What explains the Republican nominee’s fondness for Russia’s president?

As I write, the election outcome is still in the balance, so this remark has a use-by date. IF Trump wins, the event will be a discontinuity in US politics, as well as a giving a shock to US markets. If Trump gets elected, Putin's supposed influence in Washington will be the least of our worries.

"...Yanukovych, the disgraced President of Ukraine who was given refuge in Russia"

Yes, disgraced because Hillary Clinton tried to kill him same way as they killed Gaddaffi....but with the difference Yanukovych was the democratically elected President of Ukraine, the last legitimate President of that nations, who won the 2010 Elections.

And yes, first there was the "interference" of the U.S. in Russian internal affairs in a deeply violent way.

I don't understand why ppl still believe in Clinton? After all, have the people read the leaked emails or just blindly believe this liar and the main media which is rigged? How many people care about the death of Seth Rich, Shawn Lucas?
They all have insider information about Clinton but just died mysteriously? I guess any EDUCATED people will not think this is a coincidence.

Clinton and Bill has taken the flight Lolita Express 26 times within 3 years, and god knows if they have committed any child abuse? Talking about respecting woman, Hillary helps to cover Bill, a rapist, and I see no point in calling this woman respecting but abuse of political power to violate the spirit of law.

If this election is about the candidate personality but not issues, I just see how evil one is. I am not saying Trump is good and I am not his supporter, but at least all he did is just "minority flaw"(e.g. tax avoiding) compared with endangering the nation security.

The latest polls say this is the first time Trump has led the matchup since last October. Trump 41%, Clinton 39%. Another one 46% vs 45%. It’s the right time to take the lead a week before elections. I don’t see anything bad if Trump and Putin meet in case he becomes president to start another détente. Or you feel it's better to have an old mad babushka who mixes up her private life with official one and uses the same email address for her sentimental revelations and White House business. In climacteric fit of rage, she can easily hit the red button. She will be a mother-in-law for the World. Who wants that!? FBI watches Hillary and might start a law case.

Standard hit piece. TE has long believed it's a great idea to bicker endlessly with Russia over strategically worthless bits of the east end of Europe. Bits which have undeniably been in the Russian sphere of influence in the past. Pointless proxy wars with nuclear powers are such a hoot. But Trump says no, so we get this drivel.

On any given day, plenty of intelligent & generally vigilant people have their pocket picked while distracted. That does not make the thieves "ten feet tall." It is human nature, especially the human nature of highly decent people, to struggle to conceive of what actions someone extremely unethical might be willing to risk undertaking. Scam artists & identity thieves of all stripes thrive on this specific weakness in human foresight.

On this particular day, the New York Times published, on its front page, an explicit attempt to rehabilitate the mass murderer, Basher al-Assad, via an interview in which his self-concept is extensively promoted. He's not ordering the extermination of families living in the wrong postal code -- he's merely ridding himself of 'enemies' who have defied his Presidential mandate. Western media publish casualty data numbering in the hundreds of lives lost per week in Aleppo; Putin's media, meanwhile, gleefully reported that "over 35,000 terrorists had been annihilated" since the Russian bombing campaign in Aleppo began.

Which is the right figure? Humans like to lull themselves with murmurs about statistics being 'relative' -- or perhaps 'irrelevant.' Except that, of course, in actual fact, there is a precise & finite number accurately corresponding to the casualty toll in Syria. We may not know it today; we do know that it continues to grow. We also know that by the measure of any civilised, rational human being, Assad lost legitimacy some years ago. He's no 'President': he's a bloody dictator, as bad as Pol Pot or Charles Taylor. There's really no excuse for publishing glowing descriptions of his "Franco-Ottoman palace," or his coolly polished, smug demeanour, while more thousands of children, powerless women & adolescent students are being bombed to death when they are not being starved, or being driven mad with thirst.

Putin's role in all this is no mystery. Trump's keenness on Putin is already emerging in the investigative reporting of sharp-eyed journalists writing for Slate, the Guardian & Mother Jones. The likelihood of Trump having been caught in some embarrassing vices in Moscow, of Putin & his reconstituted KGB (nor a Ministry, with expanded powers, not to mention all this wonderful technology the old KGB could not even imagine owning) having 'kompromat' on Trump -- stuff he can be blackmailed with -- is not in the least farfetched. Trump's past affiliations with known members of the Russian mob who drew him into ventures of their own have already been described in detail, in the same NY Times.

It's 2016. We can move past the old-school cynicism that said, well, just accept the Assads, Putins, Trumps of the world. What, give them more power? Expand the reach of their criminal ambitions? Allow more of the world's population to become enslaved? It's bad enough that we can't do anything, or much, to relieve the plight of 140 million Russians. It's bad enough that Ukrainians will have a hard slog in their epic battle to disengage from the Moscow criminal syndicates. Should we also provide Putin with a nice staging ground for further encroachment in the Middle East? Should we hand over US sovereignty to a bunch of amateurs caught with their pants down, so that more damage might be done to Western interests in the name of "getting along better with Russia"?

What's Putin after? Breaking down Nato, of course. Softening up Europe so that he can extort concessions with threats. A Trump Presidency could prove to be the equivalent of shutting down the nuclear deterrent altogether, if Trump decides "the risk of war with strong Russia & strong Putin, in the context of our debt, makes it necessary" to dismantle America's defences. Slashing military budgets to cut taxes, signing radical new 'deals' with the Kremlin (while collecting the obligatory 'Otkat' kickbacks), all in the name of "America First" (after Russia, of course) is not a farfetched scenario in the event of a GOP win.

Trump is volatile, unpredictable, obstinate, in love with himself & unable to check his own worst impulses. He also loves money. If he is not already being paid, or funded, by Kremlin assets, he will certainly leap at the chance in the future. To suggest Putin is merely making 'offhand comments' & is not actually ready to pounce on any perceived American vulnerability -- exactly as he pounced on Kerry's exaggerated sense of his own powers of persuasion & discernment -- corresponds precisely to the kind of momentary lapse in vigilance that allows a skilled thief to make off with someone's priceless billfold, or briefcase, or flash drive, at the worst possible time, in the blink of an eye. Don't be fooled. Don't let your guard down.

Imagine a USA-Russia coalition, with all their nuclear warheads they could hold the entire planet to ransom with ease. It's a sound plan I suppose, for a tyrant. Winning the election is just the first step in such a plan.

When will the FBI tell us about their long ongoing investigation into the RUSSIAN SECRET TRUMP SERVERS ?
This is not a mistake it is a plan.

Hmmm. After reading this "pay for play" Clinton article, I am considering not to renew my subscription to the Economist. Prior to this and similar Clinton slanted articles, I had great faith that the Economist would give me news that I could recommend to others to read. Now I am questioning everything I read in the Economist. I suspect that this comment will be washed and bleached in the "Clinton" way of dealing with un-sheep like comments.

The presidential candidate The Economist endorsed in 2008 and 2012 was supposed to bring a better appreciation of how other nations operate. As Secretary of State, the first thing Hillary Clinton did is set a 'reset button' on America/Russia relations. Mitt Romney was ridiculed for not realising that the Cold War is over.

Does The Economist actually have a consistent position or does it just repeat what the Democratic nominee is saying even when it's the complete opposite to what has been said before?

Barack Obama and Donald Trump were and are right. The Cold War is over. Communism is dead. What the world needs is a repetition of the 1930s when Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin got together to defeat Nazism. The presidents of the United States, Russia and other leaders of good will need to get together to defeat the real enemy.

The real enemy of today is Islamism. Starting a war with Russia (which Hillary Clinton seems determined to do) is stupid and pointless. Hillary Clinton is two decades behind the times and does not even recognise the modern enemy (because doing so is apparently racist) even as innocents get slaughtered in Orlando and San Bernardino. Hillary Clinton does not seem to care if your son or daughter gets killed. The only thing she seems to care about is that her corruption, undermining of democracy and nefarious dealings are not revealed. As Donald Trump said: "What a nasty woman."

Trump's sexual obsession with Putin is unsurprising considering his mental and personality disabilities. What is more disturbing is the reciprocated sexual obsession with Putin from the Trumpette. Through some comically misguided notion of patriotism, the Trumpette has degenerated into an unwitting Russian troll somehow valuing the Slav over the American. Never before in US history has treason to such a degree been witnessed

Kremlin trolls are all in for Donald "Putin-won't-go-into-Ukraine" Dump.

Dump is clearly an uninformed useful idiot whom Tsar Adolf Putler would easily manipulate.

"You're right Comrade Donald, NATO isn't needed. How can I help you eliminate it?"

"How Vladimir Putin's Russia has rehabilitated 1,000 years of despotic rulers"

Just what some trolls like to see. Rehabilitation of Ivan the Terrible, Joseph Stalin the Horrible, etc.

Ask Donald how he would like Putin to be known ?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-vladimir-putins-russia-has-rehabilitated-10...

TE is a globalist Rothschild and Soros front. The reason why so many commenters hate Russia is because Putin threw Soros out of Russia, including all of his satellite organizations. Sorry, globalists, Putin doesn't want to play your games.

This is not complex:

Trump admires Putin because his people like him and follow him. He is a strong leader.

Trump does not like Obama because Obama is a weak, feckless leader hated by most of the people.

Hillary is even worse than Obama and will complete the destruction of the U.S.

Trump will restore the U.S. to a Constitutional Republic, like the one envisioned by our founders.

Do you get it, my brilliant friend?

More propaganda from TE.

Why not point to Hillary and Podesta as the true friends of Russia? After all, Hillary was the one who sold them 20% of our Uranium supply. Podesta is the one who owns thousands of shares of Russian stock.

The Liberal, radical left always accuses their opponents of doing what they do. It is an Alinsky tactic.

… Instead of the lesser of two, call about the least of three. Only Governor Johnson is on the ballot in all 50 states! In this reason letter from the FBI director could just as easily be something from the Clinton campaign to panic voters who were thinking of supporting Donald Trump.

Trump had great fondness for Russia president because he is a smart person. He outwit and outsmart Obama and Hillary many times- in Ukraine, in Syria,and in Turkey.

Your best ally, Turkey goes to Russia and offer their deep apology for downing Russia plane.
Few month ago, Turkey was blaming Russia for trespassing their airspace and justify their military aggression. Like an idiot, US blindly support Turkey on this issue.

Now, Turkey offer apology to Russia over such mistake. It deliver a big blow to USA.

Turkey want to improve economic trade with Russia when EU are busy thinking to tighten Sanction on Russia. Another big blow to USA .

It is very hypocrite for West to accuse Trump given that the West had great fondness for Roman empire - a bloody dictator and greedy imperialists ( like current Russia ).

Ms. Clinton is Putin's true friend. As Secretary of State she authorized the sale of 20% of North America's uranium ore to a Russian-owned company, in return for contributions to the "Clinton Foundation."

It's no wonder Ms. Clinton deleted those 30,000 emails detailing her corruption with Putin and others. Now that they've turned up on another server, there enough evidence to send Ms. Clinton to the Crowbar Hotel for the rest of her life.

The truth is that there are lots of FBI agents who are controlled by KGB. This leak proves that.

Are Brietbart and Infowars handing out free access to The Economist comment section? Or is it just St. Petersburg trolls having very little to do now that Trump is busy gloating about the FBI announcing it has found some more emails (they don't know what's in them, if anything, but that has never stopped the low information Trump and his easily lead followers)