isn't the single biggest concern among the voters.

And we can't elect a Democratic congress by centering it as an issue.

It should be part of a constellation of issues.

[boston bean]

45. Speak for yourself.

[Demsrule86]

42. It is dismissive actually. You want 2016 to mean something that it just doesn't...it was an anomoly

and is unlikely to be repeated...the left left green thing is worth discussing because twice in 20 years they knowingly helped elected horrible Republicans...Bush II and Trump.

[Ken Burch]

44. No...I'm talking about the future here.

And this thread is about Russia-not "the left left Green thing".

What I'm saying is let's center the midterm campaign on domestic issues.

We can't win the midterms by saying "Russia gave us Trump".

As to the Greens...I spent the fall of '16 campaigning for our ticket against Stein. I don't need lectures about how voting Stein was the wrong choice. All I've said on that is it's a waste of time to keep going on about Stein since she isn't going to be shamed into stopping.

Basically, my argument is that we should focus on factors WE can control.

[Demsrule86]

48. You must discuss that a candidate sought Russian help to influence an American election.

And Trump promised them something too...it is huge and consider he hasn't signed the Russian sanctions. It is the biggest issue of our lifetime...and a million times worse than Nixon.

[alarimer]

51. What we need is for Facebook and Twitter to own up to their place in fake news.

They (especially Facebook) need to police the things on their site. False information needs to be deleted; they need to act like the media company they actually are.

I don't think people actually care that much about Russia. And there is zero evidence that their interference tipped the balance anywhere. We have our own issues to sort out, including voter suppression, which is much more likely to affect actual voters.

[Cary]

55. Why are you are always complaining about Democrats?

[Eliot Rosewater]

80. yep

[Farmer-Rick]

56. It kind of depends on how much meddling they did

Yeah, I hear corporate media say Putin's spies did everything they could, but were just too stupid to actually rig the vote count that the GOP figured out years ago and used in Ohio.

But if they rigged the count, then there are mostly imaginary voters for Trump. And tryin to court them to vote for Dems is impossible.

But as a wise man once said, "someone voted for Trump". So getting some of them along with some of the Green Party and Bernie voters would be all you need, cause Hillary did win the popular vote, if the Putin spies Did Not rig the vote count.

It will be simply a foolish effort if Putin did, and still can, rig the vote count.

[MineralMan]

58. Yes. It should never be mentioned. We should keep our silence.

Otherwise, it might have a deleterious impact on certain people we must not mention.

Well said, Ken. Well said.

[bettyellen]

59. We can't keep pretending it was all about economics, either.

[loyalsister]

61. But we can keep pretending that people don't exist if they didn't enjoy the Dem economic success?

A teacher friend mentioned that there is a tremendous amount of bigotry and spite directed towards poor people in her classes. I guess that's common.

[bettyellen]

64. Yeah, some places the poor are ALSO facing predjudice.

While women and POC are often impoverished because of predjudice. They get it twice as bad.

[loyalsister]

66. Which is why it is all important to consider

Poor people were abandoned by Democrats over 20 yrs ago. Poverty and inequality increased while our side bragged about low unemployment. The neoliberal embrace of the competetive economics that always leave people behind have failed us and no one has done anything to make it more tolerable. The reason people see both parties as similarly disdainful and dismissive is because neither has been willing to stand up and say that they have been wrong when they enacted policies that favored wealth people and put corporate growth ahead of the well being of individuals who need an income, be it from jobs that pay living wages or some government help.

[bettyellen]

87. Dems and Republicans- exactly the same, huh? That's delusional. But thanks for the meme.

[loyalsister]

88. Thanks foor the misrepresentation of my comment

"The reason people see both parties as similarly disdainful and dismissive is because neither has been willing to stand up and say that they have been wrong when they enacted policies that favored wealth people and put corporate growth ahead of the well being of individuals who need an income, be it from jobs that pay living wages or some government help."

Rejecting any attempt to understand people's perceptions is exactly the disdain and dismissal I pointed to. Nothing I said implies that I think both parties are the same. The fact that some people don't see themselves represented by either party is something we should care about.

[bettyellen]

89. Some people think things never happened because someone else told them for-

They also have these monolothic views because they missed people "standing up and saying" X ( so it must have never happened, and "they're all ____".
Screw that, it is not true. The GOP has had much more control- because voters are stupid. They think Dems could have waved a magic wand.

[loyalsister]

90. Yes it is by design

But, demeaning people hurt by those policies is not going to win any hearts or minds. Living in a bubble and writing off people who they have decided simply don't matter is for the GOP.

[uponit7771]

67. +1

[uponit7771]

68. FOR WHICH POLITICAL PARTY?!!?! Thx in advance

for dems Russia SHOULD be included if not highlight to some degree

For Reps they could care less

For the middle Russia .. IS ... an issue

[BoneyardDem]

63. sounds like you want to push this very important matter onto the trivial table

nope....the Republicans need to never forget, need to be reminded in the same manner they pushed the Benghazi crap. One day they will actually understand the magnitude of the Russian interference and aid given by Trump. And that understanding will never happen if anyone, ANYONE capitulates to the ignorant stupidity and those that will not see.

If people forget..and you know how short term the memories are for political outrages...Trump gets to implement all of the Russian aid, Sentors are currently disallowing. You want to give them permission to support STrumpet in removing sanctions agains Russia and withdraw from UN as is the wont of Putin? Good god!

[MikeydaDog]

65. I have not seen a single Democrat state Russian interference should be "THE" argument to get votes.

Ever. Anywhere.

It will also continue to effect elections and us getting votes if not addressed.

[LanternWaste]

69. You'll support your sentiment with objective evidence, yes?

You'll support your sentiment with objective evidence, yes?

Or is it now considered 'dismissive' to provide substantiation to one's many unsupported allegations?

It does however, beg the question: who precisely is suggesting the Democrats lead the next big voter drive predicated on stories of Russian interference (or is that premise too, simply another inaccurate inference?)?

[triron]

71. wtf! Are you still stuck on 'meddled'??

It was a treasonous coup not a fucking meddle!

[brooklynite]

75. Yes we can...by focusing on the issues that VOTERS (not pundits) care about...

The Russia story feeds a broader "I don't trust Government and politicians" feeling, but it is not the major issue that the voters we need to appeal to are focusing on. They care about job growth, salaries, healthcare, economics and education.

[delisen]

77. Russian/Trump takeover is going to be a Big Topic

It will be a dramatic story and it is going to wash over the country like a mass baptism. Not much we can do to stop it.

Russians figure they are here to stay-Trump or no Trump.

They intend to participate in 2018. They have come so close---they are not going to pack up their election hacking and propaganda tools and skedaddle away. If anything they are emboldened.

We'll be getting glimpse of their new improved toolkit soon-all we need to do is open wide our eyes.

[Ken Burch]

79. Which means we need to up our Internet security game.

n/t.