Do you think Russia hacked the US Elections?

2016-12-19T09:38:31-05:00

Response by Maj Marty Hogan made Dec 19 at 2016 9:40 AM

2016-12-19T09:40:42-05:00

More important do you think it matters and how do you think it changed the outcome?

Response by SGT William Howell made Dec 19 at 2016 9:53 AM

2016-12-19T09:53:50-05:00

No. I believe the guy that posted the information. He said it was a DNC insider that did not like the way Sanders was treated. Wiki has never lied about where it has got it's information so why would they start now. This makes me think of the Warren report.

Democrats have to blame somebody and "the Russian did it" is the easiest way to fire people up without actually having to prove it. I think the Russians have show massive amounts of restraint with people throwing rumors around like they are facts. The Russians are not our friends, but they are not the boggie man either.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 9:57 AM

2016-12-19T09:57:20-05:00

My issue is what was in the emails and at least in the case of the DNC leak the source has been identified as an insider not the Russians. What about what the emails reveal why are people not up in arms about the content of the emails and all we are hearing is all this static about the Russians.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Dec 19 at 2016 9:59 AM

2016-12-19T09:59:53-05:00

IMV, the so called hacking goes on all the time for a variety of reasons. It doesn't have to be a government element, many do it for a challenge, profit or strategic purposes. Surely we aren't naive enough to think the NSA and our cyber security groups aren't looking to exploit breaches in security. The only thing that has changed is the Democrats are butt hurt about losing. If false information was generated and distributed by WIKILEAKS, there would be a case, but what was released was actual people plotting to manipulate the election. GET OVER IT.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Dec 19 at 2016 9:59 AM

2016-12-19T09:59:59-05:00

Where's the evidence? Who do you trust? Ultimately I want to know so I can thank them. Without the information the criminal candidate might have been elected. In the past such information would have been reported by journalists, but it's been decades since we saw or heard from one of those.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Dec 19 at 2016 10:13 AM

2016-12-19T10:13:38-05:00

Absolutely not... the idea that Russia somehow influenced the elections because the DNC backed the wrong candidate is ridiculous.

Response by Cpl Mark McMiller made Dec 19 at 2016 10:23 AM

2016-12-19T10:23:17-05:00

Even if they did, why should we care? From what I've read, all they did was leak a bunch of Hillary's and other Dem scumbags' emails proving how corrupt the Dems are. They didn't fabricate any of the information that was leaked. How is that any different than if I hacked the Dems and leaked the information? So if that tilted the scale in Trump's favor, Hillary and the Dems have no one to blame but themselves. It sounds like they did the American people a favor.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 10:34 AM

2016-12-19T10:34:12-05:00

It isn't that the Russians "hacked the elections." That that is being touted seems dishonest to me. Someone "hacked" (read unauthorized release of information) the DNC and their supporters. What doesn't change regardless of who the culprit was, was the information that was released. As far as I can tell, there wasn't any manipulation of information, just exposing the emails.

Regardless, it was wrong to do that, but it doesn't change the previous behavior of the DNC. That is one of the things that cost them the election. Their own behavior.

Response by SGT Dave Tracy made Dec 19 at 2016 10:37 AM

2016-12-19T10:37:25-05:00

The "election" itself? Nope.

The DNC? Yep.

Did it really help Trump win? I doubt the hack changed ANYONE'S mind, honestly. The Right was committed against Clinton, and the info gained in the hack only confirmed many reasons why they hated her; they were concerned with the "what" of the hack, less so the "who". Conversely, the Left were more concerned with the "who", and chose to largely ignore the "what"; at least insofar as Clinton was concerned. But--statistically significantly speaking--nobody's opinion changed due to the hack.

Should it matter? Absolutely. Not because the results of this election would be different; it really wouldn't. Sorry Lefties, I get why you don't want to hear it, but Moscow--a bad actor to be sure--simply isn't a good scapegoat for why your candidate lost. Everyone needs to understand this is a bad precedent and a blueprint for future foreign bad actors to monkey with how we elect our leaders as best as they can; maybe next time, someone will actually get deep into the election system itself and do more damage than just airing dirty laundry. Russia had means, motive and opportunity. Righties, don't get comfortable with what happened or bury you head in the sand and choose to pretend the Ruskies didn't hack the peripheries of this election, because next time it could happen to YOUR favored candidate.

SIDEBAR: Dammit. Because I do NOT believe the actual election itself (the voting mechanisms) were hacked or that the electorate was really affected by what Russia did manage to hack, I intended to vote NO, but I hit YES by accident. My bad.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Dec 19 at 2016 10:58 AM

2016-12-19T10:58:11-05:00

The question is much broader than I think many realize, and probably intended?

Do I think Russian hackers would have tried to hack our government and political parties, of course they were...along with every other nation. That is what electronic intelligence is all about. Did they succeed? There is no proof that they, or any other nation, did BUT if they did, one of the easiest ways would have been to use a Trojan Horse through an unsecured device of a high level (cabinet level) official...which would support why only one part seems to be compromised?

Do I think the Russians are the one's behind the information dump, no. While this is not proof that it is not the Russians, it does make me highly skeptical that it is, the Russians and their intelligence apparatus is highly professional and as such does not release information. IF they were to release such information, why dump so much of no values except to show how and where the information did come from? The Russians, while behind many incursion into electronic espionage, are still very professional and competent. As such, why release so much with NOTHING in return? What would have a greater return on their investment? I have a secret on you...it only has value while others do not know...intelligence professionals would keep the good information, not dump it for the World to know.

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 11:15 AM

2016-12-19T11:15:33-05:00

I don't care what the media has to say. I want to see logs, IP addresses. Something as an SSH connection request from a Russian IP address can be considered a "potential hack", even though it's minute.... But the media will spin it up as a "hack". We had something VERY similar here at Amazon that got a load of publicity, and things taken out of proportion. IF someone in fact did, then there is a flaw in our democratic (or representative republic) process. Something we all should care about.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 11:24 AM

2016-12-19T11:24:04-05:00

Russia, or someone hacked and exposed e-mails. The content of those e-mails told us the story of what was going on in the democratic party. What was going on is what influenced the election.. If someone knew this information and did not share it would it be fair to say they influenced the election?

Response by SFC Bill Snyder made Dec 19 at 2016 11:24 AM

2016-12-19T11:24:24-05:00

Probably tried but the demoncraps did it all by themselves.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 11:35 AM

2016-12-19T11:35:33-05:00

While I don't know with certainty who did the hacking, in my view there are two distinct issues here - who did the hacking and the validity of the released, hacked material. Just as I believe Edward Snowden should be punished for his leaking of NSA materiel and yet am glad it was leaked, so I believe that whoever hacked the DNC and Podesta should be sanctioned but am nonetheless glad the materiel was released since it provided a better picture of Democratic National Committee malfeasance and the Democratic candidate.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2016 11:40 AM

2016-12-19T11:40:18-05:00

Yes, some hacking likely took place... what we don't know is if it was enough to change the election results.

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/12/16/breaking-voting-machine-certifier-announces-russian-hack-of-data-systems-voters-irate/

BREAKING: Voting Machine Certifier Announces Russian Hack Of Data Systems, Voters IRATE

Just how many agencies were victims of a cyberattack by the Russians? The Election Assistance Commission believes their name should be added to the list.

Response by SFC George Smith made Dec 19 at 2016 12:22 PM

2016-12-19T12:22:43-05:00

I think it was an inside Job and the Russians are taking the heat ...
Even Julian Assange sad the Russians were not the Problem...
The Biggest problem i see it that Both the CIA and The FBI big-wigs making the allegations are all Clinton approved BHO appointees who want to Keep their Jobs under a HRC White House and continue Business as Usual...

The Truth of the mater Is If HRC and the Main Stream Media and DNC had Supported Bernie Sanders and Not sold Him out... He would Be the Damn President Elect... because he Had More popular and Voter Support than HRC ... just Not the Funding... and far Less Career Criminal Political Support

Everyone in DC is Running Scared Now that the Trumpster is coming in with Non Political Hacks and Folks from outside the Beltway Professionals...
They cant handle the fact a New Sheriff is coming to Town and Not Part of the Career Criminal Political Establishment

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Dec 19 at 2016 12:49 PM

2016-12-19T12:49:02-05:00

No, just a ploy by the dems to try and put the blame somewhere else.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Dec 19 at 2016 12:56 PM

2016-12-19T12:56:36-05:00

First, let's understand that it is very difficult to "hack" the election itself. The inputs to the process are paper ballots or voting machine data. The paper ballots themselves are probably hack proof. The voting machines could be programmed to inaccurately record the voter's input. Most voting machines are tested in a bi-partisan environment before being put into service. The counting process is also difficult to break into. The machines that read the paper ballots are not on the internet and most aren't on a network at all. They might be reprogrammed to ignore all votes for one candidate or the other, but this should be discovered in testing. The machines that record and tabulate the data from voting machines are similar to those that count paper ballots. In either case, an extremely skewed result would normally be questioned by a partisan pole watcher. It's unlikely that the Russians were able to recruit enough people to change the votes in any state through voter fraud. In states where no voter ID is required, a determined agent could vote in the place of a dead person several times. Getting enough people to carry off this fraud to change the results in a state is unlikely.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Dec 19 at 2016 1:29 PM

2016-12-19T13:29:36-05:00

I believe that middle America counter-hacked the DNC/Clinton/NeoCon/Globalists who were hacking and cheating for Hillary throughout the election. Thank God! Now I can't wait for the IRS and FBI investigations into the Clinton Global Foundation and the missing Haiti money.

Response by SSG Jeremy Sharp made Dec 19 at 2016 2:42 PM

2016-12-19T14:42:49-05:00

I think they should give the people some of the facts, there is no way that the people are going to believe the FBI or the CIA after all the innuendo and lies blathered around by their leadership during the Killarygate fiasco.

Response by SSG Robert Webster made Dec 19 at 2016 4:20 PM

2016-12-19T16:20:00-05:00

It would depend upon your definition of hacking the US Election. What do you think was hacked? If you think that the DNC system was hacked, is that your definition? If HRC's email server system was hacked, is that your definition? If one or more computerized voting machine, or system was hacked, is that your definition? If one or more media outlets was hacked, is that your definition? American's consumption of fake news stories (propaganda) or MSM news stories (propaganda (again)), is that your definition? Foreign owned businesses or individuals with foreign or dual citizenship contributing to various American political organizations, is that your definition of hacking?

Some of this, if not all of the items that I listed have been going on for a very long time in the current if not past several US election cycles. It is interesting to note that the Republican National Committee's computer systems were not (supposedly) penetrated. Are we to believe that they were not also targeted?

Just like a lot of other important areas of society, it is about "power" and retaining that power. In this area of the human psyche, I believe that our nations founders were a lot smarter than we are.

Response by SSG Melvin Nulph made Dec 19 at 2016 5:06 PM

2016-12-19T17:06:53-05:00

I find the situation to be a load of BS in the first place.
How anyone could do the things our politicians are doing and keep out of jail is beyond me. If it was one of us I can only imagine the joy they would take raking us over the coals.

Response by SSG Mark Franzen made Dec 19 at 2016 7:41 PM

2016-12-19T19:41:08-05:00

I think they that be not allowed and further more they should not allow Donald J Trump swear in until it has Been cleared up.
SSG MARK FRANZEN
USA ARMY VET

Response by PO3 Sharon Hunt made Dec 19 at 2016 9:34 PM

2016-12-19T21:34:02-05:00

no. enough people are afraid of Hillary , very possible an American dimed her out.

Response by Cameron Daly made Dec 20 at 2016 10:20 AM

2016-12-20T10:20:36-05:00

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Dec 20 at 2016 1:59 PM

2016-12-20T13:59:39-05:00

If you Mean a Wildly Successful Internet Hack into the Software of our Electronic Voting Process, NO. If you Mean a Mildly Successful Internet Hack into the Software of our Electronic Voting Process Coupled with a Very Successful Disinformation Attack, Most Definitely but that is the Perspective from someone that was on the Front Line of the Information Warfare Game with Russia for 21 Years.

Response by CPT Jim Schwebach made Dec 20 at 2016 2:59 PM

2016-12-20T14:59:21-05:00

There's a big difference between hacking an election, a government process, and influencing participants in that process using information or misinformation hacked from private entities, like political parties. I don't believe government election systems were hacked in such a way that results were affected. As for the use of information or misinformation to convince individual voters or voting blocks that candidates of the opposing parties were low life politicians who weren't fond of animals or small children and therefore not qualified for election to any office, well, yes, that was probably done. And, as in every other political contest, it was probably done by Republicans, Democrats, Israelis, Eskimos, Russians, the Boy Scouts or any one else who may have an oar in the water. They could have obtained the info by breaking into an opponents office and taking documents(like Watergate), by just making it up(read Hamilton's comments about Jefferson) or by breaking into an inadequately protected Email file and making off with the goods(Donnie's cousin in the basement, Koreans, Chinese, Russians, ad nauseum.)

It's the Murrican Way...

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2016 4:53 PM

2016-12-20T16:53:54-05:00

"Hacked the Elections...". Well, if you mean the Voting Count itself - No; it doesn't appear so and I've heard no reporting that this is a concern. If though you mean do I believe they hacked into comms of political parties, with intent to discredit and influence, then YES, I do.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made Dec 21 at 2016 12:14 AM

2016-12-21T00:14:13-05:00

If they weren't at least trying to, then Russian intel wasn't doing their job. As I understand, they got into both the RNC and the DNC. I'm sure our intel people attempt the same sort of stuff. The funny thing is, a report I read said the FBI informed the DNC that they had been compromised and the Dems just blew it off. Now they are seeing Russian hackers in everything. Funny how they didn't care until they lost. Funny how both parties and the government in general are treating this like a ten year old boy getting into his big sister's diary. It happened, but, oh well. http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2016/12/did-russia-hack-rnc-too-heres-what-we-know-so-far/133873/

Did Russia Hack the RNC Too? Here’s What We Know So Far

Republican lawmakers and affiliated political organizations were targeted by the same Russian group that hit the DNC.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2016 1:17 PM

2016-12-21T13:17:09-05:00

It doesn't matter whether Russia hacked the DNC servers and released emails or not. Trump didn't win the election, Clinton lost it. And it was hers to lose. There were many things her campaign could have done and didn't.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Dec 22 at 2016 10:26 AM

2016-12-22T10:26:11-05:00

Very possibly, the North Koreans and our allies do it all the time. I would like to know just how they influenced the election. Even if they tried, it would be interesting to know what they did which had any proven negative effect on HC or positive effect onDT. They are saying now that HC won the popular vote by 3.5 million or so. How could hacking overcome that?

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2016 2:31 PM

2016-12-28T14:31:20-05:00

No, there are only two ways to hack an election. They have the get the voting side or the tally side. There is no evidence of either, that I have seen or heard. I heard a report that John Podesta clicked on a link in an email that was a phishing attempt. That gave the sender access to his accounts. Remember that to date none of them have denied that what was in the original emails were untrue.

Response by LT G Paisley made Dec 29 at 2016 8:26 AM

2016-12-29T08:26:19-05:00

The question is too vague: what does it even mean to "hack [an] election?"

Response by GySgt William Hardy made Dec 29 at 2016 9:37 AM

2016-12-29T09:37:16-05:00

I actually think we did the hacking, that is to say, one of the agencies in our own government such as the NSA. We have the same ability to hack and then cover our tracks so it is nearly impossible to tell or to leave false fingerprints. Not to get into conspiracy theories, but I am just saying that the lying and corruption of the Democrats, specifically of the Clintons, was not welcomed by "intelligence" insiders who decided to put some real facts out there for us to consider.

Besides that, it makes no sense for Russia to hack the emails or the DNC. Was it not the Democrats, specifically Hillary Clinton, who made it possible for the Russians to get control of 20% of the uranium mines in the USA? Why would they want to hack the Democrats? If anything, they would have hacked the Republicans so their friends in the DNC would keep on helping on these various deals that were made during the last four years.

It makes more sense if the we hacked ourselves or the Israelis did it.

Anyone have a good argument as to why the Russians would want to do the hacking?

Response by CPL Howard Conover made Dec 30 at 2016 7:19 PM

2016-12-30T19:19:25-05:00

With everything going on in "cyber space" I would not be surprised. As in anything however you need concrete evidence/proof. Politics

Response by MAJ Eric G Troup made Dec 30 at 2016 8:23 PM

2016-12-30T20:23:03-05:00

There is no evidence of any hacked election results anywhere. Lots of speculation - no evidence. There were however, several recounts in closely contested states. None of these recounts changed more than a minuscule number of ballets and had no effect on the results. Most of this election hacking noise appears to be "fake news".

Response by MAJ Eric G Troup made Dec 30 at 2016 8:33 PM

2016-12-30T20:33:21-05:00

Given all the promises of a transparency in government and the fact that none of the content of the released emails was actually contested as to its veracity, did the release of these emails actually provide a great service to the electorate; a peek at what the politicians and their operatives actually were scheming and what was actually going on instead of only a Public Relations "snow job"?

Response by SSgt Michael Cox made Jan 4 at 2017 11:12 AM

2017-01-04T11:12:45-05:00

Even if they did get into her email accounts like I'm sure they did when she was Sec. State they didn't hack the poles. Some of the emails were probably released by her camp by disgruntled pollsters.

Response by LT G Paisley made Jan 5 at 2017 2:06 PM

2017-01-05T14:06:33-05:00

Forgive me if I haven't read through all of the comments, but I think that most of the noise on this question has completely missed the real question: What does it mean to 'hack an election?' As far as I can discern, no one is claiming that any votes were changed in any precinct. Therefore, the accusation is simply a chain of inferences that somehow someone acting on behalf of a sovereign government gained unauthorized access to a DNC server (remember that the DNC is NOT a government agency--it is a private political organization) and obtained information that was not publicly available and then publicized that information through WikiLeaks. Then, we have to presume that this information actually caused *anyone* to change their vote and then that it caused enough people to change their vote to actually swing states that *should* have voted for Clinton into states that sent to Trump and that this happened in enough states to actually turn the electoral outcome of the election. I think this stretches credulity to the breaking point. If anyone actually believes this, then some bridge salesman has a new market. Keep in mind also that I don't recall anyone claiming, much less proving, that the information released was actually untrue. Did I miss something?

Response by Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. made Jan 10 at 2017 9:11 PM

2017-01-10T21:11:09-05:00

US Elections were not hacked. Electons occure on Election Day & Early Voting. Russia did not affect changes to actual votes.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jan 10 at 2017 10:00 PM

2017-01-10T22:00:10-05:00

Sp4 Byron Skinner…A question my Liberal friends have wrapped their teeth around. My own opinion is there is not enough hard evidence to support either side. The scrubbed release sent to a "selected few members of Congress" last Friday is oohing but circumstantial evidence and here-say. Looking at the voting pattern two things jump out. First in state such as Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana and Idaho where Trump was expected to win his margins were of victory were to low, Trump should have had higher margins of victory. Secondly only two states show irregularities that count indicate outside tampering Florida and Pennsylvania. In Florida either the African American and Latino vote got smaller then 2012 or some votes disappeared, In Pennsylvania the NW part of the State, traditionally Republican had growth spirt the past four years or the Eastern part, usually strong DEmocratic and more voters lost a lot of voters in 2016.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2017 12:12 AM

2017-01-14T00:12:42-05:00

This has - and continues to be - a point of great debate for us... while this may have or not influenced the outcome... the current discussion has the US IC in a tailspin....

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2017 2:00 PM

2017-01-24T14:00:13-05:00

Yes, but I think Mexico's influence grossly exceeds Russia's. California, which doesn't check citizenship before allowing people to vote, has issued 560,000 driver's licenses in the past few years.