News Was the U.S. election hacked for Trump? - GoFuckYourself.com

videosc · 11-09-2016, 10:05 AM

So let's say you have the ability to hack U.S. election results but of course you don't want to get caught. Would your best strategy be to run up huge numbers for whoever you wanted to win or would you purposely keep the results very close in certain "swing" states so as not to raise suspicion about a possible hacking? I mean, if almost every poll showed one person was set to win by 3 to 5 points and they lost by 10 or 20 points that would be suspicious, right? Most people would think something fishy was going on. But if the winning margin fell around the polls margin of error most people would just assume it was because of the supposedly "divided" electorate, accept the results and move on with their lives.

Now let's say the candidate who would benefit from the hacking knew about it in advance. In order to make sure no one suspected them, would a clever and quite frankly brilliant idea be to constantly claim the system is rigged in your opponents favor in the weeks leading up to the election, resulting in the media and almost everyone dismissing these claims as "un-American", "crazy" and a "threat to our democracy"? That way when you do win because of the hacking if anyone raised these conspiracy theories they would be the ones who look crazy and un-American.

I pose these questions because of a very interesting video I saw this week with Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic, who as some of you may know, famously predicted a Trump win in the summer of 2015. That was a fascinating article and its worth searching for, as is his latest video interview. In that video he talks about how relatively easy it would be to rig or hack a U.S. election. He poses the question that if you were a poll worker and Hitler was one of the candidates, would you do whatever you could to keep him out of power? Adams suggests that if enough Clinton voters thought Trump was Hitler it was reasonable to believe that certain people who had the ability to effect the election results might do something because they were convinced it was the "right" thing to do, stopping Hitler.

From looking at the election results and how close they were, plus the fact that every poll got it wrong, I have to wonder if Adams had it wrong... that it was the Trump poll workers that hated Clinton so badly they decided to do what they could to swing the results towards their guy.

OK, some of you may be ready to fit me for a tin-foil hat and I'll accept that. I'm just throwing all this out for discussion. Something about the election results just feels wrong. Was it individual right-wing poll workers in deep red counties doing what they thought was best for the country? Was it Russian hackers? Or was this a legit election after all? I guess we may never really know for sure.

crockett · 11-09-2016, 10:10 AM

Lets not go jumping on conspiracy bandwagon... Hillary was a horrible choice by the DNC and wasn't supported by the people of the Democrat party. She was the insider's pick not the people's pick..

That's why she lost..

Trump was not the insider's pick and was supported by the people on the right. He was able to over come the insider's and that's why he won.

The election was the DNC's to lose and they failed to understand the people were tired of insider's picks. Obama was the first sign that people were not taking these establishment picks. Obama did previously what Trump has now done. Both were candidate's supported by the people of their side vs establishment picks.

NatalieK · 11-09-2016, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

Lets not go jumping on conspiracy bandwagon... Hillary was a horrible choice by the DNC and wasn't supported by the people of the Democrat party. She was the insider's pick not the people's pick..

That's why she lost..

Trump was not the insider's pick and was supported by the people on the right. He was able to over come the insider's and that's why he won.

The election was the DNC's to lose and they failed to understand the people were tired of insider's picks. Obama was the first sign that people were not taking these establishment picks. Obama did previously what Trump has now done. Both were candidate's supported by the people of their side vs establishment picks.

This

I'd heard so many people say Trump was not of their choice, but Hillary was definitely not. It's a fair win for Donald, let's hope he can make a great country and bring peace to our planet.

If not, then 2020 comes soon enough

Bladewire · 11-09-2016, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

Lets not go jumping on conspiracy bandwagon... Hillary was a horrible choice by the DNC and wasn't supported by the people of the Democrat party. She was the insider's pick not the people's pick..

That's why she lost..

Trump was not the insider's pick and was supported by the people on the right. He was able to over come the insider's and that's why he won.

The election was the DNC's to lose and they failed to understand the people were tired of insider's picks. Obama was the first sign that people were not taking these establishment picks. Obama did previously what Trump has now done. Both were candidate's supported by the people of their side vs establishment picks.

Hillary has won the popular vote for the second time now, first time was against Obama.

OP it's entirely possible the election was hacked.

Also, Clinton was not only fighting her opponent, she was fighting rogue FBI agents & WikiLeaks/Russia & the Alt-right with their fake news as well, unprecedented. All this and she still won the popular vote.

scarlettcontent · 11-10-2016, 02:33 AM

bronco67 · 11-10-2016, 06:44 AM

They couldn't hack the election system itself. But hacking the DNC and fostering the trickle of Wikileaks didn't help Clinton at all.

So in a way, the Russians did hack our system.

Barry-xlovecam · 11-10-2016, 08:45 AM

You (America) got played

1962 LOL
I am sure Mr. Trump remembers this well

NewNick · 11-10-2016, 09:30 AM

I dont think the election was hacked, but it was certainly influenced very heavily by various dubious influences.

A) The conspiracy industry. This cabal of window lickers were firmly 100% behind 1 candidate. And considering that this gang is usually broadly libertarian and anti-establishment you would have thought that they would have more political nouse than to blindly back the arch-capitalist Billionaire. It seems Billionaire Trump is a hero, Billionaire Soros is the devil.

B) Julian Assange. Wikileaks used to be an honourable attempt to provide an outlet for the publishing of material which held companies and governments to account. What is it now ?

C) Vladimir Putin. Both of the above groups seemed to have backing from the Kremlin. Now I am sure that the US has regularly sought to influence the democratic process around the world and it is no surprise that governments wish to see election results that work in their favour. But Somehow Vlad has the conspiracy types into such a lather that they see their own leaders as corrupt crooked satan worshipping paedophiles, and poor old Mr Putin as the misunderstood kindly uncle.

You could not make this shit up.

C) The FBI. So Mr Comey wrote the infamous letter a few days before the election and Hillary's 10 point lead evaporated, only for him to then say there was no evidence of wrong doing. He could have read the emails first before blabbing - maybe he did. There has been considerable speculation that the FBI was getting even. Well they certainly did that.

So there you have it, an absolute pantomime of an election where the winner was able to slander, insult, and lie his way into power.

Rochard · 11-10-2016, 10:15 AM

I've been wondering myself if this has been hacked.... ALL of the polls gave Hillary a clear and large lead nearly the entire time during the election. Do you really meant to tell me that ALL of the polls had Hillary winning and suddenly Trump wins? LOL.

I surely am the last one to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon, but something isn't right here.

Relic · 11-10-2016, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewNick

they see their own leaders as corrupt crooked satan worshipping paedophiles

Bladewire · 11-10-2016, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

Lets not go jumping on conspiracy bandwagon... Hillary was a horrible choice by the DNC and wasn't supported by the people of the Democrat party. She was the insider's pick not the people's pick..

That's why she lost..

Trump was not the insider's pick and was supported by the people on the right. He was able to over come the insider's and that's why he won.

The election was the DNC's to lose and they failed to understand the people were tired of insider's picks. Obama was the first sign that people were not taking these establishment picks. Obama did previously what Trump has now done. Both were candidate's supported by the people of their side vs establishment picks.

Clinton had a 70% approval rating when she left as Secretary as state.

She lost because, unlike Trump who was only running against Clinton, she was running against Trump, Wikileaks, rogue FBI agents with fake "leaks" & the media (reporting on the email server every day for 1 1/2 years)

Trump had on his side wikileaks, rogue FBI, Comey & the media (billions in free press and no vetting until the last month)

All this & Clinton still won the popular vote.

It was trendy to say booth were awful choices but only one has no government experience, multiple open federal lawsuits, convictions for breaking the law for racial descrimination on his properties, xenophobic, etc. and he's now the president

Like I said before, well be fine either way. Trump was a Democrat for 20 years be for switching Republican 2 years ago ;) Putin will want to be a USA good boy for a while so as not to piss away the goodwill he paid for via corruption & theft, so that's a positive too.

Bladewire · 11-10-2016, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewNick

I dont think the election was hacked, but it was certainly influenced very heavily by various dubious influences.

A) The conspiracy industry. This cabal of window lickers were firmly 100% behind 1 candidate. And considering that this gang is usually broadly libertarian and anti-establishment you would have thought that they would have more political nouse than to blindly back the arch-capitalist Billionaire. It seems Billionaire Trump is a hero, Billionaire Soros is the devil.

B) Julian Assange. Wikileaks used to be an honourable attempt to provide an outlet for the publishing of material which held companies and governments to account. What is it now ?

C) Vladimir Putin. Both of the above groups seemed to have backing from the Kremlin. Now I am sure that the US has regularly sought to influence the democratic process around the world and it is no surprise that governments wish to see election results that work in their favour. But Somehow Vlad has the conspiracy types into such a lather that they see their own leaders as corrupt crooked satan worshipping paedophiles, and poor old Mr Putin as the misunderstood kindly uncle.

You could not make this shit up.

C) The FBI. So Mr Comey wrote the infamous letter a few days before the election and Hillary's 10 point lead evaporated, only for him to then say there was no evidence of wrong doing. He could have read the emails first before blabbing - maybe he did. There has been considerable speculation that the FBI was getting even. Well they certainly did that.

So there you have it, an absolute pantomime of an election where the winner was able to slander, insult, and lie his way into power.

Dam n I didn't see your post before I posted!

Very well said and spot on

PR_Glen · 11-10-2016, 11:27 AM

i don't see how the fbi would have a motive to sabotage clinton at all. having a lose canon like trump in office isn't something that helps them any. I am pretty sure they just felt obligated because it would seem shady if they withheld that information until after the election. It was pretty sloppy of them to not be clear that the emails were benign though until it was too late.

plaster · 11-10-2016, 11:40 AM

Love it how clinton crimes are the fault of rogue fbi. It's not clintons fault she used a private server to launder and funnel her bribe money then delete the emails when they were requested by Congress... nah, that's not hillary's fault at all.

NewNick · 11-10-2016, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PR_Glen

i don't see how the fbi would have a motive to sabotage clinton at all. having a lose canon like trump in office isn't something that helps them any. I am pretty sure they just felt obligated because it would seem shady if they withheld that information until after the election. It was pretty sloppy of them to not be clear that the emails were benign though until it was too late.

It would not have been left until after the election - they declared that they had been through the emails and found nothing (again) three days before the vote. Why did they not just do that without sending a bomb into the campaign of one side ?

Can you imagine what the FBI would find if they were given access to every piece of correspondence from Trumps office for the last 5 years ?

He has not even released his tax returns for fucks sake - I think that he was happy when everyone started to believe that it was because he did not pay any tax - I think their are deeper secrets for Donald.

Bladewire · 11-10-2016, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewNick

It would not have been left until after the election - they declared that they had been through the emails and found nothing (again) three days before the vote. Why did they not just do that without sending a bomb into the campaign of one side ?

Can you imagine what the FBI would find if they were given access to every piece of correspondence from Trumps office for the last 5 years ?

He has not even released his tax returns for fucks sake - I think that he was happy when everyone started to believe that it was because he did not pay any tax - I think their are deeper secrets for Donald.

Well the election is over and Clinton won the popular vote, Trump won the electoral college.

Now we get to sit back and watch Trump do his thing, and Trump supporters explain why he's doing what he's doing, and if he does something he said he's gonna do that they don't like, say they didn't know or thought he wasn't gonna do what he said, etc. etc.

11-09-2016, 10:05 AM	#1
videosc Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 375	Was the U.S. election hacked for Trump? So let's say you have the ability to hack U.S. election results but of course you don't want to get caught. Would your best strategy be to run up huge numbers for whoever you wanted to win or would you purposely keep the results very close in certain "swing" states so as not to raise suspicion about a possible hacking? I mean, if almost every poll showed one person was set to win by 3 to 5 points and they lost by 10 or 20 points that would be suspicious, right? Most people would think something fishy was going on. But if the winning margin fell around the polls margin of error most people would just assume it was because of the supposedly "divided" electorate, accept the results and move on with their lives. Now let's say the candidate who would benefit from the hacking knew about it in advance. In order to make sure no one suspected them, would a clever and quite frankly brilliant idea be to constantly claim the system is rigged in your opponents favor in the weeks leading up to the election, resulting in the media and almost everyone dismissing these claims as "un-American", "crazy" and a "threat to our democracy"? That way when you do win because of the hacking if anyone raised these conspiracy theories they would be the ones who look crazy and un-American. I pose these questions because of a very interesting video I saw this week with Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic, who as some of you may know, famously predicted a Trump win in the summer of 2015. That was a fascinating article and its worth searching for, as is his latest video interview. In that video he talks about how relatively easy it would be to rig or hack a U.S. election. He poses the question that if you were a poll worker and Hitler was one of the candidates, would you do whatever you could to keep him out of power? Adams suggests that if enough Clinton voters thought Trump was Hitler it was reasonable to believe that certain people who had the ability to effect the election results might do something because they were convinced it was the "right" thing to do, stopping Hitler. From looking at the election results and how close they were, plus the fact that every poll got it wrong, I have to wonder if Adams had it wrong... that it was the Trump poll workers that hated Clinton so badly they decided to do what they could to swing the results towards their guy. OK, some of you may be ready to fit me for a tin-foil hat and I'll accept that. I'm just throwing all this out for discussion. Something about the election results just feels wrong. Was it individual right-wing poll workers in deep red counties doing what they thought was best for the country? Was it Russian hackers? Or was this a legit election after all? I guess we may never really know for sure.

11-10-2016, 02:33 AM	#5
scarlettcontent www.scarlettcontent.net Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Pleiades Posts: 6,031	__________________ Scarlett Content - Adult Content Provider - High Quality Adult Stock Content for your Websites, Mobile Media and Print. Over 3 Million Images (14,000 photo sets) over 5000 Videos - Many Niches, US-2257, Awesome Prices. Over 40 years in the adult industry. [email protected] Follow us on twitter.

11-10-2016, 06:44 AM	#6
bronco67 Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 29,035	They couldn't hack the election system itself. But hacking the DNC and fostering the trickle of Wikileaks didn't help Clinton at all. So in a way, the Russians did hack our system. __________________

11-10-2016, 09:30 AM	#8
NewNick Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 7,033	I dont think the election was hacked, but it was certainly influenced very heavily by various dubious influences. A) The conspiracy industry. This cabal of window lickers were firmly 100% behind 1 candidate. And considering that this gang is usually broadly libertarian and anti-establishment you would have thought that they would have more political nouse than to blindly back the arch-capitalist Billionaire. It seems Billionaire Trump is a hero, Billionaire Soros is the devil. B) Julian Assange. Wikileaks used to be an honourable attempt to provide an outlet for the publishing of material which held companies and governments to account. What is it now ? C) Vladimir Putin. Both of the above groups seemed to have backing from the Kremlin. Now I am sure that the US has regularly sought to influence the democratic process around the world and it is no surprise that governments wish to see election results that work in their favour. But Somehow Vlad has the conspiracy types into such a lather that they see their own leaders as corrupt crooked satan worshipping paedophiles, and poor old Mr Putin as the misunderstood kindly uncle. You could not make this shit up. C) The FBI. So Mr Comey wrote the infamous letter a few days before the election and Hillary's 10 point lead evaporated, only for him to then say there was no evidence of wrong doing. He could have read the emails first before blabbing - maybe he did. There has been considerable speculation that the FBI was getting even. Well they certainly did that. So there you have it, an absolute pantomime of an election where the winner was able to slander, insult, and lie his way into power. __________________ "Americas Hitler" JD Vance. “There isn’t really an upside to Trump.” Tucker Carlson. “a convicted felon rapist is now your president” OneHungLow, gfy.com

11-10-2016, 10:15 AM	#9
Rochard Jägermeister Test Pilot Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NORCAL Posts: 72,794	I've been wondering myself if this has been hacked.... ALL of the polls gave Hillary a clear and large lead nearly the entire time during the election. Do you really meant to tell me that ALL of the polls had Hillary winning and suddenly Trump wins? LOL. I surely am the last one to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon, but something isn't right here. __________________ “The choice is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal and crazy.” - Sarah Huckabee Sanders YNOT MAIL \| THE BEST ADULT MAILING SOLUTION

11-09-2016, 10:10 AM	#2
crockett in a van by the river Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 76,806	Lets not go jumping on conspiracy bandwagon... Hillary was a horrible choice by the DNC and wasn't supported by the people of the Democrat party. She was the insider's pick not the people's pick.. That's why she lost.. Trump was not the insider's pick and was supported by the people on the right. He was able to over come the insider's and that's why he won. The election was the DNC's to lose and they failed to understand the people were tired of insider's picks. Obama was the first sign that people were not taking these establishment picks. Obama did previously what Trump has now done. Both were candidate's supported by the people of their side vs establishment picks.

11-10-2016, 08:45 AM	#7
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	You (America) got played 1962 LOL I am sure Mr. Trump remembers this well

11-10-2016, 11:27 AM	#13
PR_Glen Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 9,058	i don't see how the fbi would have a motive to sabotage clinton at all. having a lose canon like trump in office isn't something that helps them any. I am pretty sure they just felt obligated because it would seem shady if they withheld that information until after the election. It was pretty sloppy of them to not be clear that the emails were benign though until it was too late. __________________ webmaster at pimproll dot com

11-10-2016, 11:40 AM	#14
plaster So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 2,295	Love it how clinton crimes are the fault of rogue fbi. It's not clintons fault she used a private server to launder and funnel her bribe money then delete the emails when they were requested by Congress... nah, that's not hillary's fault at all.