Opinion piece: If Russia influenced your vote, you don't understand the media.

Source: stocknewsusa.com

In the past weeks, the FBI has released a statement saying that the Russian hacks that were released about Hillary Clinton's email servers were done to influence the outcome of the American presidential election. Democrats are absolutely furious, Republicans are indifferent because it helped them win a much needed victory to fuel their agenda.

But here's the thing with this whole fiasco. Russia is known for propaganda and influencing the thoughts of many people. Look at Crimea, look at the current feud between Russia and the Ukraine, look at any history of Russian politics and how they use propaganda to get what they want. Putin and his team are some of the most talented propagandists in the world, rivaling North Korea and taking examples of the propaganda machine that ISIS uses.

You cannot believe everything that comes out of the media. Both sides launch curveballs at you, and then they leave it to you to figure it out. As a student who studies the media for a degree, I have seen the techniques that both journalists and governments have used to sway people. If your vote was influenced by Russian hackers, and you were voting differently before the hacks came out, you were manipulated by the media. Never be manipulated by what they are putting out.

Putin wanted Trump to win. That much was clear. With a Democrat president, a Russian alliance would be next to impossible. Putin is known to have a very low opinion of Obama's leadership over the past 8 years. I'm honestly surprised that people didn't take this information with a grain of salt, knowing how much of a tyrant Putin's governmental ideas are.

The fact that people are mad about Russia supposedly influencing an election surprises me because any other time, people dismiss Putin and Russia as if they are just Charlie Brown's teacher. His approval rating in the US is lower than the temperatures in the Arctic, yet people listened to him on this. Why?

The people that voted based on the information that was leaked had their minds made up long before Putin and Guccifer 2.0 released any information. Like Fox News and Huffington Post, people went to this information to reaffirm their already existing beliefs. The people that voted against Hillary Clinton based solely on these hacks didn't like her in the first place, and they used this information to help articulate a better position on why they didn't like her.

The information the hacks revealed was intriguing. The Democratic Party is falling apart between Hillary's failed bid, Debbie Wasserman Schultz's resignation, Donna Brazile's fall from grace, and emails from people like John Podesta and his staff trying to steer the election away from Bernie Sanders, who, if the election actually reflected the will of the people, would have almost surely have been the Democratic nominee.

Instead of looking at Russia and blaming them for the "rise of Trump", maybe the public should look at themselves and see how they were influenced by propaganda and were played by Putin's own game. Maybe the fault actually lies with the American people, who complain about media manipulation but then repeatedly fall into it.

Russia is not innocent. But they are not the only problem either.

Questioning the American Family Association

Source: en.wikipedia.org

In my house, FOX News is the most watched news outlet. As a person, I'll listen passively. As a journalist, I question everything.

Last night on The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly talked about how the American Family Association had made a list of places that were "Christmas friendly" in their marketing strategies. The list ranked from 5-star nice to 5-star naughty. To see the list, visit the link here.

Now, I've always been one to say Merry Christmas because that's the holiday I celebrate. It's never been a knock at other religions, I just say it without thinking. However, to rank stores based on how they choose to advertise the holidays is wrong, especially coming from a place like the AFA, which stirs up continuous controversy.

The American Family Association is a network of advocates for family values. Sounds great, right? Well here's the thing. They are predominately conservative and they lead petitions and bills such as this one, which is asking shoppers to boycott Target stores because they allow transgendered citizens to use the bathroom of the gender they identify as, rather than their birth gender. Also, the AFA literally condemns homosexuality and abortion, creating a controversy in modern day progressive America.

While people have the right to stand for what they believe in, having a company like the AFA telling you where to shop for Christmas, knowing the values they promote, is questionable to those who have any sort of ethics in them. By them telling you to shop at these places, are they telling you that these stores hold themselves to these questionable morals, even though they claim to be inclusive of all people?

A family is a family. Divorced, same sex, step, traditional, single parent or anything else. The AFA pushes outdated morals onto society by pushing fallacies such as the bathroom bill only puts little girls in danger, when if you look at it, little boys also face the same dangers.

Their logic is incredibly simplified, outdated arguments that should not be followed. While they are free to speak their minds, consumers should look at the source of this list, and what this organization stands for, before they continue their shopping experience.

Opinion Piece: Petition for Faithless Electors to Renounce Donald Trump as the President Elect

A Change.org petition started by social worker Daniel Brezenoff has become the largest petition in the history of the site, with 4.6 million signatures. The petition was published on November 10th, just after the US Presidential Election's results became public knowledge. The idea was spurred due to the realization that Hillary Clinton won by a landslide in the popular vote, by more than 2.5 million votes. Brezenoff also argues that Trump is very "unfit to serve."

In my opinion, Brezenoff has a point. The man has no political experience, has no filter, has no empathy, and never takes responsibility for what he says and how he treats the people that he is supposed to represent as a whole. He has produced blatantly disrespectful rhetoric about large populations of people throughout his entire campaign, even mocking a disabled reporter on live television.

So, some may ask, where is the validity of this plea? Well, the electoral college was created to protect the nation from being run by "crazy" candidates that the popular vote has the potential to result in. Apparently, this time, I didn't work the way it was expected to. The basic rule of the electoral college is that the electors are supposed to vote based on the popular vote of their specified region, which in this election were highly conservative (as more rural areas were represented and the densely populated more liberal areas were not).

The results of the electoral vote was 306 votes for Trump and 232 for Clinton. 270 electoral votes are necessary to win the Presedential election, but the Electoral College has the opportunity to reverse the decision by re-voting on December 19th, a month before the inauguration. This is where Faithless Electors come into play. A Faithless Elector is an elector on the Electoral College, who chooses to vote against his or her population. This usually comes with some form of legal ramifications, usually a monetary fine.

Now, there is a way for electors to not have to worry about their potential  legal ramifications as a law firm is offering probono legal assistance for those electors who do not want to vote for Trump. According to the law, a Faithless Elector has every right to go against what is predicted of them, if they have a strong justification to back up their decision. Therefore, if an elector has a strong moral justification for going against Trump, they have every right to vote against him! This law firm, is offering to present your case, your justification, for free!

I beg of all electors, if you do not want Trump to be the United State's president, for whatever reason, contact the law firm who is offering you help, obtain information, and do the right thing. Vote against Trump!

You can visit electoralcollegepetition.com for more information.

The Downfall of Tomi Lahren

Source: totalprosports.com

Last week, conservative talk show host Tomi Lahren was hosted on political comedian Trevor Noah's popular show "The Daily Show" to talk politics in light of the recent election. Lahren is an outspoken critic of many liberal platforms, including Black Lives Matter and feminism. Noah had her on the show to introduce his predominately liberal audience to the other side of the conversation.

The interview can be seen here, if you are interested. Fair warning, it's about 30 minutes long, so grab yourself a snack and some hot cocoa.

As the conversation went on, Noah consistently challenged Lahren's views, and seemed to be finding gaping holes within them. Noah repeatedly asked Lahren how BLM protestors were supposed to be protesting if not on the street or by kneeling during the national anthem, to which Lahren continuously danced around the question, showing evidence of citing her own personal opinion rather than bringing forth solutions or facts that could be used to rectify the situation that she, and many other conservative Americans, see as a problem.

As the dust settled, conservatives and liberals alike agreed that Noah had clearly ripped through Lahren's usual rhetoric and that she had met her match. Usually, Lahren has no immediate challengers on her most controversial segment of her show, "Tomi", where her politically fueled rants consistently go viral. To see Lahren's usual fiery content be challenged, and torn apart, was a liberal victory that many are still celebrating this week.

Since the incident, Lahren has not made headlines, and Noah seems to have gone on with his show. Will Tomi go back to her usual status quo and continue to spout her usual information now that she has widely been found to be discredited by solid facts? You decide.