|
my bony fealty posted:SE Cupp is a self-proclaimed atheist, and wrote one of those dumb books about the LIBERAL MEDIA war on Christianity and how evolution is a lie blah blah blah She also has publically stated she doesn't believe that an atheist should be president, she's putting it on for the audience.
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
Joememtum = Keith Ellison ??
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Dahbadu posted:It was pretty obvious to me that Hillary had plants in the audience. There was applause for things she said that weren't actually rousing. lmao, Bernie Sanders supporters are loving insane.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
It must really suck to be a Bernie Sanders supporter and have to be constantly surrounded by people who are A) detached from reality to a worrying degree to B) completely ignorant of how politics works, or what it even is.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
NotWearingPants posted:But it's true. Hillary had plants in the audience, just like all the other candidates. Judging by the cheers, I'd say each of the candidates had supporters in the audience roughly equal to the percentages they are pulling in national polls. They're not called 'plants', idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
crazy eights posted:Lol at pretending Hillary is significantly left of any of the republicans. You're mentally retarded if you believe she isn't.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Dahbadu posted:I'm serious. It's known that the DNC leadership controlled access to an extent to who was given tickets. You'll find that in reaction polls and focus groups of people that aren't given tickets to the debate by DNC leadership that Bernie is/will be doing quite well. Some are getting released as we speak, and you'll see that I'm right. You're an insane person.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
NotWearingPants posted:Apparently they are. The person that posted it earlier called them plants. And he's an idiot and wrong. They're called 'Hillary supporters', who shock surprise, outnumber Sanders supporters, particularly at Democratic events.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:More eloquent home runs by forums master analysist Dan Didio Tell me more about the Clinton conspiracy. Do you think Bernie should attack her for killing Vince Foster?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:Hyperbole isn't insanity, it's standard internet discussion. Describing supporters of one candidate cheering for their preferred candidate, whose views they support, at a party debate as 'plants' isn't just insane, it's factually wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:They are worded differently but in practice they result in the same outcomes for the most part [Citation Needed]
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Bernie got a lot of claps tonight too, does that mean Bernie had plants placed in the audience? That was just the failure of BIG HILLARY's totalitarian control of the democratic party's processes, clearly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:This is tough because her positions keep changing faster than I can cite them It's tough because you're mentally impaired.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:The accusations of "Hillary plants" in the crowd are ridiculous to me but I think you would have to be deaf not to notice she had the majority of support in the room. The accusations of 'Hillary plants' are how crazy Sanders supporters deal with not being deaf enough to notice that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:It's surprising how common the accusations are considering how most Sanders supporters actually are more or less deaf, what with being 80 and all. I think Sanders audience is pretty young, no? Sudo Echo posted:that was one guy and even the sanders thread makes fun of him, chill This kind of nonsense, along with thinly veiled sexism and racism, is surprisingly common on the internet among his supporters.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
Sudo Echo posted:feel free to find all the others cause I honestly didn't see anyone else People posting online poll results as if they matter, etc. etc. A lot of Sanders presence online is young people, and people who have little idea of what politics means and entails. There's a lot of bizzare assumptions they make on spurious reasoning and it's been happening a lot on SA as well. That and the mocking and completely bizzare response of a bunch of progressives telling black protesters to shut up and how to do activism right back when the Black Lives Matter thing happened and the really harsh gendered attacks against Hillary. Much like with every politician, most of Sanders loudest, most energized supporters are really dumb and/or really perspectiveless.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 09:18
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Keep it up, and they'll keep it up. Sanders probably deserves better, and the enclave of people stamping their feet and saying they won't vote for anyone but Bernie because the other democrats aren't progressive enough are maybe the funniest of all.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:Yeah no, their trying to get you to realize you're doing the same thing you're complaining about honestly watching two white candidates supporters call each other racists is getting old as a non white person. Guess which candidate I (would, I guess) support. I genuinely can't tell what the bulk of the rest of your post is trying to say.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
When people said Jim Webb was talking about killing a guy, I was expecting something worse.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Best line: Sanders I'd tip my hat to O'Malley's retort to Sanders about being in Congress not being such a great thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Do you have a source for this? It was posted earlier in either this thread or the democratic primary thread, but yeah, it literally did happen. quote:At the height of this practice, in 2005, Baltimore logged more than 108,400 arrests — equivalent to a sixth of the city’s population. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/05/omalley-baltimore-clinton-democratic-primary-president/
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Someday they'll isolate and destroy the 'single issue voter' gene.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
It's a shame the 'insights' aren't all represented across the board, some of those would have been really interesting to compare.ArbitraryC posted:Good, eat poo poo people pretending there wasn't blatant bias in the post debate coverage. There wasn't. Sheng-ji Yang posted:yes, second most accurate according to nate Haha, I forgot how terrible Gallup's polling was last time around, hot drat.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Hasn't the most charismatic candidate won the presidential election every time in our lifetimes? How old are you?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Is it really projected that women are going to vote more for Hillary just to shoot for that first woman potus status because that is the lamest reason in the world to vote for someone. I guess going by her response to how she's different from b-rock the islamic shock went over it shouldn't surprise me, but it still would be incredibly disappointing. Why?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:'88 and '76 are really the only elections where this is even debatable Honestly, I wouldn't even say '88, really.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:really that one comes down to who is the biggest goober and the jury is still out Yeah, I mean neither of them were winning personalities, but it's hard to be 'charismatic' with the kind of metaphorical weight Dukakis carried through that election.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I just think it's a really poor reason. There aren't policy differences between bernie and hillary on women's issues and bernie has an overall better record on human rights issues in general. I guess you could make the argument that Hillary might prioritize them more, but honestly I'd be doubtful about that because she's more beholden to corporate interests than bernie is and stuff like family leave are going to be fought tooth and nail by the people funding her campaign. I understand it could be viewed as a symbollic victory putting a woman in the white house but I guess I just think she should get there for policy reasons rather than her lack of penis in itself. Like if you're a pro woman economic centrist then fine knock yourself out, but if you're pro woman economic leftist bernie is the better choice on paper. Why do you think a woman's perspective is purely 'symbolic'?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:This is such an unfair trap question I'm not even going to bother answering it Then why did you say it? ArbitraryC posted:If carly were the R nom and the D was a man, should women vote for carly for a woman's perspective? If they value that perspective, they should vote how they best see fit, personally, to get it represented in the upper echelons of political power, sure. But I thought we were talking about prospective Democrat voters, voting in the Democratic primary?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Smoremaster posted:McGovern, what a name It's a top tier president name.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Miltank posted:hmmmmmm Hmmmmmm.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Where did I say that it was "purely"? quote:I understand it could be viewed as a symbollic victory putting a woman in the white house but I guess I just think she should get there for policy reasons rather than her lack of penis in itself. If your view is that outside of their pre-recorded policy positions Hillary's experiences as a woman amount to a 'could be viewed' symbolic victory, and that voting for her on any basis like that is 'disappointing', then the only reasonable conclusion is that you think a candidate's gender is meaningless outside of symbolism. Do you think that the differences between how men and women experience society are purely 'symbolic' or not? I'm not really concerned about you telling some hypothetical, non-existent irrelevant woman how to vote, but more the thing where you do it for real, existing women. Stay on target.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:a lot of women agree with carly fiorina. a lot of women agree with trump. As a humble progressive, I just don't think they should be able to vote.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
rscott posted:Did Margaret Thatcher getting elected prime minister amount to a victory for feminism in the UK? Pretty sure Crass didn't think so. No, and I haven't said anything to suggest that it would, or that I would believe it did. The fact that people keep dodging questions and bringing up odd, irrelevant tangents tells me that people here probably aren't arguing in good faith, like me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:i think people should be able to vote for whatever heinous jabbering freak they want. this is america and we stand for freedom. I think, actually, they should be murdered.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Actually if you stopped being disingenuous for two seconds and read the previous sentences in that very paragraph you'll see that I hint at something that is both another reason (meaning you're "purely" symbollic line is a flat out bald face lie wrt to what I said, there was literally a second reason in that very post) and something that strangely seems to be referencing a woman's perspective might prioritize different issues, the exact point you're trying to pretend I don't believe in because you're being an annoying person. I bundled timing and enaction of policy in with 'policy' because I assumed you'd view 'policy' and 'policy enaction' as the same thing. I apologize. You still haven't answered why you view the differences in perspectives of men and women in other areas as symbolic. ArbitraryC posted:Maybe I was subtly hinting that policy is the important part that has the biggest impact on the most people? So? I'll ask again, simpler; why do you think women should cleave to your standards and reasons for voting? And why is it 'disappointing' when they don't?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:this is also why, as a christian and firm believer in traditional family values, im voting for a guy whose job is standing in the surf at the beach screaming racial epithets at the waves That's my dad. He's tall.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
rscott posted:So what's the point of voting for someone to the right of Thatcher on poo poo that affects women like free health care? What's the point of democracy at all?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
rscott posted:To distribute political power in the most ethical way possible And how is that ethical distribution of power best achieved?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
liberty, she whispered,
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:52
|
|