Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.
I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.
I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.
Outta here...
I do not at all think
@Daisy misinterpreted what was being said. Words have implications (e.g., Democrat vs. Democratic). When a poster accuses someone of parroting troll farms, it is a reasonable interpretation for the recipient to infer, at an absolute minimum, that they are too stupid to vet their news; and at worst, that they are consequently a troll themselves.
In fact, it happened repeatedly when I first posted in the political Off-Topic threads a long time ago. I basically posted that I thought the Russia story was way overblown (i.e., based on on what Russia spent, and how many posts they made, it was a blip in the radar of social media, and thus we lacked evidence that it substantially affected the election). I also said that continually referencing RUSSIA to dismiss legitimate concerns is modern day Red Scare/McCarythyism:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/so-let's-speculate-about-the-future-of-a-full-trump-presidency/msg2333178/#msg2333178I was met with the usual from the folks on this forum -- dissecting my posts into fifteen pieces to effectivelly call me stupid, a bunch of socratic method questions that implied I really haven't thought this out, etc. On top of that, several basically accused me (and other posters doubting the Russia story) of being trolls themselves:
Imagine the disruption to this forum if even 50 coordinated trolls showed up.
*** Next Post ***
If JLee? :(
Noticeable difference in Off-Topic since... maybe 2-3 months ago?
THEY ARE ALREADY HERE!
*** Next Post ***
Yep, they are here.
I know the mods had to deal with them on an anti-vax thread or two already.
Of course, Sol had to dial it up to 11, completely misrepresenting everything I was saying to claim "Russia was innocent" (something I never came remotely close to saying):
Just as an example, there are precisely TWO posters in this thread who are saying "Russia is innocent! Russia did nothing wrong!" They are a tiny fraction of the the total users, or the total posts, but their voices absolutely have an impact. You're bringing people around to the opinion that Russia wants us to have, with your tiny fraction of our total posts, because you're not throwing out random posts but rather targeting a specific discussion about Russian interference, to people who are reading along because they want to learn about it and form an opinion, and you are giving them one that Russia supports but the United States intelligence services do not. The total number of posts on the forum does not matter, in determining how much impact you can have for your few hours of typing away from Moscow. You have absolutely swayed this discussion, literally with just two accounts, to exonerate the Russians for their interference in the US election, in less than 48 hours. You may have already convinced hundreds of US citizens, lurking in this thread, that Russia is innocent. See how easy it is, when you target your messaging?
Take it over and over, and while not being directly called a Russian operative, the substance of my posts was being dismissed because RUSSIA. Of course.
So I don't think Daisy's interpretation was wrong at all. Daisy was effectively being called a dumbass, of not checking her information carefully enough, of not cross-referencing Russia troll farm social media posts, and hey, if the troll farms are parroting this, it must be false, or it must not be a big deal, or even if it is a big deal, RUSSIA wants us to be mad about it, so don't worry about it, it's fine.
What nonsense. This was the lead story in NYT, WaPo, Politico, The Atlantic, etc. And Pod Save America did an entire podcast on it that I listened to on my walk this morning.
***
You know what IS funny? The usual liberal posters in this thread, who act as if they are the most well informed of anyone who's ever lived, are just parroting the Democratic Party talking points. Look at AOC, Bernie, etc. -- "Hey, the Iowa thing is being overblown, calm down, let's wait for results, it's not a big deal."
They have done all the Google searches and read all the articles to justify their position, and when you disagree with that -- citing WaPo, NYT, The New Yorker -- out come the links and the pitchforks.
The dismissal of any disagreement is just modern day McCarthyism. The far left (is that a slur too?) loves it because it helps them ignore what's in front of their face -- Trump is going to win in 2020 because they can't shut the hell up about Russia/impeachment.