What's up with Russian apologists?

[regnaD kciN]

28. The only individual I know in person who held that line...

...was someone who was big for Sanders in the 2016 primaries but rejected him as "just as corrupt as the rest of them" when he endorsed Clinton before the election. Since then, that person got really into video commentaries from Jimmy Dore, who not only seems to hold that the mainstream Democratic leadership is too centrist and tied to big money, but also wants to claim that this was the only reason for the 2016 loss. They really seem to see it as an either/or: that, if you hold that Russia interfered in the election, you're saying that none of the criticisms of the Democratic establishment have any validity at all (whereas most criticism from the left doesn't hold to such a strict dichotomy -- those in that section, like myself, think it undeniable that Russia interfered, and may have been the critical factor in the election's outcome, while at the same time granting that the 2016 campaign was a weak effort that alienated some crucial traditionally-Democratic voting blocs, allowing Trump to stay close enough that Russia could steal it in the end).

Like I said, this is only one person, but I've seen enough others online with the same talking points that I assume it's the dogma held by at least a small-but-significant group.

Incidentally, the individual I mentioned is backing Biden this time around; even though they think he's "just another conservative," they see that as infinitely preferable to the "fascist" we're stuck with now.