| EricHiggin said: The response should've been what was explained in the post below. Nobody talks about it because everyone could see that Putin was trolling and not serious about his endorsement of Harris. |
I'm pretty sure people did talk about it. And yeah, people (read: Americans and people interested in the election) are going to pay more attention to a potential president of the United States, than some foreign dictator endorsing someone (and supposedly laughing about it).
Putin trolling America with an endorsement isn't the same thing as Trump "trolling" America.
And to some extent, I ignored Putin's endorsement because manipulation can work in all kinds of ways.
A lot of left wing people distrust Jill Stein because of ties to Russia.
Putin can convince some number of people to not vote for Harris, because they don't trust him, and if he's supporting her (whether it's true or not), then probably shouldn't support her either.
In a different world, where a lot of left wingers loved Putin, Putin could reasonably have endorsed Trump for the same reason.
What result makes sense, depends on where people are at. Which people are you able to manipulate for or against.
The same action can have completely opposite consequences based on where people are at. => if most people believed the Earth were flat, and you told them it was round, you'd get called an idiot (despite being correct). If most people believe the Earth were round, and you told them it was round, people would just say "duh".
The same action, different response.
