I will die if Biden answers some questions in Spanish tonight. I wish Beto would of done the whole debate in Spanish, lol.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Mayor Pete should answer all questions tonight in one of the 30 different languages he knows, except English.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
GTFO white dude? Are you mental? Nice fucking message. Racism and sexism cuts all ways.
Yes, please explain All Lives Matter to me while we're at it. There are plenty of candidates qualified up there that are not this, so all things equal I'll take any of them over the vanilla up there. Talk about triggered, christ. Also, please tell me more about white man grievance while we're at it - to me, a white man - that's who we need to hear from right now in this world.
GTFO white dude? Are you mental? Nice fucking message. Racism and sexism cuts all ways.
Yes, please explain All Lives Matter to me while we're at it. There are plenty of candidates qualified up there that are not this, so all things equal I'll take any of them over the vanilla up there. Talk about triggered, christ. Also, please tell me more about white man grievance while we're at it - to me, a white man - that's who we need to hear from right now in this world.
Ok so my color and sex disqualifies me from being president. How very tolerant of the progressives.
GTFO white dude? Are you mental? Nice fucking message. Racism and sexism cuts all ways.
Yes, please explain All Lives Matter to me while we're at it. There are plenty of candidates qualified up there that are not this, so all things equal I'll take any of them over the vanilla up there. Talk about triggered, christ. Also, please tell me more about white man grievance while we're at it - to me, a white man - that's who we need to hear from right now in this world.
Ok so my color and sex disqualifies me from being president. How very tolerant of the progressives.
It does? All things equal I'm taking the woman, even better a woman of color. You're right, how intolerant of me.
Warren (of course I am, she put her message out there for those to hear it and she didn't waver. Didn't kill, but got her message across effectively)
Castro (Tentatively, I want this as the Prez/VP ticket - I am more and more impressed with him the more I hear from him)
deBlasio (hate to say it, but he got people fired up, even though to me it came off as fake outrage)
Middling:
Klobuchar (for owning Inslee on abortion, that was sweet)
Inless (meh, he was fine)
Losers:
Tim Ryan (big time GTFO, random white dude)
John DeLaney (Also GTFO other white dude)
Big time Beto (thank god)
Gabbard
Booker (I guess people liked him more than I did, but I loved this "oh shit you just robbed my Spanish routine":)
If there was a rule to cut out at least 4-5 of the 10 from last night right now I'm cutting: Ryan Delaney Beto Gabbard
GTFO white dude? Are you mental? Nice fucking message. Racism and sexism cuts all ways.
If you don't know what racism and sexism is.
Chaos is the perfect term to describe your disposition dude. I thought it was great TV lastnight. I can't wait to watch more of it tonight. Are you not a white dude yourself Chaos? What the hell does race have to do with any of this? Regardless of race or gender, aren't you just looking for the candidate that has the best shot at beating Trump?
GTFO white dude? Are you mental? Nice fucking message. Racism and sexism cuts all ways.
Yes, please explain All Lives Matter to me while we're at it. There are plenty of candidates qualified up there that are not this, so all things equal I'll take any of them over the vanilla up there. Talk about triggered, christ. Also, please tell me more about white man grievance while we're at it - to me, a white man - that's who we need to hear from right now in this world.
Ok so my color and sex disqualifies me from being president. How very tolerant of the progressives.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
I love that cartoon...because it's apt so frequently.
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I love that cartoon...because it's apt so frequently.
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
But if it is in the category of "random white dude". Then it is just a random white dude.
Bernie is not a random white dude. Not even Biden is. Inslee got his eyes. But some dudes just happen to be random.
And then some people want them to GTFO.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
I love that cartoon...because it's apt so frequently.
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
This will be the case if the Dem nominee is a white dude. OR if any we're a better choice when weighed against an equally qualified woman and/or has better policy. Why does this have to be repeated?
I love that cartoon...because it's apt so frequently.
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
Generally I'm with you, but with 20+ candidates they do qualify as random white dudes to me. Nothing about them stands out or is compelling. It's less about their gender or colour of their skin and more about their life stories (of which their gender and race play a part). I would also put Amy in that bunch.
I think it would also be appropriate to add OLD to the random white dude description.
Regardless, all 20+ of them are leagues better than the giant A-hole who currently occupies The White House.
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,464
She came off as the most sensible candidate last night. I wish she had more of a chance. And I wish about 5 of those guys were not even on the stage.
Why didn't they pick the top polling candidates in the polls to have them all go at each other? Wouldn't it have been more productive to have Biden, Pete, Kamela and Sanders on the same state as Warren, Booker, Beto, and Amy?
They drew the lineup for both nights at random....and you end up with this. Good part is the funding requirements doubles for the September debate so we should lose close to half the field......hopefully.
I like Klobuchar a little bit, somewhat pragmatic.
Really liked the format last night, too. The moderators held them to the question posed, or at least in the beginning it was this way. Also, I liked that they left some room for some back-and-forth.
If I'm ranking my personal preference it's: 1) Warren by a mile 2) Castro 3) Harris 4) Klobuchar 5) Yang 6) Buttigieg 7) Sanders 8) Inslee 9) Biden 10) Gillibrand That's more than enough ranking
I'd be surprised if it was truly random. I know that's what they said but....how convenient! You end up with an equal amount of top tier candidates on both nights so on both nights they are all right smack in the middle of the stage.
She came off as the most sensible candidate last night. I wish she had more of a chance. And I wish about 5 of those guys were not even on the stage.
Why didn't they pick the top polling candidates in the polls to have them all go at each other? Wouldn't it have been more productive to have Biden, Pete, Kamela and Sanders on the same state as Warren, Booker, Beto, and Amy?
They drew the lineup for both nights at random....and you end up with this. Good part is the funding requirements doubles for the September debate so we should lose close to half the field......hopefully.
I like Klobuchar a little bit, somewhat pragmatic.
Really liked the format last night, too. The moderators held them to the question posed, or at least in the beginning it was this way. Also, I liked that they left some room for some back-and-forth.
If I'm ranking my personal preference it's: 1) Warren by a mile 2) Castro 3) Harris 4) Klobuchar 5) Yang 6) Buttigieg 7) Sanders 8) Inslee 9) Biden 10) Gillibrand That's more than enough ranking
I'd be surprised if it was truly random. I know that's what they said but....how convenient! You end up with an equal amount of top tier candidates on both nights so on both nights they are all right smack in the middle of the stage.
It isn't equal?
Night 2 Kamala Biden Bernie Pete
Night 1 Warren
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
She came off as the most sensible candidate last night. I wish she had more of a chance. And I wish about 5 of those guys were not even on the stage.
Why didn't they pick the top polling candidates in the polls to have them all go at each other? Wouldn't it have been more productive to have Biden, Pete, Kamela and Sanders on the same state as Warren, Booker, Beto, and Amy?
They drew the lineup for both nights at random....and you end up with this. Good part is the funding requirements doubles for the September debate so we should lose close to half the field......hopefully.
I like Klobuchar a little bit, somewhat pragmatic.
Really liked the format last night, too. The moderators held them to the question posed, or at least in the beginning it was this way. Also, I liked that they left some room for some back-and-forth.
If I'm ranking my personal preference it's: 1) Warren by a mile 2) Castro 3) Harris 4) Klobuchar 5) Yang 6) Buttigieg 7) Sanders 8) Inslee 9) Biden 10) Gillibrand That's more than enough ranking
I'd be surprised if it was truly random. I know that's what they said but....how convenient! You end up with an equal amount of top tier candidates on both nights so on both nights they are all right smack in the middle of the stage.
Haha. Ya gotta take the tinfoil hat off, man. Each campaign was present for the drawing and confirmed it's randomness.
Equal amount of top tier candidates? I'd say tonight is soooo strong and heavier than last night - Buttigieg, Biden, Sanders, Harris. Last night Warren got the B team. Though, I have no complaints it helping Castro shine.
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
Yes, a shifty way to word the question but you can almost always turn any wording to your advantage. Depending on how you want to come across, you can come right out and say “it’s never been about taking guns away” or be more subtle about it.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,464
Okay, touché. Haven't checked the polls lately and I thought Booker and Klobuchar were polling higher than 1%. Ha.
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
Yes, a shifty way to word the question but you can almost always turn any wording to your advantage. Depending on how you want to come across, you can come right out and say “it’s never been about taking guns away” or be more subtle about it.
Like I pointed out in this thread before with the Face the Nation interview with Bernie - there is something wrong with american journalists. At least on cable news shows. But they are shit all over. Leading questions. Heavily loaded questions etc.
It's really surprising seeing how journalists behave. Or "hosts" or whatever they want to call themselves.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,464
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
Yes, a shifty way to word the question but you can almost always turn any wording to your advantage. Depending on how you want to come across, you can come right out and say “it’s never been about taking guns away” or be more subtle about it.
Well the other way of looking at it is some people out there (none watching these debates, I suspect) need to hear that the answer is a "no" to that question.
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
Yes, a shifty way to word the question but you can almost always turn any wording to your advantage. Depending on how you want to come across, you can come right out and say “it’s never been about taking guns away” or be more subtle about it.
Well the other way of looking at it is some people out there (none watching these debates, I suspect) need to hear that the answer is a "no" to that question.
Right, as they clutch their fallic symbol closely. They'll also be the first when hearing "no" as a response to also not believe said response.
I love that cartoon...because it's apt so frequently.
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
Generally I'm with you, but with 20+ candidates they do qualify as random white dudes to me. Nothing about them stands out or is compelling. It's less about their gender or colour of their skin and more about their life stories (of which their gender and race play a part). I would also put Amy in that bunch.
I think it would also be appropriate to add OLD to the random white dude description.
Regardless, all 20+ of them are leagues better than the giant A-hole who currently occupies The White House.
What about the random chicks? Should they gtfo? I think so.
Comments
I wish Beto would of done the whole debate in Spanish, lol.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
How do you say "folks" and "the worlds greatest experiment" in spanish?
Oh come one. Bollocks. Saying there have been enough white dudes in the American government is in no way sexism or racism.
I thought it was great TV lastnight. I can't wait to watch more of it tonight.
Are you not a white dude yourself Chaos?
What the hell does race have to do with any of this? Regardless of race or gender, aren't you just looking for the candidate that has the best shot at beating Trump?
I'm not sure this is one of those times. I understand that white dudes are over-represented, but case-by-case, I don't like the idea of not voting for a good candidate because he's a white dude. You want a good candidate and if that happens to be a white dude, fine. If not, also fine.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Bernie is not a random white dude. Not even Biden is. Inslee got his eyes. But some dudes just happen to be random.
And then some people want them to GTFO.
Was the biggest moment of night 1.
I think it would also be appropriate to add OLD to the random white dude description.
Regardless, all 20+ of them are leagues better than the giant A-hole who currently occupies The White House.
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/castro-to-beto-o-rourke-i-think-you-should-do-your-homework-on-immigration-laws-62753861843
I had two problems with Chuck Todd, who sucks, and the moderators last night: first, couching the issue/question of firearms in a way of "would you take away people's guns?", which, uh, has never been the case. And it's a shitty narrative that feeds into the garbage people. The other was the question that was posed about immigration in a way about "what would you do to address border crossing? (sic) or would it be a civil offense?" It's already a civil offense! Inform people in a way that's not dumb - it should be worded: "Crossing the border illegally is a civil offense. Would you do more or less in regards to penalty?" and not feed into some false narrative.
Night 2
Kamala
Biden
Bernie
Pete
Night 1
Warren
Equal amount of top tier candidates? I'd say tonight is soooo strong and heavier than last night - Buttigieg, Biden, Sanders, Harris. Last night Warren got the B team. Though, I have no complaints it helping Castro shine.
It's really surprising seeing how journalists behave. Or "hosts" or whatever they want to call themselves.
Chuck Todd is trash - like what kind of question is this?
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1144068747000504321