It’s amazing how the narrative has changed from “Russians hacked emails” to “Russia hacked the election.”
They’re two entirely different issues, but opponents of President-elect Donald Trump are trying to conflate the two.
Now, it’s entirely possible Russia or its agents did hack the emails of the Democratic National Committee and its officials.
It’s equally possible they did not. Julian Assange, after all, insists Russia was not the source of the leaks to his organization Wikileaks.
I doubt if we will ever know the source of the emails. But as interesting as that is, the morphing of this story into Russia hacked the election is more fascinating.
It is, of course, deflection. After all, even if Russia or its agents hacked the emails, that act in and of itself would have carried no weight had the emails not contained information that was damaging to the reputation of a number of important officials.
Think about it. Imagine if the emails contained messages telling people they must be careful to give Clinton’s primary opponent Bernie Sanders every opportunity to get his message out to the rank and file. Or what if the emails had contained no evidence of collusion between news networks and Clinton?
Exactly. The emails would not have mattered in the least.
The thing is the emails contained lots of information that cast the DNC and Clinton in a bad light, calling her character into question and that of her close associates.
Yet I have seen commentators opine that Russia hacked the election.
There is no evidence, none whatsoever that the voting was compromised by Russia or its agents. Americans cast their ballots and that was that.
The Nov. 8 results, to be sure, came as a surprise to a great many people.
After all, it had been predicted by virtually every pollster and commentator that Clinton would win handily. Every poll had her leading Trump nationally.
The operative word there is “nationally.”
Too many observers simply do not understand that the presidential elections are not a “national” popularity contest.
In fact, president elections are 50 popularity contests.
That is why Trump could win the presidential election even though he was not as popular as Clinton across the nation.
If the truth be known, Clinton’s popularity stems from her popularity in two states – New York and California.
If California is removed from the counting, Trump actually wins the popular vote as well as the Electoral College vote.
That is why Clinton lost. She was not popular in a sufficient number of states.
Invoking Russian intervention in the election is little more than a bald-faced attempt to deflect from that simple fact.