Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Politics and Religion
Might the Russians Have Flipped the Election to Trump?

Might the Russians Have Flipped the Election to Trump?

Last updated on: February 21, 2018 at 5:45 am by Gene Veith

0 Comments

Might the Russians Have Flipped the Election to Trump? 2018-02-20T18:30:05-05:00 Gene Veith

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The indictment filed by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller against 13 Russians and a Kremlin-connected organization shows that the Russian interference with the U.S. presidential election was no mere prank. Its scale and tactics were such that it may well have contributed some votes to Donald Trump. But even if it did, that by no means takes away the legitimacy of his election.

The Russian effort, according to the Mueller indictment, was a targeted, sophisticated attempt to prevent the election of Hillary Clinton and “establishment” Republicans. In the primaries, this meant helping Bernie Sanders and helping Donald Trump by discrediting Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. In the general election, this meant helping Donald Trump.

This does not mean there was collusion with his campaign. Trump had criticized American sanctions against Russia, which the Obama administration with the input of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had imposed because of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. So Russia had a motive for interfering on behalf of Trump. He need not have known anything about it.

But the Russian investment in his campaign was considerable. If the budget for the operation was $1,250,000 per month, as the indictment claims, that would come to $15,000,000 per year. If the effort ran from 2014 to 2016, that would come to $45,000,000.

According to this breakdown of campaign funds, Trump raised $957.6 million for his election, including $543.4 million from the Republican party, $334.8 million from his own campaign, and $79.3 million from Super-PACS.

These figures do not include money spent by independent entities, such as the Russians, that did not give to the campaign as such. While chicken feed compared to the total spending on the campaign (including Clinton’s much bigger purse of $1.4 billion), the Russian investment of $45,000,000 was nearly 58% as much as that of all of the Super-PACS.

Furthermore, according to the indictment, the Russians targeted the “purple states,” those with a closely-balanced mixture of Democrats and Republicans that could be tipped either way (the indictment mentioned specifically Florida, Virginia, and Colorado).

That the Russians concentrated their advertisements, rallies, and social media activity on those states that could actually swing the election demonstrates an actual intention to determine the election’s outcome.

Read this account of what the Russians did in Florida. It concludes that “the operation in Florida, the nation’s largest swing state, was in a class by itself.” That includes organizing seemingly grass-roots “Florida Goes Trump” rallies.

The Florida Goes Trump rallies were held in more than 20 cities across the state on Aug. 20, 2016. News releases touting the event were rife with grammatical errors and used language ripped from a traditional Trump stump speech.

“We want to support our candidate and show the whole country that we must unite and make America great again!” read a posting about the rallies. “On August 20, we want to gather patriots on the start of Floridian towns and cities and march to unite America and support Donald Trump!”

That slightly-non-idiomatic English characteristic of non-native speakers was also evident in the social media barrage.

“We want to support our candidate and show the whole country that we must unite and make America great again!” read a posting about the rallies. “On August 20, we want to gather patriots on the start of Floridian towns and cities and march to unite America and support Donald Trump!”

Russian-linked Facebook group “Being Patriotic” sent messages to its followers as it was planning the rallies, stressing the importance of winning Florida.

“Florida is still a purple state and we need to appoint it red,” read the message, according to the indictment. “If we lose Florida, we lose America.”

These rallies included a stunt that would be picked up and repeated at other non-Russian sponsored Trump events: having someone dress up like Hillary Clinton and putting her into a cage on a flat-bed truck, dramatizing the “Lock her up!” chant.

Also, the Russians used social media to put out false rumors to Florida voters:

Beyond the rallies, the Russian scheme also used its social media reach to falsely tie Clinton to voter fraud in South Florida, a region with a long history of voting abnormalities.

Russian-linked Twitter accounts on Nov. 2, well into the state’s early-voting period, blasted out a tweet saying voter fraud was occurring because “tens of thousands of ineligible mail in Hillary voters are being reported in Broward County, Florida.”

Could such efforts flipped the always crucial battleground state of Florida with its 29 electoral votes into the Trump column? Trump beat Clinton in Florida with a 1.2% margin, a difference of about 113,000 votes. Could that many voters have changed their mind because of the rallies, advertising, social media commentary, and the false rumors put out by the Russians?

If campaign rallies, online advertising, and social media initiatives are not effective politically, why do the political parties and their candidates spend so much money on them?

Might the Russian operation, in such a close election, have tipped the balance in these battleground states to Trump? Might the Russians have actually made Donald Trump our president?

First of all, this is highly unlikely. Though Clinton won the popular vote, Trump won the Electoral College by a fairly large margin, 304-227. In the 2000 election, the contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore hinged on the outcome of Florida’s hanging chads. But Florida was not critical to Trump, with his 77 electoral vote advantage. Of the purple states mentioned in the indictment, only Florida voted for Trump. Virginia and Colorado voted for Clinton. Trump won because he was able to turn Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, states that had voted for the Democratic candidate for president since the 1990s.

More to the point, even if the Russians did influence the way some Americans cast their votes–in fact, even if they influenced enough voters to swing the election to Trump–that would not negate the legitimacy of Trump’s election.

We can never know the reasons why Americans chose to cast their vote for one candidate or the other. Who influenced them, what arguments they found persuasive, what ads had an impact on their thinking–if any–is irrelevant, as long as the voter made a free decision at the ballot box.

The law states that foreign governments may not get materially involved in our elections. Russian involvement was clearly not only a violation of American law, but a serious act of aggression against the United States of America, a sort of non-military invasion of our nation.

But unless the Mueller investigation can show that President Trump and his campaign knowingly conspired with the Russians–and there has been no evidence of that as far as anyone has shown–he has been duly elected to his office.

Illustration by Mike Licht, “Boris and Natasha Meet with Don Jr.” [after Rocky & Bulllwinkle Show] via Flickr, Creative Commons License

2016 Presidential Election

Mueller indictments

Mueller investigation

Russian election interference

Trump and the Russians

Previous Post

February 20, 2018

The Two Kingdoms Doctrine Does Not Mean Moral Relativism

Next Post

February 21, 2018 By 2050 Mind Melds Will Replace Language

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"While she worked for Trump she was a tool's tool!"

reg

Luther on Tools

"I know wired earbuds are making a comeback (I never stopped using them as I ..."

reg

Luther on Tools

"VCRs, tape decks, and cassette players are all having a revival among a segment of ..."

Tom Hering

Luther on Tools

"As a (retired) lawyer I see potential liability from sharing things like power or sharp ..."

reg

Luther on Tools

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category America Apologetics Art baseball Bible Blog Christ Church crime Culture Economics Education Ethics Family Food Football Government History Holidays Holy Week Humor International Islam Language Law Life Issues Literature Media Medicine Movies Music Nature News Personal Philosophy Politics psychology Reformation Religions Sacraments Science sex Social Science Sports technology television terrorism Theology Uncategorized Vocation war

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

To whom does Paul say he has become all things so that by all possible means he might save some?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The Jews The Gentiles Everyone The weak

Books by This Author Books by Gene Veith

See All Titles »