Both the FBI and the CIA have concluded Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election with the intention of helping Donald Trump win.
Our “Political Insiders” are divided down partisan lines whether Russia’s intervention had any effect on the outcome.
Only 25% of the Republicans on our panel said Russia’s interference helped shape the outcome, while 95% of the Democrats who responded said it changed who won the race. A slight majority of our readers (52%) said the Russian hacking had an effect.
Selected anonymous comments:
“Just more fake news from the completely unreliable and untrustworthy mainstream media. Almost everything is Yellow Journalism these days, and we can’t trust them to get it right. It’s sad when the “fourth branch of government” is less trustworthy than the other three.”
“If the Democrats had won and there was even a hint of undue influence (or even just a made up story), Republicans would be screaming from the rooftops, Chaffetz would be holding hearings for years, and the whole election would be invalidated. Since it is on the Republican side, the only thing we can expect is a little bit of feigned indignation and mostly crickets. Republicans have no moral high ground anymore with their liar/sexist/cheating clown-in-chief at the helm.”
“At the very least we must look at it seriously enough to thoroughly investigate in a bi-partisan manner.”
“The magnitude is likely impossible to gauge, and intent is even harder.”
“The fact that the Russians apparently hacked into records of both the Republicans and Democrats – but released only those of the Democrats suggests that they certainly tried to influence the election, and I believe they probably did.”
“I have no idea, but that is precisely why a thorough, non-partisan investigation needs to be conducted to determine if it did nor did not!”
“No. Democrats can’t have it both ways. Either Hillary won by 3 million popular votes or Russians helped Trump win — which means she would not have by 3 million votes. The CIA has no proof, and their reasoning would not pass the indictment test in a court of law. Democrats can’t accept the electoral system and that many people thought she was a horrible candidate, horrible human being and part of the problem.”
“The daily releases of hacked DNC emails dominated the news cycle even though nothing of great substance was revealed. It also amplified the private email server narrative even though the two are unrelated. Was it THE determining factor? No, but it was a factor.”
“It absolutely had an impact. Did the hacking cause Hillary to lose? I don’t think it was the only reason she lost.”
“Russians did to the US elections just as they have done to other countries over the years since the Cold War–our politicians in the 50s and 60s recognized this pattern–unfortunately, few of the current politicians have the historical background even to recognize this pattern.”
“If your news source keeps attempting to influence electors by giving this fairy tale wings, you’re listening to #fakenews.”
“It is telling that the Russians hacked the RNC as well, and has not released those. Sounds like blackmail to me.”
“I think the Russians wanted to damage Hillary but figured she would win. They likely have her private server emails that would have made great blackmail fodder had she become president.”
“Hillary Clinton was an awful candidate and ran a bad campaign. I don’t think that Russian hacking changed the outcome of the election. I do think that Russia hacked and messed with our democratic processes and that should not be a partisan issue. There should be a full, thorough and public investigation into the Russian hacking activities and Republicans and Democrats should unite in this effort.”
“The American voter may be dumb, but we are not stupid.”
“Of course it did. It fed directly into the myth that Clinton’s email server was a security issue. State department servers were constantly compromised (by the same Russian groups), but that information was not leaked because it didn’t support the GOP narrative.”
“Yes, the constant news coverage about each latest batch of Podesta emails certainly impacted enough voters to make an impact. It wasn’t the only thing that had an impact (e.g. Comey’s letters, Hillary’s email server, and Trump’s p***y grabbing comments), but anyone who argues they didn’t have “an effect” is simply selling snake oil.”
“Too early to tell what happened and the impact might never be measurable.”
“Russia did hack into these sites, but whether the anti-Clinton stuff led to her defeat is unknown, and likely unknowable.”
“They tried, but I don’t think they actually affected the election at all.”
“By being complicit in only providing Hillary’s e-mails to Wiki Leaks, and nothing on Trump, and releasing them to do maximum damage thus adversely affecting her momentum, they indirectly but definitely did have some influence in the outcome.”
“There is no doubt the info that was released hurt Hillary Clinton. That being said she has no one but herself and her team to blame. There should be a full investigation into the hacking and those parties responsible should be held accountable.”
“We all saw tricky Trump ask the Russians to intervene. That alone should be enough to disqualify this traitor from holding office. For the FBI to play a part in this is truly traitorous. Comey and tricky Trump should be tried for treason.”
“It’s like blaming an illegal wire-tap for John Gotti bribing a government official. While the wire tap may be illegal–it in no way makes Gotti innocent of bribery. While a court of law does not condone or permit the use of illegally obtained information at a criminal trail; it does not bar the information’s use in the court of public opinion. It likewise does not (and should not) shield a crooked official from the voters’ wrath at the next election. The illegal hack did not write the emails; the hack only shed light on lies & dirty tricks government & party officials had done and were concealing from the public.”
“Another lame excuse by the left.”
