The Democratic Presidential Debates

1214215217219220345

Comments

  • ecdanc
    ecdanc Posts: 1,814
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    hedonist said:

    The problem is four candidates are similar to Amy and two similar to Bernie. Even if far fewer vote “socialist” Bernie wants to change the rules so he wins based on that simple math.
    From what I've seen, many vote based on personality, the candidate and other factors. So the whole "the moderate block" is bigger isn't completely failsafe.

    E.g. Saw somewhere that Warrens lost voters went to Buttagieg more than Bernie. And many Biden voters having Bernie as their second choice etc.

    I would also guess many Amy voters and many Liz voters would go to eachother, based on them being women.
    What? Because women wouldn’t be capable of choosing their candidate regardless of gender?
    When did I say that?
    Above, bolded.  I don't think I misread your comment, but apologies if I did.
    Based on the candidates (Amy and Warren) being women.
    That's kind of sexist,  to believe that women vote primarily on gender. 
    Just stop
    You're so woke that you get sexism more than Hedo... who's actually a woman. You probably understand racism better than MLK did too, that's how impressive you are. 
    You’re willfully misreading SC’s posts even after he clarified. Or you are struggling with reading again.         .



        




    Actually, his further response validated my question.

    Why would I vote for anyone based solely (or even mostly) on what lies between their legs?
    Why are you assuming that only women would vote for someone because they’re a woman?
    Jesus, I feel like I'm in a bizarro world around here at times.

    How you extrapolated that from what I said, I have no idea.
    Get used to it, it’s the new norm around here. 
    Only if we let it....
    Jesus Christ, people. She misread the post. It’s not a big deal, but do you really have to pretend it didn’t happen just because you dislike SC?

    I don’t believe I misread. And no, I am not calling SC a sexist. The comment could be taken that way though.

    This is hilarious.  
    You misread. You thought he was referring to women voters, when he was referring to women candidates. I saw the misreading as it occurred. It’s not a big deal! So why does everyone have to pretend it didn’t happen? 
  • ecdanc
    ecdanc Posts: 1,814

    Does someone want to insist this is an apple?
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,834
    edited February 2020
    ecdanc said:

    Does someone want to insist this is an apple?
    Hold the tip of your tongue and try to say Apple. 
    Post edited by cincybearcat on
    hippiemom = goodness
  • ecdanc
    ecdanc Posts: 1,814
    ecdanc said:

    Does someone want to insist this is an apple?
    Hold the tip of your tongue and try to say Apple. It’s you.
    Activities from your job!! Fun!!!!
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,834
    To get away from the condescending shit....

    Sanders looks to have won Nevada pretty big. I guess maybe they should have focused on him vs Bloomberg in the debates, who would have thought 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • F Me In The Brain
    F Me In The Brain this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 31,809
    ecdanc said:
    ecdanc said:

    Does someone want to insist this is an apple?
    Hold the tip of your tongue and try to say Apple. It’s you.
    Activities from your job!! Fun!!!!
    Agnes?  Is that you?
    The love he receives is the love that is saved
  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    Lordy, I get it. 

    I love how some channels are calling it “America’s Choice”. We’re talking just Nevada though, no?
  • F Me In The Brain
    F Me In The Brain this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 31,809
    Fuck Bernie Bros.  Just Trumpeters from the other side.  
    The love he receives is the love that is saved
  • Fuck Bernie Bros.  Just Trumpeters from the other side.  
    Based on what? You personally wanting it to be that way?
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,471
    edited February 2020
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,471
    edited February 2020
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    hedonist said:

    The problem is four candidates are similar to Amy and two similar to Bernie. Even if far fewer vote “socialist” Bernie wants to change the rules so he wins based on that simple math.
    From what I've seen, many vote based on personality, the candidate and other factors. So the whole "the moderate block" is bigger isn't completely failsafe.

    E.g. Saw somewhere that Warrens lost voters went to Buttagieg more than Bernie. And many Biden voters having Bernie as their second choice etc.

    I would also guess many Amy voters and many Liz voters would go to eachother, based on them being women.
    What? Because women wouldn’t be capable of choosing their candidate regardless of gender?
    When did I say that?
    Above, bolded.  I don't think I misread your comment, but apologies if I did.
    Based on the candidates (Amy and Warren) being women.
    That's kind of sexist,  to believe that women vote primarily on gender. 
    Just stop
    You're so woke that you get sexism more than Hedo... who's actually a woman. You probably understand racism better than MLK did too, that's how impressive you are. 
    You’re willfully misreading SC’s posts even after he clarified. Or you are struggling with reading again.         .



        




    Actually, his further response validated my question.

    Why would I vote for anyone based solely (or even mostly) on what lies between their legs?
    Why are you assuming that only women would vote for someone because they’re a woman?
    Jesus, I feel like I'm in a bizarro world around here at times.

    How you extrapolated that from what I said, I have no idea.
    Get used to it, it’s the new norm around here. 
    Only if we let it....
    Jesus Christ, people. She misread the post. It’s not a big deal, but do you really have to pretend it didn’t happen just because you dislike SC?

    I don’t believe I misread. And no, I am not calling SC a sexist. The comment could be taken that way though.

    This is hilarious.  
    With you drawing bizarre conclusions from my post - I must ask, what did you read then? And what in my clarification went straight over your head?
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,471
    edited February 2020
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    hedonist said:

    The problem is four candidates are similar to Amy and two similar to Bernie. Even if far fewer vote “socialist” Bernie wants to change the rules so he wins based on that simple math.
    From what I've seen, many vote based on personality, the candidate and other factors. So the whole "the moderate block" is bigger isn't completely failsafe.

    E.g. Saw somewhere that Warrens lost voters went to Buttagieg more than Bernie. And many Biden voters having Bernie as their second choice etc.

    I would also guess many Amy voters and many Liz voters would go to eachother, based on them being women.
    What? Because women wouldn’t be capable of choosing their candidate regardless of gender?
    When did I say that?
    Above, bolded.  I don't think I misread your comment, but apologies if I did.
    Based on the candidates (Amy and Warren) being women.
    That's kind of sexist,  to believe that women vote primarily on gender. 
    Just stop
    You're so woke that you get sexism more than Hedo... who's actually a woman. You probably understand racism better than MLK did too, that's how impressive you are. 
    You’re willfully misreading SC’s posts even after he clarified. Or you are struggling with reading again.         .



        




    Actually, his further response validated my question.

    Why would I vote for anyone based solely (or even mostly) on what lies between their legs?
    Why are you assuming that only women would vote for someone because they’re a woman?
    Jesus, I feel like I'm in a bizarro world around here at times.

    How you extrapolated that from what I said, I have no idea.
    Get used to it, it’s the new norm around here. 
    Only if we let it....
    Jesus Christ, people. She misread the post. It’s not a big deal, but do you really have to pretend it didn’t happen just because you dislike SC?

    I like SC quite a bit.  He's grown on me... other than the video spamming
    See here, how you don't care to respond to the actual point and content of ecdancs post but ignores it because it highlights you being wrong?

    Do you often have problems admitting when you are wrong?

    I mean, when @cincybearcat jumps in (who I would bet have not even read the string of posts related to the specific discussion but just want to oppose ecdanc) and is being completely wrong, you (and/or @hedonist) could have stepped in and said "chill out cincy, we were actually totally wrong and misread Mr Chaos post a while back", whether this wrong stems from nonchalance, problems with reading comprehension or sexism. I mean, I did clarify and asked you people to re-read the post instead of accusing me of sexism (ironically enough). 

    Instead it seems in an almost Trumpian way being wrong doesn't matter to you - and won't be acknowledged as long as you have people cheering you on when being wrong.

    (The same with that "how to use quote marks" BS you tried to pull a few days ago, which @mcgruff10 jumped on - and that you (or mcgruff) never owned up to)

    Just curious.
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,471
    edited February 2020
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,404
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,471
    edited February 2020
    The toxic Pete Pals. Just like the Trumpeters and also not far enough from the other side.


    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    The toxic Pete Pals. Just like the Trumpeters and also not far enough from the other side.


    You muzzle a dog.  I've never heard of that term being pointed at a particular race or sex.  That's a reach. 
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    hedonist said:

    The problem is four candidates are similar to Amy and two similar to Bernie. Even if far fewer vote “socialist” Bernie wants to change the rules so he wins based on that simple math.
    From what I've seen, many vote based on personality, the candidate and other factors. So the whole "the moderate block" is bigger isn't completely failsafe.

    E.g. Saw somewhere that Warrens lost voters went to Buttagieg more than Bernie. And many Biden voters having Bernie as their second choice etc.

    I would also guess many Amy voters and many Liz voters would go to eachother, based on them being women.
    What? Because women wouldn’t be capable of choosing their candidate regardless of gender?
    When did I say that?
    Above, bolded.  I don't think I misread your comment, but apologies if I did.
    Based on the candidates (Amy and Warren) being women.
    That's kind of sexist,  to believe that women vote primarily on gender. 
    Just stop
    You're so woke that you get sexism more than Hedo... who's actually a woman. You probably understand racism better than MLK did too, that's how impressive you are. 
    You’re willfully misreading SC’s posts even after he clarified. Or you are struggling with reading again.         .



        




    Actually, his further response validated my question.

    Why would I vote for anyone based solely (or even mostly) on what lies between their legs?
    Why are you assuming that only women would vote for someone because they’re a woman?
    Jesus, I feel like I'm in a bizarro world around here at times.

    How you extrapolated that from what I said, I have no idea.
    Get used to it, it’s the new norm around here. 
    Only if we let it....
    Jesus Christ, people. She misread the post. It’s not a big deal, but do you really have to pretend it didn’t happen just because you dislike SC?

    I like SC quite a bit.  He's grown on me... other than the video spamming
    See here, how you don't care to respond to the actual point and content of ecdancs post but ignores it because it highlights you being wrong?

    Do you often have problems admitting when you are wrong?

    I mean, when @cincybearcat jumps in (who I would bet have not even read the string of posts related to the specific discussion but just want to oppose ecdanc) and is being completely wrong, you (and/or @hedonist) could have stepped in and said "chill out cincy, we were actually totally wrong and misread Mr Chaos post a while back", whether this wrong stems from nonchalance, problems with reading comprehension or sexism. I mean, I did clarify and asked you people to re-read the post instead of accusing me of sexism (ironically enough). 

    Instead it seems in an almost Trumpian way being wrong doesn't matter to you - and won't be acknowledged as long as you have people cheering you on when being wrong.

    (The same with that "how to use quote marks" BS you tried to pull a few days ago, which @mcgruff10 jumped on - and that you (or mcgruff) never owned up to)

    Just curious.
    It's because everyone is past it. 
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,834
    Can we stop with the people don’t read nonsense?

    SC - you states that Amy and Warren voters would go to the other? Is that right?

    You think so because they are women. Right?

    So you think some people are only voting for them cause they are women? Or are you quoting a news source that stated this?  Not agreeing or disagreeing just trying to understand why you said that? 

    And yes i went back... I think far enough to look for it. But coulda accidentally scrolled passed it on my phone. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • ecdanc
    ecdanc Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    The toxic Pete Pals. Just like the Trumpeters and also not far enough from the other side.


    You muzzle a dog.  I've never heard of that term being pointed at a particular race or sex.  That's a reach. 
    Clearly there's no history of referring to women--specifically--as dogs. 
  • ecdanc
    ecdanc Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    hedonist said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    ecdanc said:
    mrussel1 said:
    hedonist said:
    hedonist said:

    The problem is four candidates are similar to Amy and two similar to Bernie. Even if far fewer vote “socialist” Bernie wants to change the rules so he wins based on that simple math.
    From what I've seen, many vote based on personality, the candidate and other factors. So the whole "the moderate block" is bigger isn't completely failsafe.

    E.g. Saw somewhere that Warrens lost voters went to Buttagieg more than Bernie. And many Biden voters having Bernie as their second choice etc.

    I would also guess many Amy voters and many Liz voters would go to eachother, based on them being women.
    What? Because women wouldn’t be capable of choosing their candidate regardless of gender?
    When did I say that?
    Above, bolded.  I don't think I misread your comment, but apologies if I did.
    Based on the candidates (Amy and Warren) being women.
    That's kind of sexist,  to believe that women vote primarily on gender. 
    Just stop
    You're so woke that you get sexism more than Hedo... who's actually a woman. You probably understand racism better than MLK did too, that's how impressive you are. 
    You’re willfully misreading SC’s posts even after he clarified. Or you are struggling with reading again.         .



        




    Actually, his further response validated my question.

    Why would I vote for anyone based solely (or even mostly) on what lies between their legs?
    Why are you assuming that only women would vote for someone because they’re a woman?
    Jesus, I feel like I'm in a bizarro world around here at times.

    How you extrapolated that from what I said, I have no idea.
    Get used to it, it’s the new norm around here. 
    Only if we let it....
    Jesus Christ, people. She misread the post. It’s not a big deal, but do you really have to pretend it didn’t happen just because you dislike SC?

    I like SC quite a bit.  He's grown on me... other than the video spamming
    See here, how you don't care to respond to the actual point and content of ecdancs post but ignores it because it highlights you being wrong?

    Do you often have problems admitting when you are wrong?

    I mean, when @cincybearcat jumps in (who I would bet have not even read the string of posts related to the specific discussion but just want to oppose ecdanc) and is being completely wrong, you (and/or @hedonist) could have stepped in and said "chill out cincy, we were actually totally wrong and misread Mr Chaos post a while back", whether this wrong stems from nonchalance, problems with reading comprehension or sexism. I mean, I did clarify and asked you people to re-read the post instead of accusing me of sexism (ironically enough). 

    Instead it seems in an almost Trumpian way being wrong doesn't matter to you - and won't be acknowledged as long as you have people cheering you on when being wrong.

    (The same with that "how to use quote marks" BS you tried to pull a few days ago, which @mcgruff10 jumped on - and that you (or mcgruff) never owned up to)

    Just curious.
    It's because everyone is past it. 
    You have a tendency to move past things at the precise moment your mistakes/ignorance are exposed...
This discussion has been closed.