Why do Hillary haters almost invariably deny Russian influence in the election?

[Igel]

44. If it hadn't been a recurring issue,

Comey would have no reason to speak up.

But it was a recurring issue. Because a lot of people thought it important. And because the media kept reporting on it. Those last two bits are a vicious circle. No, it wasn't the case that the media produced the news; the news was there and people were interested in it. Consider how the Ukrainian conflict and the recent deaths continue to headline all the MSM and take up at least 25% of reporting time. Oh, they don't? It's because the populace doesn't care and so the MSM doesn't push the story. It only shows up in left-of-center sources because it's Trump-bashing fodder, not because people really care about it.


Now, in the mix was Russian shit-stirring. The media thought it important enough to keep reporting about because of this, and the populace thought it important enough to pay for the media's attention. If nobody cared, it wouldn't have made any difference. Many of those who cared were (R); many were (D); more than a few were first time voters as (D).

Even the email hacking of the DNC and scores of other places, some (D), some (R), some neither, at least officially, fed the email server issue. Why? Because if it was so easy to hack emails, then server security absolutely must be an issue.

Even many of the Brights on DU never really figured out what the "hacking" consisted of and continued to say "hacked the election." It's a metaphor that confuses and obfuscates, feeds outrage, more than it illuminates and feeds understanding. But "hacking is hacking," so it didn't matter. When some attempts were made to look at voter registration rolls, it was assumed this was somehow the same as hacking voting machines; or that deleting a lot of voter registrations would somehow go unnoticed, that nobody ever made backups. Truly amazing.