But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
Does anyone else feel like Biden gets a free pass with his outbursts? He fat shamed someone about a month ago for asking a question he didn’t like and the other day when asked why he didn’t do better in the first results he called the girl a dog faced pony soldier.
I haven’t seen anyone upset about it (although I’m sure there have been) I just see news anchors laughing it off and making jokes about it.
Hannity talked about it last night. And I know the stigma that comes with posting something from Fox News (especially Hannity) around here. But fuck it. When he's defending Trump, he's wrong. But when he's calling out Biden, for me, a lot of the time he's right. Biden's making a fool of himself with some of this shit and to call someone a "dog-faced pony solider" isn't just insulting to the person, he sounded like some relic from the late-1800's or something. Go to the 2:53 mark of the video.
Another thing that you won't see covered on the left-leaning networks is that some maniac tried to run over a bunch of republican volunteers in Flordia yesterday as they tried to register people to vote. Drove right into their tent and barely missed running over some elderly volunteers...
saw an article in wapo or through yahoo's aggregator app.
the more people who vote the better imo. of course I would prefer voting a certain way, but that isnt my place. My place is to encourage any would be voter to view each candidate or issue from all sides and vote your conscience.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
saw an article in wapo or through yahoo's aggregator app.
the more people who vote the better imo. of course I would prefer voting a certain way, but that isnt my place. My place is to encourage any would be voter to view each candidate or issue from all sides and vote your conscience.
I'm the same way. It's annoying when people encourage others to vote...but only for who they want them to vote for.
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Prudent?
Look, these candidates had people at every caucus for the most part. They knew the results or close to it. Iowa messed up and almost robbed Pete of the momentum a campaign like his needs, so he did what he had to do. And .... well looky there.... was he right?
And why are you conflating what Pete thinks the American electoral system should be with what the caucus system actually is in Iowa at this moment? What does one thing have to do with the other?
As I said "and now you maybe will say ut that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa"
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
And why are you conflating what Pete thinks the American electoral system should be with what the caucus system actually is in Iowa at this moment? What does one thing have to do with the other?
As I said "and now you maybe will say ut that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa"
No comprendez
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
cuz he wants the fake social democrat that he cant vote for to win.
dude is 79 yrs old
he was a SD for 7 yrs of his adult life. the rest he's been independent.
Now If you believe so strongly in a political philosophy why arent you representing that philosophy more tangibly by running as same?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
Or.
A house is being painted. Covered by a wodden fence. A red and a blue paintbucket stand next to the fence.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor hopes its i blue. Bu he doesn't know yet because of the fence.
Days later the fence is taken down and it is blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
The fence was there.. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
cuz he wants the fake social democrat that he cant vote for to win.
What has me not being able to vote to do with anything, please explain.
And sound like you actually have an argument while doing it.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
How about constructing a mature argument and actually countering my point.
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
cuz he wants the fake social democrat that he cant vote for to win.
What has me not being able to vote to do with anything, please explain.
And sound like you actually have an argument while doing it.
Hello pot, meet the kettle.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
cuz he wants the fake social democrat that he cant vote for to win.
What has me not being able to vote to do with anything, please explain.
And sound like you actually have an argument while doing it.
Hello pot, meet the kettle.
kinda thought that was addressed in the quote he cut....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
How about constructing a mature argument and actually countering my point.
I just did. You just put your energy into putting people down, instead of having to face the argumentation. Proven not only by this, but also your "pot blabla kettle" post.
But it is okey. You have been bending backwards to try to save your arguments while they go sour in hours, for Biden and Pete these last few pages. I understand it takes a toll. You have been a (making up) Dream(s) Warrior.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
and I am still waiting for the answer from many pages ago.
just how will he get his agenda passed? hmmm? me thinks this is an impossibility, and he knows WHICH makes him a liar..... as well as a carpetbagging party hijacking independent.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
and I am still waiting for the answer from many pages ago.
just how will he get his agenda passed? hmmm? me thinks this is an impossibility, and he knows WHICH makes him a liar..... as well as a carpetbagging party hijacking independent.
You answer first. Decorum etc.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Does anyone else feel like Biden gets a free pass with his outbursts? He fat shamed someone about a month ago for asking a question he didn’t like and the other day when asked why he didn’t do better in the first results he called the girl a dog faced pony soldier.
I haven’t seen anyone upset about it (although I’m sure there have been) I just see news anchors laughing it off and making jokes about it.
Hannity talked about it last night. And I know the stigma that comes with posting something from Fox News (especially Hannity) around here. But fuck it. When he's defending Trump, he's wrong. But when he's calling out Biden, for me, a lot of the time he's right. Biden's making a fool of himself with some of this shit and to call someone a "dog-faced pony solider" isn't just insulting to the person, he sounded like some relic from the late-1800's or something. Go to the 2:53 mark of the video.
Another thing that you won't see covered on the left-leaning networks is that some maniac tried to run over a bunch of republican volunteers in Flordia yesterday as they tried to register people to vote. Drove right into their tent and barely missed running over some elderly volunteers...
Holy cow, I never heard that second story. But you're right, if it was flipped it would have been headline news on every network.
I can't stand Hannity. I usually watch the first 10-15 minutes of Tucker, I think it is pretty funny. He did talk about the Biden comments, but he seemed to be more making fun of Biden about it than being upset the way people are upset when Trump calls people names. The same news channels that are outraged over Trump calling names seem to laugh with Biden over these comments.
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
How about constructing a mature argument and actually countering my point.
I just did. You just put your energy into putting people down, instead of having to face the argumentation. Proven not only by this, but also your "pot blabla kettle" post.
But it is okey. You have been bending backwards to try to save your arguments while they go sour in hours, for Biden and Pete these last few pages. I understand it takes a toll. You have been a (making up) Dream(s) Warrior.
So with your silly story, you're saying that because of the chance that re-canvassing may change teh result, Pete should not declare victory. By contrast, because the re-canvassing may change the result it's okay that Sanders declares "decisive" victory? Can you please square that logic, because it completely escapes common sense.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
and I am still waiting for the answer from many pages ago.
just how will he get his agenda passed? hmmm? me thinks this is an impossibility, and he knows WHICH makes him a liar..... as well as a carpetbagging party hijacking independent.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
and I am still waiting for the answer from many pages ago.
just how will he get his agenda passed? hmmm? me thinks this is an impossibility, and he knows WHICH makes him a liar..... as well as a carpetbagging party hijacking independent.
You answer first. Decorum etc.
go back to the full quote......
See the part I quoted? That is what I want an answer to.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,348
oh I see now. because you cant vote your opinion is irrelevant.
now answer mine. its the 3rd time it was asked.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
cuz he wants the fake social democrat that he cant vote for to win.
dude is 79 yrs old
he was a SD for 7 yrs of his adult life. the rest he's been independent.
Now If you believe so strongly in a political philosophy why arent you representing that philosophy more tangibly by running as same?
Problem is there's no DSA party. At least not yet. That's why so many of them run as Democrats. I don't know enough about the Greens to know how well the platforms align or how well they're organized at the state or federal level.
It sounds to me like your beef should be with the DNC, at least as it relates to him running in the primary. If they let him run and he can get the votes, why wouldn't he? It's the easiest path for him to win that office.
This Democratic field is so flawed that even Biden still has a chance
I hope that means also, "Even Andrew Yang still has a chance to win". We need someone with a vision for the future (which is coming fast). That someone is Yang.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
But whatevz. He gets questions about it. He and Petes agrees the popular vote is what counts, so Bernie won - jippie. Pete weasel-pushing the narrative of his win was "smart" but backbone-less. Bernie countered it by him saying how he won for real. just like Biden countered when Pete attacked.
Weasel pushing? I'd argue the opposite. Bernie declaring "decisive" victory was much closer to weasely... considering as of this moment, Pete is the winner and has the most SDE's. Iowa is a caucus and that's how delegates work. You don't get to declare victory because you won the popular, when that's not how the process is set up. Just ask Hillary.
If you were an honest man, you would say they both were the winners getting the same delegates. That is what it was all about?
And I don't need to ask "Hillary" - I CAN JUST ASK PETE:
"At risk of of sounding a little simplistic, one thing I believe is that in an american presidential election, the person who gets the most votes ought to be the person who wins"
The "Pete standard" as Jake Tapper calls it. And even Pete can't spin it:
(and now you maybe will say - but that is the presidential election, he didn't say ioooowaaaaaa - he's free on a technicality.
And we all know who famously was let free on a technicality)
They didn't get the same delegate count, so why would anyone say that? It's 13-12 currently. Now that doesn't mean re-canvassing won't flip that, but as of now, it's not a tie.
What was it when he declared victory and had his team call up every news source in america to make sure that story spread?
Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not. So that means he had strong data coming from his precinct captains. Tell me what was weasly about it, and contrast it with why Sanders saying his victory was "decisive" is okay.
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
How about constructing a mature argument and actually countering my point.
I just did. You just put your energy into putting people down, instead of having to face the argumentation. Proven not only by this, but also your "pot blabla kettle" post.
But it is okey. You have been bending backwards to try to save your arguments while they go sour in hours, for Biden and Pete these last few pages. I understand it takes a toll. You have been a (making up) Dream(s) Warrior.
So with your silly story, you're saying that because of the chance that re-canvassing may change teh result, Pete should not declare victory. By contrast, because the re-canvassing may change the result it's okay that Sanders declares "decisive" victory? Can you please square that logic, because it completely escapes common sense.
C'mon @spiritual_chaos I'm ready to "face the argumentation". Explain to me why it's wrong for Pete to declare victory with an official lead in the delegates, but okay for Bernie who is behind to declare decisive victory? You're like our own little Joseph Goebbels, the minister of propaganda while you litter the boards with You Tube clip, memes and gifs.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Look, these candidates had people at every caucus for the most part. They knew the results or close to it. Iowa messed up and almost robbed Pete of the momentum a campaign like his needs, so he did what he had to do. And .... well looky there.... was he right?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
A house is red.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor lies.
Days later the house is painted blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
If the house was red. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
Or.
A house is being painted. Covered by a wodden fence. A red and a blue paintbucket stand next to the fence.
Stupid Mayor: That house is blue.
Stupid Mayor hopes its i blue. Bu he doesn't know yet because of the fence.
Days later the fence is taken down and it is blue.
M Russel: Was he wrong? As of this moment, no he's not.
The fence was there.. Yes, he was wrong.
Tenses is a thing.
And sound like you actually have an argument while doing it.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
But it is okey. You have been bending backwards to try to save your arguments while they go sour in hours, for Biden and Pete these last few pages. I understand it takes a toll. You have been a (making up) Dream(s) Warrior.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I can't stand Hannity. I usually watch the first 10-15 minutes of Tucker, I think it is pretty funny. He did talk about the Biden comments, but he seemed to be more making fun of Biden about it than being upset the way people are upset when Trump calls people names. The same news channels that are outraged over Trump calling names seem to laugh with Biden over these comments.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
It sounds to me like your beef should be with the DNC, at least as it relates to him running in the primary. If they let him run and he can get the votes, why wouldn't he? It's the easiest path for him to win that office.
"I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little"
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Although from 2001-2007, Trump was a registered Democrat and Bloomberg was a registered Republican. So who the hell knows really.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/11/joe-biden-has-a-chance-win-democratic-nomination-113836
SHOW COUNT: (152) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=92, US=112, CAN=15, Europe=19 ,New Zealand=2, Australia=2
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
Upcoming: Manchester, London, Chicago x2, NYC x2, Fenway x2, Ohana x2 Aucklandx2, Gold Coast, Melbournex2
The headline is :
This Democratic field is so flawed that even Biden still has a chance