Russian Support For Sanders

It appears that Russia is up to its usual tricks in 2020 as they were in 2016.

Cite.

The story characterizes this as an effort to re-elect Trump, which offers an interesting insight into Russia’s estimates of the electability of Bernie. FWIW, I think the Russkis are probably right, and a Sanders nomination is a fairly sure way to MAGA.

If that is their motivation. It could also be that Sanders won some primaries, and Putin et al. just wants to troll the elections and/or discredit the winner, no matter who it might be. I am not naive enough to think they want a socialist, even a democratic/Democratic socialist, in the White House.

Maybe if Biden gets the nom, they will start trolling for him (as well as Trump).

Thoughts?

Regards,
Shodan

I am shocked. SHOCKED! to find Russian interference going on in the 2020 election cycle.

They will certainly try, why wouldn’t they? But how would we discern which is Russian interference and plain old down-home stupid?

Russians use better spelling and grammar.

OK, let me see if I’m following all this correctly…

a) Russia, the former Soviet Union, is currently headed by Vladimir Putin, former KGB apparatchik, who seems bent on returning to the Soviet Union’s more hegemonic days. (Does Russia currently consider itself communist?)

b) The Russians keep interfering in our elections. It looks like they’re interfering with the Democratic Party primary process in ways that favor Bernie Sanders, our socialist candidate, which would make sense for a pro-socialist foreign gov to do except that…

c) Their real agenda is to get Donald Trump, Republican, re-elected. The Republican Party is traditionally the most vehemently anti-communist political party in the US and has a long history of antipathy towards the Soviet Union (see: Cold War) and not much warmth for its successor the Russian state. Ermm until recently
Is ideology and political persuasion irrelevant or does this somehow shake out in a fashion that makes sense if you look at it right?

It’s as simple as Russia considering the US to be an enemy (or at best, a rival) and anything that weakens the US makes them stronger by comparison.

They will endeavor to get anyone into the White House that they think is the worst for the US, and that is Trump. I would be curious who they back if Bernie somehow won the nomination; do they think Bernie’s radical plans will weaken the US economy, or will Trump’s general incompetent Trumpiness be worse?

Traditional ideology and political persuasion have gone out the window since 2015.

The short answer is Yes.

The idea AFAICT for the Russians is not to get a candidate they want into the White House. The idea is to fuck with the election, and thereby discredit whoever wins. If it is Sanders, that’s fine because he would be discredited because the Russians interfered. If it is Trump, he is discredited for the same reason. They tried the same sort of thing in 2016 - hacking into the DNC servers to look for dirt on Hillary, trying to hack into the RNC to get dirt on Trump, in 2020 pushing Tulsi Gabbard just to mess with things.

I doubt they thought, any more than anyone else, that Trump would win. They just thought they could feed Trump something to discredit Hillary and weaken her after she won. They backed Trump for much the same set of reasons - puff up the weaker candidate to try to divide the country, as they are doing with Sanders. If the Russians have any smarts, and I think they do, when Sanders loses the nod they will try to get the Bernie Bros to think he was robbed. And thereby mess with the election.

I honestly don’t think they care who wins - Trump is as good as Sanders is as good as Biden. As long as whoever wins is weakened.

Regards,
Shodan

Republicans in opposition to Russia haven’t been a thing for a while. I can’t believe that argument was even made on this board. Russia likes the GOP because they can buy them with business deals and they will let them sell their oil.

Why do you think Trump was so surprised to learn Biden is likely going to be his opponent in the general election? I’m quite sure Putin had reassured him at one of their private meetings that he would be working hard to put Sanders at the top of the ticket. Trump seems genuinely baffled to discover he’s probably going to have to face Biden instead.

The Russians helped Bernie in 2016. This is not in dispute. The idea was to create division between Clinton-supporting and Sanders-supporting Democrats. Worked a treat, too. Mueller flat out told us the subversion efforts have never stopped. The Republican party is all in with their illegal Russian help and quashed virtually every effort to shut it down. We should all be appalled.

Same reason Jill Stein ran as a Green in 2016. Her candidacy, supported by Putin, was meant to peel off 3-4% of the Democratic vote. That’s a lot of voters in a close election. The tactic worked well in 2016. For 2020, I predict Tulsi Gabbard will be advanced for this purpose.

I’m not saying any of these Democratic candidates are actively using Russian support. I don’t think they are. Trump is, though.

I was happy to see Bernie repudiate Russian intervention in our elections in a very forceful way. But whether any of the Democrats actively invite it, they are still the beneficiaries of Russian subversion efforts in our elections.

As for Putin trolling for Biden if he wins the nomination, where have you been? Did you miss that whole Ukraine impeachment thing? The entire scheme originated with Putin as a way to blame 2016 Russian interference on Ukraine, so Trump had a path to lift the sanctions against Russia imposed in response to that interference. Bonus: Smear Trump’s most worrisome opponent, Joe Biden. Putin is really good at this stuff.

The intent of the Russians is to clear a path for Trump to win reelection with a narrow but somewhat believable margin. If successful, it will play out in multiple ways:

  1. Create division in the Democratic party, same as 2016.

  2. Try and advance the weakest candidate possible for Trump to run against, and of the available most likely nominees, that was Sanders.

  3. Peel off a few percent of Democratic voters by advancing a third-party candidate. Same as 2016.

  4. Create memes of Trump reelection inevitability. Sadly, I’ve seen evidence of the success of this tactic here on this board. It’s working. There is no real evidence that Trump can win again in 2020, but if he manages to cheat his way into another “win,” we’ll all be softened up to accept it without question.

  5. Mess with voting machines or voter rolls during the election, if possible. If they can’t create a “win” for Trump, at least create such havoc in the election that its results are not trusted by the citizens.

I’ve made this observation in another thread that I found it curious that there is so much monetary support for Sanders via small donors, and he has enjoyed such a vocal contingent of followers on Twitter and Facebook – yet these same highly motivated people couldn’t be bothered to vote for him in the primaries on Super Tuesday. I find these disparities very odd. It’s not hard to create thousands of “small donors” as a way of providing foreign money to help to a campaign. And we already know how vulnerable Twitter and Facebook are to foreign manipulation with fake personas.

So it appears that on this very rare occasion, I agree with you in large measure, Shodan. Russian interference with be a significant factor throughout this 2020 campaign. Only this time, Trump is using the levers of government (illegally) to help them help him.

I disagree, however, that Putin doesn’t care which candidate wins the election. He wants Trump. He has Trump under his thumb. Putin will never again have an American president so willing to do his bidding, so corrupt, so beholden and so happy to smash through every tradition or Constitutional norm established since this country’s founding. Putin wants Trump for a second term bad, and he’s going to fight hard to get him “reelected.”

While they do love Trump - he has gifted them just about everything he is able to squeeze through his Senate handlers - I expect that Putin would be perfectly happy to have Sanders in place.

While I’m sure that Russia loves free goodies, fundamentally their first goal is simply to have the US sidelined. Bernie will accomplish that just fine through both his policies and by introducting what would be extreme deadlock in the Federal government.

As a far back, secondary interest, Russia is trying to advance the ideology that “Authoritarianism is the right answer because Democracy is dumb”. And, of course, that’s made easier by the fact that Democracy is dumb - ergo, why the Framers explicitly attempted to avoid setting up a Democracy way back when, which we’ve destroyed over the centuries through selfishness.

Any time a Western power does something stupid because of Democracy, be that to hire Donald Trump, approve Brexit, or anything else, it advances the Russian interest.

You’re a couple of weeks too late. :slight_smile:

Putin’s goal isn’t complicated at all. You’d have to look at it funny to get it wrong. Putin wants an American ppresident that he can manipulate. That’s the guy that pardons people when a Kardashian bats her eyelashes at him.

Not quite. The aims are to weaken the United States by creating discord, AND get a Russian-friendly politician elected. They pursue both strategies simultaneously even though the tactics may step on each other at points.

Putin said himself he wanted Trump to win 2016. Of course he did. Trump is in no way anti-Russia, no matter how much he says he’s tough on Russia. He’s about at tough on Russia as he is on Jared. He might yell at Jared every once in a while, but he clearly isn’t going to try to get rid of the boy.

The other reason Trump favors Trump is that his mere existence is incredibly divisive in the country. The more Trump is around, the fewer things Americans can agree on.

Sanders fits the same bill in that respect. I mean, does anyone think Sanders, if elected, would have an approval rate much above 50% over the long haul? Of course not!

There is no way that the Russians will want to see Biden elected, and they aren’t going to start social media chatter talking about how great Biden is. What they will likely do is take aspects of Biden’s platform that are divisive and each them: “Joe is great because he wants to ban the assault weapons that red necks love so much!”

The point there isn’t to get Biden elected, it is to troll the NRA and control control types to fight each other.

The idea that Russians actually will want Biden elected is more bullshit from the Trump fake news circus that seeks to normalize the behavior and actions of the deeply disturbed fascist in office.

“pushing Tulsi Gabbard” is there any verifiable evidence of this or is it from Hillary Clinton’s ramblings?

Here ya go. (NBC News)

More at link.

You can Google the search term, “Russian Support for Tulsi Gabbard” and find more.

Also intriguing is where her funding comes from. She raised 3.4 million in the 4th quarter of 2019 but won’t say where it originates. I wonder why? No reason to be embarrassed if it’s from those 129-odd voters who gave her 2 delegates in American Samoa.

As for Hillary Clinton’s “ramblings,” she’s been right with virtually every “rambling” she’s made. Might be a good idea to start paying attention to her.

Amusingly, Clinton’s comments about a Russian-backed female asset participating in the Democratic primary never specifically named anyone. Gabbard herself jumped up and confirmed the comments must be directed at her. It would have been funny if it weren’t so awful.

Did you not watch the South Carolina debates? Not 3 minutes in.

It should be noted too that Russian boosting of Gabbard’s campaign was reported before Clinton’s remarks including a NYT piece only a few days before. She wasn’t rambling. She was commenting on a current mainstream news story. If someone other than Hillary said it, it may not have even made the news, but since it was her, a bunch of people lost their minds.

Tell me exactly how Russians were “boosting” Gabbard’s campaign. Any verifiable evidence would be helpful. The NYT article offers innuendos about Russian interference, but no facts that show the Kremlin is somehow helping her campaign.

“Laura Rosenberger, a former policy aide to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and director of the Alliance, sees Ms. Gabbard as a potentially useful vector for Russian efforts to sow division within the Democratic Party.” She “sees” as a … again, no evidence.

“An independent analysis of the Russian news media found that RT, the Kremlin-backed news agency, mentioned Ms. Gabbard frequently…” Mentioned frequently? In a positive or negative way? Doesn’t say.

And so what if RT does run positive articles on Gabbard. Who reads and is influenced by them in the US?

Sounds just like a typical Conspiracy theory.

BTW, I am no fan of Gabbard. I like what she says about staying out of endless wars, but she is wrong on about everything else.

No.