# Assume that Trump colluded with Russia **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 2, 2018, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060 "2018-02-02T20:16:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/81 "2018-02-06T23:04:45Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > So you believe that all Americans should vote, and that their votes count? Yes, I would prefer that all Americans vote, and that their votes should count. Getting there from here is something that won’t start until people admit the system as it is now could use some improvement. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/82 "2018-02-06T23:20:21Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > In my opinion Gore was very relevant to the 2000 Presidential race and its outcome. Not sure how you managed to think he’s some kind of non sequitur. But there’s no reason to be talking about the 2000 election. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/83 "2018-02-06T23:25:00Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > But there’s no reason to be talking about the 2000 election. The don’t talk about it. Me, I do have reasons to talk about it when discussing elections where there are irregularities. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/84 "2018-02-07T00:31:33Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > It’s been widely reported that the NSA spies on Americans. I read about it in the newspapers and remember stuff from even months back! Good for you. Me, I go back decades. They were substantially shackled after Ed Snowden revealed the particular activities I think you’re talking about, but that goes back a lot more than months. > [@](#): > > They seem to claim to believe it. As I pointed out one convincing evidence that they actually believe would be acting as if they believed - things like obtaining access to the servers that were supposedly _hacked_, or examining the voting machines that were supposedly _rigged_. > > As has been pointed out, they are unlikely to find the hard evidence they need if they don’t look for it. But those who have a vested interest in Trump’s being accused seem willing to skip this step and go straight to shrieking about ‘treason’. > > Yes, I am looking for what is the purported ‘all of this collusion’ is supposed to actually entail, not just some vague handwaving. It doesn’t appear the ‘hacking’ and ‘rigging’ narratives have been taken seriously and are being walked back to some financial shenanigans. Once again, how do you know what they’ve done, haven’t done, or will do? > [@](#): > > If you really want to cite the absence of evidence as a compelling argument to believe your story, I’m not sure that will work as well with me as it might for others. That’s rich coming from someone claiming the absence of evidence himself. I didn’t. I said YOU DON’T KNOW. You’ve got nothing but vague, unsupported accusations. Are we clear now? > [@](#): > > Where can I read this dossier you seem to believe Putin handed off to Trump? Strawman city. I never mentioned any dossier being handed off to Trump. I talked about a dossier detailed in the Steele memos. Have you read them? > [@](#): > > It _does_ seem to be quicksand - you can’t tell me what the secret agents know so we have to take their word for it. > > Some people who may or not have been Russian nationals wrote mean things about Clinton on FaceBook - that’s ‘proof’ of collusion? > > This _is_ taking longer than we thought! You clearly haven’t read the Steele dossier nor the Simpson testimonies. There are detailed 15 or 20 Russians in Steele’s dossier alone, all with provable links to Trump, Don Jr., Jared, Ivanka, Flynn, and Page at least, and many of those links tie to Putin. (I don’t recall anything being mentioned about Eric, but I wouldn’t put it past him.) You may live in enough of a fantasy world that you can run around parroting “No collusion!” but I don’t buy it. I don’t claim to have proof, but I can read the signs, as you seem to be unable or unwilling to do. Regardless, you’re also parroting the Republican talking point. There must be no collusion because nothing was found, yet the investigation continues and a handful of people know what it’s turned up to this point, let alone what it will turn up. Sorry, you don’t get a preemptive “You don’t know” when you claim there isn’t collusion as if you know. And, plain and simply, you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/85 "2018-02-07T01:02:53Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > Good for you. Me, I go back decades. They were substantially shackled after Ed Snowden revealed the particular activities I think you’re talking about, but that goes back a lot more than months. Since it took one Snowden to reveal the extent of the domestic spying officials lied about… > [@](#): > > Director of National Intelligence James Clapper now has a fifth reason for why he lied to the US Congress over the NSA’s spying program: he just plain forgot it existed… > > [James Clapper has found another reason why he lied about NSA spying • The Register](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/07/reason_clapper_lied_about_nsa_spying/) It might be wise to wait for the next whistleblower before making an emotional commitment to these guys. > [@](#): > > Once again, how do you know what they’ve done, haven’t done, or will do? Nobody knows what they’ve done, are doing, or will do. And they have a track record of lying about it when anyone tries to hold them accountable. But it’s hardly satisfactory (to my way of thinking) to say they have _secret evidence_ and we should just take their word for it. > [@](#): > > That’s rich coming from someone claiming the absence of evidence himself. I didn’t. I said YOU DON’T KNOW. You’ve got nothing but vague, unsupported accusations. Are we clear now? Yes, we don’t know. Because of the absence of evidence. Just like no one knows about the unicorn in your garage. > [@](#): > > Strawman city. I never mentioned any dossier being handed off to Trump. I talked about a dossier detailed in the Steele memos. Have you read them? So Steele claims there was a Russian dossier on Clinton, and that is the ‘evidence’ there was such a thing? > [@](#): > > You clearly haven’t read the Steele dossier nor the Simpson testimonies. There are detailed 15 or 20 Russians in Steele’s dossier alone, all with provable links to Trump, Don Jr., Jared, Ivanka, Flynn, and Page at least, and many of those links tie to Putin. (I don’t recall anything being mentioned about Eric, but I wouldn’t put it past him.) This kind of game is also played as ‘Six Degrees of Separation of Kevin Bacon’. > [@](#): > > You may live in enough of a fantasy world that you can run around parroting “No collusion!” but I don’t buy it. It would be a fantasy if I were lecturing people on the internet that I should accept some vague claims about Putin based on the flimsiest of ‘evidence’. What I am doping is rejecting fantasies until some persuasive evidence rears its head, and not rumors about ‘secret evidence’ we can’t be shown. > [@](#): > > I don’t claim to have proof, but I can read the signs, as you seem to be unable or unwilling to do. OK, no proof. Your interpretation of _signs_ and _omens_ isn’t as compelling as you seem to wish it was. > [@](#): > > Regardless, you’re also parroting the Republican talking point. There must be no collusion because nothing was found, yet the investigation continues and a handful of people know what it’s turned up to this point, let alone what it will turn up. It’s neither here nor there with me what some Republicans might say - I’m not ideologically befuddled enough to start denying the sky is blue just because a bad guy also says so. > [@](#): > > Sorry, you don’t get a preemptive “You don’t know” when you claim there isn’t collusion as if you know. And, plain and simply, you don’t. The fact is, you don’t know either. But since the _positive claim_ is apparently ‘all this collusion with Russia to rig the election to get a Putin puppet in the White House’ the burden of proof is not mine. It’s your conspiracy theory. It might be wise to soft peddle it until you can claim to have some proof. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/86 "2018-02-07T01:54:23Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > The don’t talk about it. > > Me, I do have reasons to talk about it when discussing elections where there are irregularities. Every election has irregularities because they’re run by humans. Nothing that special about 2000 except it was put in the spotlight. The irregularities of a hanging chad is not remotely comparable to an organised plot by a foreign power to hack and disperse party emails coupled with a disinformation campaign. So no, you don’t have reasons. Not good ones anyway. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/87 "2018-02-07T02:37:44Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Every election has irregularities because they’re run by humans. Nothing that special about 2000 except it was put in the spotlight. The irregularities of a hanging chad is not remotely comparable to an organised plot by a foreign power to hack and disperse party emails coupled with a disinformation campaign. > > So no, you don’t have reasons. Not good ones anyway. You’re free to not talk about it if you choose. But when discussing manipulated/hacked/rigged elections 2000 deserves to be on the list. We’ve known for a long time our system is open to hacking/rigging/manipulating, and if it’s true The Russians finally arrived to take advantage of our collective failure to protect and strengthen our democratic institutions maybe it’s time some thought was given to doing something about it. If you imagine the 6 million votes ‘lost’ in 2000 (according to the study cited above) are no big deal and unworthy of mention, then I can only say that’s six million Americans who were robbed of their rights and it is a big deal for me. In my opinion robbing Americans of their votes is a crime that should have been addressed a long time before 2016. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/88 "2018-02-07T02:47:34Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > You’re free to not talk about it if you choose. > > But when discussing manipulated/hacked/rigged elections 2000 deserves to be on the list. > > We’ve known for a long time our system is open to hacking/rigging/manipulating Not overly so. It’s not like there’s a big computer sitting there waiting to be hacked. Individual voting machines can be hacked but they have to be done in person, because they aren’t hooked up to the internet, and you have to get around a security seal for each machine. Further, the national vote is completely decentralized being a state run thing. Many states still use pen and paper. So you are free to distract from the topic of the thread with hanging chad talk but it is a distraction – utterly unconnected. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/89 "2018-02-07T03:00:57Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Not overly so. It’s not like there’s a big computer sitting there waiting to be hacked. Individual voting machines can be hacked but they have to be done in person, because they aren’t hooked up to the internet, and you have to get around a security seal for each machine. Further, the national vote is completely decentralized being a state run thing. Many states still use pen and paper. > > So you are free to distract from the topic of the thread with hanging chad talk but it is a distraction – utterly unconnected. You’re free to ignore my on-point observations if they inconvenience your narrative. But if what you’re now saying is true, then it would appear the story about The Russians ‘hacking’ or ‘rigging’ the recent election in favor of Trump _must_ be hogwash since it is not ‘overly’ susceptible to such unsavory manipulations. Though, as I pointed out, six million Americans being robbed of their votes in 2000 would appear to be a problem for anyone who even pays lip service to the notion of democracy. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/90 "2018-02-07T06:27:55Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > Since it took one Snowden to reveal the extent of the domestic spying officials lied about… Therefore there must be more, right? And specifically related to this case. > [@](#): > > It might be wise to wait for the next whistleblower before making an emotional commitment to these guys. You’ve done nothing but question the evidence, and provided none yourself. Hmm…what group of politicians do I know of that do that? > [@](#): > > Nobody knows what they’ve done, are doing, or will do. And they have a track record of lying about it when anyone tries to hold them accountable. > > But it’s hardly satisfactory (to my way of thinking) to say they have _secret evidence_ and we should just take their word for it. > > Yes, we don’t know. Because of the absence of evidence. > > Just like no one knows about the unicorn in your garage. Dammit, you’re gonna get me on an endangered species rap! Thanks, I’ll take the word of an established and respected intelligence agent over yours any day of the week, even if it is humint, because the _fact_ is that some of it is already known to have been corroborated. > [@](#): > > So Steele claims there was a Russian dossier on Clinton, and that is the ‘evidence’ there was such a thing? Steele’s sources do. And it’s corroborated by other sources. > [@](#): > > This kind of game is also played as ‘Six Degrees of Separation of Kevin Bacon’. As opposed to Deny, deny, deny, and then say it doesn’t matter anyway? > [@](#): > > It would be a fantasy if I were lecturing people on the internet that I should accept some vague claims about Putin based on the flimsiest of ‘evidence’. > > What I am doping is rejecting fantasies until some persuasive evidence rears its head, and not rumors about ‘secret evidence’ we can’t be shown. > OK, no proof. > > Your interpretation of _signs_ and _omens_ isn’t as compelling as you seem to wish it was. It’s a helluva lot more substantial than yours. > [@](#): > > It’s neither here nor there with me what some Republicans might say - I’m not ideologically befuddled enough to start denying the sky is blue just because a bad guy also says so. > The fact is, you don’t know either. > > But since the _positive claim_ is apparently ‘all this collusion with Russia to rig the election to get a Putin puppet in the White House’ the burden of proof is not mine. You’re arguing the negative, something you can never prove, but since you’ve provided no actual facts, you’re not even doing that. > [@](#): > > It’s your conspiracy theory. It might be wise to soft peddle it until you can claim to have some proof. My theory is backed by evidence. Yours has none in sight. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 10:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/91 "2018-02-07T10:15:30Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > Therefore there must be more, right? And specifically related to this case. I have a healthy respect for the truth and think it’s wise not to trust those with a solid track record of lying. Obviously, you take a different tack. > [@](#): > > You’ve done nothing but question the evidence, and provided none yourself. Hmm…what group of politicians do I know of that do that? Yes, claims need to be questioned. And when someone says ‘I really, really believe there is evidence but I can’t show it to you’ they need to be realize that the depth of their unfounded faith isn’t a very persuasive argument to use against rational people like me. > [@](#): > > Thanks, I’ll take the word of an established and respected intelligence agent over yours any day of the week, even if it is humint, because the _fact_ is that some of it is already known to have been corroborated. That’s fine if you are willing to accept rumors as if they were facts. It is rather odd you think everyone else should be as naive. > [@](#): > > Steele’s sources do. And it’s corroborated by other sources. So we more than one person who believes in the rumors. > [@](#): > > As opposed to Deny, deny, deny, and then say it doesn’t matter anyway? I think my tactic of waiting for persuasive evidence is a better way to go about it than believe, believe, believe while claiming facts don’t matter because so many share the same faith. > [@](#): > > It’s a helluva lot more substantial than yours. The fervency of your commitment doesn’t make your beliefs any more substantial. > [@](#): > > You’re arguing the negative, something you can never prove, but since you’ve provided no actual facts, you’re not even doing that. I don’t need any more facts than your admission that you have no proof for your cherished beliefs to remain unmoved by your proselytizing. > [@](#): > > My theory is backed by evidence. Yours has none in sight. More claims from you which misrepresent the situation here. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/92 "2018-02-07T10:41:35Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > You’re free to ignore my on-point observations if they inconvenience your narrative. > > But if what you’re now saying is true, then it would appear the story about The Russians ‘hacking’ or ‘rigging’ the recent election in favor of Trump _must_ be hogwash since it is not ‘overly’ susceptible to such unsavory manipulations. Exactly why that’s not ‘the story’ anyone serious is dscussing. It’s certainly not what this thread was started about. But you’re free to delude yourself that you’re making ‘on-point observations’. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/93 "2018-02-07T10:46:31Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Exactly why that’s not ‘the story’ anyone serious is dscussing. It’s certainly not what this thread was started about. But you’re free to delude yourself that you’re making ‘on-point observations’. You’re just angry because I was able to back up my claims with the facts that showed your narrative was false. “There was a close vote in one state…” As I proved, the 2000 election scandal was much bigger than that. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/94 "2018-02-07T11:16:38Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Let’s assume that Trump (and his campaign) DID in fact collude with Russia. > … [sarcasm] Boy, you’re _really_ stretching the limits of my imagination here! [/sarcasm] ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/95 "2018-02-07T11:35:12Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > You’re just angry because I was able to back up my claims with the facts that showed your narrative was false. > > “There was a close vote in one state…” > > As I proved, the 2000 election scandal was much bigger than that. I’m not angry. And no, the ‘election scandal’ was not bigger than the Florida recount court case. There’s always some irregularities, so not a scandal. But keep up the ‘on-point observations’. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/96 "2018-02-07T17:02:09Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > I have a healthy respect for the truth and think it’s wise not to trust those with a solid track record of lying. Obviously, you take a different tack. > > Yes, claims need to be questioned. And when someone says ‘I really, really believe there is evidence but I can’t show it to you’ they need to be realize that the depth of their unfounded faith isn’t a very persuasive argument to use against rational people like me. > > That’s fine if you are willing to accept rumors as if they were facts. It is rather odd you think everyone else should be as naive. > > So we more than one person who believes in the rumors. > > I think my tactic of waiting for persuasive evidence is a better way to go about it than believe, believe, believe while claiming facts don’t matter because so many share the same faith. > > The fervency of your commitment doesn’t make your beliefs any more substantial. > > I don’t need any more facts than your admission that you have no proof for your cherished beliefs to remain unmoved by your proselytizing. > > More claims from you which misrepresent the situation here. Spaces removed for brevity. Interesting that you can ignore the numerous Russia connections to the Trumps, yet you call _me_ naive. And still you have not provided a single piece of actual evidence to support your original contention. Sources are slightly more than ‘people who believe the rumors.’ Just for clarity, I believe Trump is as dirty as it’s possible to be. Proving it is another matter. But when you make a living and a political career out of blatant and continual lying, you don’t get the benefit of any doubt. The more he denies it, the more I believe it. There is absolutely no way that a reasonable, undeluded person can believe a word that he says. Nevertheless, there’s no way I can talk you out of your position, any more than I could with **Okrahoma**. So you go right on believing that Trump is pure as the driven snow. But don’t have the balls to try to tell me I’m naive because I don’t blindly agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/97 "2018-02-08T13:11:46Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > Spaces removed for brevity. > > Interesting that you can ignore the numerous Russia connections to the Trumps, yet you call _me_ naive. And still you have not provided a single piece of actual evidence to support your original contention. > > Sources are slightly more than ‘people who believe the rumors.’ > > Just for clarity, I believe Trump is as dirty as it’s possible to be. Proving it is another matter. But when you make a living and a political career out of blatant and continual lying, you don’t get the benefit of any doubt. The more he denies it, the more I believe it. There is absolutely no way that a reasonable, undeluded person can believe a word that he says. > > Nevertheless, there’s no way I can talk you out of your position, any more than I could with **Okrahoma**. So you go right on believing that Trump is pure as the driven snow. But don’t have the balls to try to tell me I’m naive because I don’t blindly agree with you. If you imagine I ever claimed Trump was pure as the driven snow, you are suffering severe reading incomprehension. My issue here is with the OP - the accusations about Trump-Putin collusion regarding the election are so vague as toi be meaningless. The difference between me and my critics here is that I actually care about democracy in the United States and this story is bigger than just an opportunity to benefit one party by bashing the other. ---
**Author:** ![proudfootz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b9e5f3/32.png) [@proudfootz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/proudfootz)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/98 "2018-02-08T13:14:11Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I’m not angry. And no, the ‘election scandal’ was not bigger than the Florida recount court case. There’s always some irregularities, so not a scandal. But keep up the ‘on-point observations’. I already provided a link which indicated millions of votes were trashed all over the country. Unlike you, I care about having democracy in the United States instead of using this as an opportunity for partisan attacks against Trump. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/99 "2018-02-08T15:34:56Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > I already provided a link which indicated millions of votes were trashed all over the country. > > Unlike you, I care about having democracy in the United States instead of using this as an opportunity for partisan attacks against Trump. I haven’t made any partisan attacks against Trump. The link you gave estimate 4-6 million votes were lost (not stolen, not trashed). It includes all possible human and machine errors. 104 million votes were counted for the main candidates. So their worst case is 6/110\*100%=5.5% loss rate. There lowest 3.7%. I suppose that could be better but not horrible when you have over a 100 million people voting on the same day (give or take). Do you think it’s realistic to get that to 0%? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060/100 "2018-02-08T15:46:11Z")
> [@proudfootz](#): > > I already provided a link which indicated millions of votes were trashed all over the country. To be specific, your link said “voting machine problems, ballot confusion, lost absentee votes and failed voter registration” and that the main problem seemed to be malfunctioning voting machines. Looking at your own link, do you have any specific solutions in mind? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-that-trump-colluded-with-russia/808060.md?page=6)