• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

WaPo: What [Podesta's] hacked emails really tell us about American politics

Status
Not open for further replies.

pigeon

Banned
Since nobody made an all-encompassing thread about the Wikileaks emails, I thought I'd make one myself.

wapo said:
Though the words “Clinton emails” are sure to cause quickening pulses, the latest emails to come to light — these ones hacked from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s account — contain nothing scandalous, no doubt to the chagrin of most Republicans.

They do, however, provide a valuable reminder of something important about Washington. It’s this: conspiracies are seldom true, and even the savviest operatives often aren’t sure what they’re doing....

Some of the interest in these emails will be just gossipy — Chelsea Clinton and a guy from the Clinton Foundation were backstabbing each other! — but what do they actually reveal? Well, there’s a lot of back-and-forth between Clinton’s political advisers on how different issues should be handled. For instance, when she decided to come out against the Keystone XL pipeline, how should it be done? Should she write an op-ed? Just leak it to one reporter? Something else? Everyone has an opinion but nobody knows for sure.

It takes a mighty effort to turn this into something sinister. But some are trying, though....

What’s most revealing is how their indecision and uncertainty about matters like these shows that when it comes to politics, even supposedly shrewd professionals are often just casting about in the dark. These are some of the most experienced operatives in American politics, and they don’t seem to know more than anybody else....

But most of the time, everybody’s improvising, and even the smartest and most experienced operatives screw up. The best email in this batch is one from an experienced admaker, who goes on a stream-of-consciousness riff suggesting themes for Clinton’s upcoming campaign (all typos in original):

Neither change nor continuity.but The different way. The new way. HRC declares the old way of building partisanships flying the special interest flags. Is the root cause of America becoming the Status Quo. Nation where we as a nation are weak and a victim of change. No when we are our best. We are a nation of doers and dreamers. Builders and architects of the future we do not predict or fall victim of the future. We create the future. She champions with clear vision and grit. We will build not the partisans ships. But rather the Ship of State flying the American Dream flag

Have you ever looked at your hand — I mean really looked at your hand?

The irony is that if there’s anything that sort of resembles a conspiracy at work at the moment — and we don’t know if there is or not — it’s not from Clinton’s side, and it’s a bumbling one. Russia (possibly) hacks the emails, passes them on to Wikileaks, who publishes them to Republicans’ glee, but when nothing really damaging is there, Donald Trump is left to spend time at rallies quoting from altered versions of one email, falsely attributing lines from a Newsweek article to the sinister Sidney Blumenthal — a misconception he apparently got from either a Russian propaganda site called Sputnik News, or perhaps some alt-right chatroom denizen. Very few Americans know or care who Sidney Blumenthal is, but Trump’s ardent supporters do, and know to boo and hiss at the mention of his name as though he were Haman in the Purim story. This will not, I can boldly predict, transform the presidential race. And again, we don’t know whether this is happening, and even if it is, it seems more haphazard than conspiratorial.

Just to be clear, I’m not arguing that Podesta’s emails aren’t newsworthy. It’s always interesting to know what people are saying behind the scenes. The same is true of what we learned from Podesta’s emails about Clinton’s speeches to Wall Street firms — which, again, were somewhat interesting though not nearly as scandalous as Republicans, and even some on the left, had hoped. But whenever someone tells you that there’s a complex and wide-reaching conspiracy at work, one with multiple moving parts synchronizing to manipulate events while keeping itself hidden from public view, you should be very skeptical.

tl;dr THERE'S NOTHING THERE, VEEP IS A DOCUMENTARY

The biggest story coming out of all the hacks of the Democrats and the Clinton campaign is: she's basically honest and progressive. She isn't engaged in any shady business. She is the person she's presented herself to be for the last forty years -- a steady, cautious mainstream Democrat who believes the things she does will advance or protect equality and human rights as effectively as she can.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...out-american-politics/?utm_term=.6e809e044286
 

Nonoriri

If your name is Nonoriri you have to go buy Nanami's tampons.
If only the world were as interesting as conspiracy theorists would have me believe.
 

Jag

Member
I don't even know which wiki leaks emails are true and what's fake at this point. I know there is a Podesta email floating around that says Hillary hates Americans and Trumps pigs are touting that as proof that she hates America.
 
while I've never agreed that Clinton is OMG HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER like some folks pretend she is, I can't help but think...

progressive
pigeon said:
a steady, cautious mainstream Democrat

loweredexpectations.jpg


which is pretty much what the constant rightward economic drift of American politics leads to
 

Toxi

Banned
I should note that at this point, it's not just the FBI that implicated Russia in recent hacks like the DNC. The Cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike that investigated the DNC breach came to the same conclusion.
 
I should note that at this point, it's not just the FBI that implicated Russia in recent hacks like the DNC. The Cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike that investigated the DNC breach came to the same conclusion.

Yeah but Glenn Greenwald told me there's no real evidence to this and how can you trust the US government after Iraq.
 

pigeon

Banned
I don't even know which wiki leaks emails are true and what's fake at this point. I know there is a Podesta email floating around that says Hillary hates Americans and Trumps pigs are touting that as proof that she hates America.

I'm on my phone right now, but I saw this email and will share it later.

Hillary hates the phrase "everyday Americans." Doesn't want to use it in speeches. Podesta was probably on a phone and didn't put in quotes, but the context is pretty clear if you read it.
 
I don't even know which wiki leaks emails are true and what's fake at this point. I know there is a Podesta email floating around that says Hillary hates Americans and Trumps pigs are touting that as proof that she hates America.

That's part of the problem. At this point, there are so many hacks, which by their nature are illegal, that I wouldn't doubt there to be fabricated 'hacks' at this point or in the future. Someone(s) is clearly hacking with a specific agenda to damage Hillary, and they aren't going to get in any more trouble for mixing in a little bit of lies with the truth. I think it is especially likely soon given how unfruitful the recent hacks have been.
 
I don't even know which wiki leaks emails are true and what's fake at this point. I know there is a Podesta email floating around that says Hillary hates Americans and Trumps pigs are touting that as proof that she hates America.

She hates the term "everyday americans"
 
while I've never agreed that Clinton is OMG HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER like some folks pretend she is, I can't help but think...



loweredexpectations.jpg


which is pretty much what the constant rightward economic drift of American politics leads to

The most left-leaning candidate in the history of the US.... but yeah, fuck her
 

NCR Redslayer

NeoGAF's Vegeta
while I've never agreed that Clinton is OMG HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER like some folks pretend she is, I can't help but think...



loweredexpectations.jpg


which is pretty much what the constant rightward economic drift of American politics leads to
This is America, where politicians lie in a congressional style. Wether or not those lies are serious is up to debate.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
lol, anything that keeps you Clinton folks from realizing you're supporting a monster I guess

y'all must never get tired of tripping over yourselves to find something to excuse her being a career political criminal huh

Did you even read the article because it seems like you came in here to make some snarky baseless comment instead of adding anything of value. Maybe you should take your own advice and stop tripping over yourself to sound smarter and more in the "know" than you really are.
 
The biggest story coming out of all the hacks of the Democrats and the Clinton campaign is: she's basically honest and progressive. She isn't engaged in any shady business. She is the person she's presented herself to be for the last forty years -- a steady, cautious mainstream Democrat who believes the things she does will advance or protect equality and human rights as effectively as she can.
I kind of feel like Clinton saved the world by doing so well in that first debate.

DC092616-1000.jpg
 
I don't even know which wiki leaks emails are true and what's fake at this point. I know there is a Podesta email floating around that says Hillary hates Americans and Trumps pigs are touting that as proof that she hates America.

Hillary hates the term "every day Americans"

But the Trumps are omitting the "term" part and trying to pretend she hates every day Americans.
 

Oppo

Member
i always accuse conspiracy theorists of being involved in a massive conspiracy

it's like checkmate
 
The way I see it, I'm not supporting a monster because I'm not exactly thrilled with her. I'm stopping a monster from gaining the power he so desperately craves.
 

Cyan

Banned
Deleted low-effort troll derail. This is a potentially interesting subject, let's see if we can actually talk about it.
 

Jag

Member
I'm on my phone right now, but I saw this email and will share it later.

Hillary hates the phrase "everyday Americans." Doesn't want to use it in speeches. Podesta was probably on a phone and didn't put in quotes, but the context is pretty clear if you read it.

Thanks guys. That makes more sense. I didn't think Podesta would actually say this which is why I thought it was fake. I can't wait for this national nightmare to end.

I really started to get into this wiki leaks stuff today when I read the Twitter War between the Clinton camp and Wiki leaks.
 

jWILL253

Banned
This election has definitely been a boon for conspiracy types on both sides of the isle. I had to stop talking about politics with this one Bernie Bro/Stein supporter cat on my Facebook who think's Hillary is a demon. Dude thought he had the matrix figured out and thought everyone who disagreed with him are idiots.

Funny thing is, I feel like the main reason why no one really fucks with Bernie or Stein is because of their supporters. Trump's crowd was already deplorable, but it's crazy how far even self-proclaimed liberals go off the rails, insulting folks who don't see eye-to-eye all the while. Maybe if they weren't going around citing every WikiLeaks article and telling Blacks to know what's good for them and shit, Bernie might have had a better time.

This is why I think social media is a mistake sometimes. Every conspiracy theorist with a Twitter or Facebook has a platform to influence the otherwise uninformed masses. Every outlet now is basically mandated to report on every little thing that comes out about, regardless of whether or not what they're reporting on has any validity or merits an article. And this, in turn, colors the outside view of the current era of politics and colors the politicians better or worse than they actually are. Trump is the only politician who's reports on him are basically 1:1 with reality.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Someone check on Goodman. I am sure he is salivating over these e-mails.

Also, DONNA BRAZILE LEAKED SECRETIVE BERNIE TWEETSTORM TO CLINTON CAMP!!

Lawd.
 
Go away. We like our fiction and conspiracies. If everyone really knew we had fuckin monkeys running the country, more qualified people would actually run. Who wants that?
 
So money in politics isn't sinister, its welfare for Washington's idiots?

He's probably just a very vivid visual thinker rather than an auditory/lingual one.

I sometimes have to remind myself when working with artists that there's a reason they can do so many things I can't, and it probably has something to do with things I can do that they can't.
 

AlphaDump

Gold Member
It tells me that Russian hackers can specifically target Hillary Clinton and the DNC and no one bats a fucking eye about why Russians are helping Republicans try to win the election. After all the brow beating about classified information, and respecting email servers, we are now tripping over ourselves about information being tactically spoon fed to the media by Russian backed hackers who want to undermine our democracy.

And we even have current examples of the exact same methods use on other countries, that are now occupied by Russia.

The threat is the most real and explicit is has ever been, and since it helps Republicans, no one cares. But democrats, oh man - for shame!

it's all bullshit.
 
What do you expect? A real socialist?

there's a space for policy positions between cautious, mainstream Democratic candidates, and real socialists. Coincidentally, one of them ran earlier in the year, some ran in 2008, they are in power in numerous countries throughout the world, etc. There are also others in numerous US third parties, and have been throughout history. Often, these more "extreme" positions from third parties also end up being co-opted by the mainstream parties. So there's a lot of ground to cover between your average mainstream 2016 Democrat and Karl Marx.

And sure, while we're discussing for funsies, having a real socialist on a major party ticket would actually make for a more interesting political debate than "ideologically pro-corporate but well-meaning with some decent regulations here and there and relatively progressive on social issues but still leaves a ton of people hurting" vs. "ideologically pro-corporate and hates vaginas and brown people and leaves a ton of people hurting while twirling their mustache"

I can certain respect the former position, and I certainly would prefer that the former was considered our "right-wing". I just wonder why people feel so defensive when their relatively moderate stance (again, not just limiting myself to the right-leaning window of American politics post-Reagan) aren't seen as very progressive by others.

Of course, on some level, I guess this is all quibbling over definitions, so whatever. After all, you can pick out single issues here and there and make someone out to be more progressive than they probably are in their overall viewpoint. But I think overall, I find it hard to make a convincing case that being "cautious and mainstream major party Democratic candidate" in 2016 is equivalent to "progressive".

I also just really wanted an excuse to post that Mad TV pic.

The most left-leaning candidate in the history of the US.... but yeah, fuck her

This seems obviously false with even just a cursory glance at US political history. Unless we're limiting things specifically to "mainstream party general election presidential candidates in the post-Reagan era" or something.

Also, certainly one can be saddened by the limited window of political viewpoints in modern US politics without having to say "fuck her"?

To clarify some more, my issue is not actually with Clinton herself. Obviously I disagree with her ideologically, but I don't think she's some evil harpy or whatever other absurd caricature is made of her. What I'm taking issue with is people who seem to willingly limit the spectrum of what's possible to whatever a mainstream party candidate or platform is proposing, when there's no actual need to do so. Same thing with Obama. He means well, and on issues here and there he ventures into "progressive" waters when it's safe to do so. But he's still basically ideologically pro-corporate/pro-empire/etc. But because he wants to raise taxes a few percentage points on rich people and doesn't hate gay people, that's supposed to make him some awesome progressive voice?

I understand why Clinton, Obama, and so many others are cautious, mainstream Democrats. What I don't understand is why people feel the strong urge to make cautious, mainstream Democrats out to be some grand progressive voice. If you're a cautious mainstream Democrat, then just own that and embrace your moderate to center-left leanings!
 
I understand why Clinton, Obama, and so many others are cautious, mainstream Democrats. What I don't understand is why people feel the strong urge to make cautious, mainstream Democrats out to be some grand progressive voice. If you're a cautious mainstream Democrat, then just own that and embrace your moderate to center-left leanings!

It's simple. To the majority of Americans, center-left ideology is actually almost radical-left. This is because the GOP has shifted the "center" way into the right over the past years.

The left-right spectrum is relative.
 
Blumenthal is a very Jewish sounding name. Like Rothschild. I'm sure that's gotta sound very suspicious to your typical Trump supporter.
 

reckless

Member

Fuchsdh

Member
If only the world were as interesting as conspiracy theorists would have me believe.

This is what gets me about conspiracies; they require the government, shadowy organizations, et al to somehow be evil and hyper competent to pull these things off, and yet sloppy enough to leave traces so people can piece together the entire conspiracy. You can't have both, guys.
 
It's simple. To the majority of Americans, center-left ideology is actually almost radical-left. This is because the GOP has shifted the "center" way into the right over the past years.

The left-right spectrum is relative.

Agreed, which was my entire point in the first post :p
 
Why is the author attributing Hillary's style of management to the rest of the American politicians?

I think the point is that politics is messy on the inside and these emails are far more typical than people know. That was Hillary's whole point of public / private position.

For example; a public position would be "I think we should have Medicare for all to make sure everyone has quality healthcare," while a private position might be either more nuanced, or you leverage different things privately "Medicare for all would improve Democratic approval ratings, making it easier for us to get reelected, therefore you should vote for it." It's not contradictory, but it's not something you necessarily want to tell the public.
 

Link

The Autumn Wind
It's really annoying how the press has decided that they're just going to make this a scandal, when even the emails they are showing are a bunch of nothing. Not one of them has bothered to explain why these are anything bad.

EDIT - Not talking about this WaPo article, obviously.
 
It's really annoying how the press has decided that they're just going to make this a scandal, when even the emails they are showing are a bunch of nothing. Not one of them has bothered to explain why these are anything bad.

Almost makes you think Trump should win if this the best our media can do.
 
Hillary hates the term "every day Americans"

But the Trumps are omitting the "term" part and trying to pretend she hates every day Americans.
It's so insane to interpret it otherwise. Like, you first have to entertain the idea that Hillary Clinton — whatever her flaws, whatever policies you disagree with, however she sucks — secretly hates the people of the country whose highest office she is trying to attain.

It requires insane priors to believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom