|
Gripweed posted:oh drat, these oppo hits of Sanders saying accurate things are coming hard and fast now "OUTRAGE: regularly correct man says another correct thing"
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
kidkissinger posted:holy moly. i really want to see what the centrist response is to a crowd of black people chanting "the time is now" in support of Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
First election at '08 here and in the 1% of millennials who have voted every major election since eligible. Even though I was never enthusiastic about either party, I still believed it was my civic duty (like a dweeb). Never found either party appealing, but I knew Republicans were a dumpster fire enough to vote against them whenever possible. The one and only time I purposely voted R was for Ron Paul (yeah yeah, but he was anti-war/surveillance). I knew instinctively Dems were mostly full of poo poo, but couldn't really understand why until I started getting exposed to leftist critique in the past ~5 years. By default, I still voted D because at least they weren't openly hateful and anti-science. I still never registered Dem and didn't like going by labels, as liberal and conservative were the only choices I knew. Now, I happily would label myself leftist, and if the leftist wing takes control, even register as D. Bernie is the first politician whose intentions and ability I actually believe in. He's the first to get me to donate abandonedly and even go out in public to support. I wish I had looked more into him in college, when I first looked up how many independents there were in congress and he made a blip on my radar. Mostly for the hipster cred, but also to have developed my ideology sooner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
This is gold, does anyone have a link to the original Killer Mike speech though? I think it was in September last year maybe - that's when Sanders' twitter first posted clips of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
Haha poo poo, now that's how you give a speech.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:Lol yeah I sit on my phone all day posting while making more money than I ever have, and then I think back to getting paid half as much to walk around delivering mail for ten hours a day in the pouring rain. Seriously this. I did more work in a day in retail than I do in a week at my comfy office job and get paid twice as much. The myth of higher pay jobs being harder is utter bs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
They’re shook https://twitter.com/kadiagoba/status/1223300486167760901?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
Someone slap Joe's hand away and start jabbing him back. Why does he touch people?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:Someone slap Joe's hand away and start jabbing him back. Why does he touch people? he is the living embodiment of white male privilege
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Person Dyslexic posted:Seriously this. I did more work in a day in retail than I do in a week at my comfy office job and get paid twice as much. The myth of higher pay jobs being harder is utter bs. I hate how people will act like they are involved in riskier decisions as part of of their higher paying job.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:Someone slap Joe's hand away and start jabbing him back. Why does he touch people? Those Secret Service bullets would kill you, but they'd also murder the Biden campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:Someone slap Joe's hand away and start jabbing him back. Why does he touch people? Because he's a bully, just like Trump. It is a physical challenge, an intimidation tactic. You are aggressively touching someone else because you are, in essence, daring them to react. They may back down, in which case the aggressor seen as powerful. They can't poke back, because he's a loving vice president and you'll get shot. So the only play is to either call it out or ignore it. It might work well when you're young, but at his age, nobody is intimidated by an old dude who can't remember his boss's name.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
Also not that intimidating to be touched by somebody who knows that if you try to touch them back there will be secret service agents tackling you to the ground within seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:One of these days Biden is just gonna take a swing at someone From the politifact article he references: quote:At the same time, it’s important not to overstate the impact of Biden’s bill, said Josh Howe, a professor of history and environmental studies at Reed College.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/politico/status/1223325410261377031
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
gently caress the DNC
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
lmao it's going to end up with the DNC trying to override the Dem primaries to ratfuck Bernie for Bloomberg isn't it
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
It was dumb that he was able to skip out on anyone ever calling him on his poo poo while he polls as high as 12-13%, so good
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
lol the DNC can't even rig an election right cheating to help Bloomberg split the anti-Bernie vote isn't going to do what they want
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1223328123124699136 Well-timed spending blitz!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
 e: this is not going to go the way those absolute fuckers think it is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
The new debate requirements are good. They're based entirely on polling and delegate counts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
Lol they're shoving out Yang and pulling in Bloomberg.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Built 4 Cuban Linux posted:The new debate requirements are good. They're based entirely on polling and delegate counts. Changing the rules because things aren't going the way they want is bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1223328123124699136 This is extremely good to know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Changing the rules because things aren't going the way they want is bad They change them every debate
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Read the replies if you want to desire the sweet release of death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DavidKlion/status/1223327658248998912 What's doubly funny about this is, he's basically plagiarizing Warren G. Harding here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Changing the rules because things aren't going the way they want is bad they changed the donor requirement to a delegate requirement because the primary is actually starting, and they raise the polling requirement every debate so we're not stuck with Delaneys and Hickenloopers
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:They change them every debate All of the previous debates had an individual donor number requirement. Lowering or removing any threshold at this point is a bizarre move. The only real explanation is that they are opening the door for Bloomberg.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
TBH it should just be a delegate requirement, but then they wouldn't be able to give Bloomberg free publicity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
They shouldn't have the debates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
It’s Bernie, Joe, and Liz in the next debate. Adding a bloomer should help Bernie more than hurt him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:They change them every debate Having different criteria everyone knows about in advance for the different debates is different than changing those rules because you don't like how things are going
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:All of the previous debates had an individual donor number requirement. Lowering or removing any threshold at this point is a bizarre move. The only real explanation is that they are opening the door for Bloomberg. The first one had a donor number back door to make the debate more inclusive. They changed it to a requirement to shrink the stage, which isn't really necessary by Feb. But honestly, this doesn't "help" Bloomberg. If he wanted to be on the stage, it would be trivial for him to spend his way to getting the donors just like Tom Steyer did. He doesn't complain about the requirements or demand to be up there because he doesn't really give a poo poo about it at best or at worst actively doesn't want to be on the stage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Having different criteria everyone knows about in advance for the different debates is different than changing those rules because you don't like how things are going They didn't change it, this is a new debate with new criteria.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:The first one had a donor number back door to make the debate more inclusive. They changed it to a requirement to shrink the stage, which isn't really necessary by Feb. Almost as if the DNC is trying to put their thumb on the scale because they don't like how things are going
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
 FEC deadline
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
fridgraidr posted:It’s Bernie, Joe, and Liz in the next debate. Adding a bloomer should help Bernie more than hurt him. Butt is almost definitely getting a couple delegates and Klob might actually swing a couple as well if she's lucky in some districts. Yang and Steyer are potentially out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 20:58
|
|
