Do you think Russia hacked the US Elections?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.