Why does this have a negative twist? Is it not a good thing that voters were more informed of the darker sides of the DNC and the Democratic party before voting?
>DCCC documents sent to Mr. Nevins analyzed specific Florida districts, showing how many people were dependable Democratic voters, how many were likely Democratic voters but needed a nudge, how many were frequent voters but not committed and how many were core Republican voters—the kind of data strategists use in planning ad buys and other tactics.
How exactly are these documents showing the "darker sides of the DNC"?
it was no longer a level playing field. I never expected that the DNC was full of angels but I also expect that the GOP is also hiding some dark secrets.
What if the DNC did some really not okay things? Nah, you're right, we shouldn't know about them because the DNC wouldn't want that...
Of course I wouldn't like you to have all my personal data. But the point of an election is for the people to make the most informed decision, not for me to feel good.
Having a geopolitical adversary strategically hack political parties in order to change the outcome of an election to suit their interests is a HUGE problem. By selectively disclosing information a hostile nation can change the political landscape in the target nation to weaken alliances, change security posture, change positions on treaties, and/or create general dysfunction.
This is not a case where the public is getting information about everyone, it's a case where an adversary is attempting to illegally manipulate public opinion to our detriment. The goal and the result is not the public making the most informed decision, it's the public making a decision based on incomplete information specifically disseminated to help a foreign agenda.
This can only be described as an attack on our democracy.
>> Having a geopolitical adversary strategically hack political parties in order to change the outcome of an election to suit their interests is a HUGE problem
So you were ok with Obama sending a few hundred thousand dollars to try and influence the Israeli elections to oust Netanyahu?
According to the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI), the State Department gave $349,276 in U.S. taxpayer-funded grants to a political group in Israel to build a campaign operation, which subsequently was used to try to influence Israelis to vote against conservative Benjamin Netanyahu in the March 2015 election for prime minister.
This is the definition of whataboutism. It wasn't okay when Russia did it, and it wasn't okay when Obama did it. Saying Obama did it doesn't make something okay?
Huh? I'm talking about illegal hacking by a hostile intelligence service interfering in our election. What you linked has nothing to do with any illegal activities, which is what the point of the whole thread is.
Even from the article you linked, it says that "OneVoice did not use State Department funds directly for political activities, or seek State Department grants in anticipation of the Israeli elections" but that it indirectly allowed that non-profit to campaign against Netanyahu. Not exactly the same kettle of fish.
Just the same I don't support our government trying to fund political campaigns against our allies either.
What informed decision do we learn from a member of a political party getting to frame the narrative about their opponent's secrets though? This isn't journalism, it was a smear campaign.
No you couldn't?? That's now how the American presidency works at all. We don't even have access to Trump's tax returns or other basic financial information and he isn't legally obligated to release them.
I didn't say there was a legal obligation. Clearly we are in agreement that Trump is in the wrong here. We can say Trump should release his tax returns without requiring them or any other citizen to do so.
How exactly are these documents showing the "darker sides of the DNC"?