RT seemed to have come out of nowhere and becam a "go to" source last election. meanwhile reputable papers put accusations in the headlines and then the caveats were buried- therefore helping create negative buzz out of "information" that was innocuous or had context removed in order to manipulate reactions.

I will say it was ably done. Especially the way that the leak came out hours after the Trump woman grabbing tape came out.

There is no doubt that the Russians seemed to be trying to influence the voters. But I would like to see an investigation to prove that all of this was not partly a coincidental taking advantage of things.

And no matter what comes out, a certain number of Trump voters will not believe anything negative. And those are the deplorable ones.

if we don't get an accurate vote count, which i don't think we can do, with hackable voting machines.

and infrastructure. There is no reason that 50 states need 50 separate procedures.

Which is why I don't buy into the "weak candidate" bullshit. Flawed? Yes. But so is any presidential candidate offered up ever and the debate should have been about clear merits vs perceived flaws. Long term, concentrated effort to sabotage Hillary on the right--sure, but also the emergence of players on the left happily repeating some of the worst of the rights bullshit, even while making up thier own.

And I never, ever underestimate the effects of unadulterated sexism and racism that played a huge part on what people were willing to believe--or not believe. So blame gerrymandering? You bet.

Russia's interference may have kept people home, tipped people to 3rd party votes. The concern I have is the way Rebublican simply accept this--promote their once-dying agenda at all costs I guess.

Off topic, but There are a few ways for societies to go forward at this point in history, its my belief that the Republican version, as tied to religion as it is can only lead to dystopia, whereas all encompassing liberal values--which embraces compassion, love, tolerance and acceptance while recognizing the clear need for separation of church and state, leads to a logical and healthy society.

Economics? Simply put, In a world with finite resources we are simply going to eventually learn to share or pay the consequences.

Not the simple answer to your poll, I know.

Clinton was a strong candidate, with a reasonably progressive message. She lost due to gerrymandering, voter suppression, sexism, the ever-present North/South and rural/urban conflicts, James Comey, and undoubtedly Russian interference.

And yes, for the GOP, winning is the goal no matter how the win is accomplished. But even with all that they did, the GOP only won due to the built in advantage of the Electoral College. So for me, the way to win is to energize the 41% who stayed home.

While I recognize the fear of a possible dystopia, one hopes that tolerance is winning over intolerance. Marriage equality is more and more accepted by most people.

I believe that a message of love wins, but the sharing part --not so much. There is a very human tendency--sometimes seeped in superstition, to blame others for their own misfortune from health care woes to homelessness.

I see this personified in comment on the live casts during the challenges to the Muslim ban, or proposed interventions for the homeless. People would say "Seattle's streets are filled with homeless--take care of them first" or "Veterans are suffering take care of veterans before people who don't even want to work" two very mixed messages that come from the same kinds of people who voted for Trump. (Homeless veterans are rarely mentioned) The need to be right supersedes the impulses to be compassionate to all--refugees, the homeless, suffering Veterans. People know that tax dollars will be needed to help all three groups, so they pick one. This is typically Rebublican but not exclusively so, sad to say.

Me? I'd rather live small and help others than judge how they got to be in need, as well as try to be involved in how tax dollars are best spent to help others by political activism.