Sanders gets greeted by high school students against gun violence

ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
If he had not lost.
Click to expand...
The Democratic Party broke every rule of fairness and equitable conduct, including using unprecedented tactics like publicising the votes of Superdelegates from the very beginning of the nomination campaign rather than waiting until the convention as had been done in campaigns past.

Bernie would have won.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
The Democratic Party broke every rule of fairness and equitable conduct, including using unprecedented tactics like publicising the votes of Superdelegates from the very beginning of the nomination campaign rather than waiting until the convention as had been done in campaigns past.

Bernie would have won.
Click to expand...
speaking of "unprecedented" and "broke every rule", bernie got help from vladimir putin and the kremlin. possibly knowingly
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a grand jury already



you've lost it
Click to expand...
So let's see the indictments that count. You've never heard me say they I don't want it to happen.

Where else did the bulk of Hillary's campaign war chest come from, then? Why was she using white noise generators at fundraisers across the country, if not to drown out voices of dissent or reporters who might hear the 'wrong' message?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I said I didn't buy that it was happening in a significant scale.

Nowhere in there did I say I didn't want to see those responsible brought to Justice.

You aren't even listening anymore.
Click to expand...
it still is happening on a significant scale
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
no, not hardly.

you're setting yourself up to look real dumb when this is all over
Click to expand...
Nothing I've read has advanced the idea that a massive campaign was being run by Russians.

Cambridge Analytica is a different story and a different crowd. They aren't Russians.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
so incredibly naive
Click to expand...
Bernie is the only politician who actually showed up at the student protest.

Cambridge Analytica is not a Russian front. They misused Facebook data to manipulate campaign messages and benefit the Trump campaign, who was their paying client.

If you're so worried about foreign governments influencing our 'democracy', the place to start protesting would be the long succession of presidential administrations who made a habit of meddling in everyone else's.

You have a bad case of American exceptionalism blinders on, fool.

81 different instances of American intervention in the governments of other countries and somehow we should reasonably expect to be left alone?!

What a fucking crybaby.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
meltdown
Click to expand...
UncleBuck said:
DID YOU EVEN WATCH THE VIDEO
Click to expand...
When the point is discussed in detail, it's a 'meltdown'

If a clip is posted for brevity, it's irrelevant because it's a video, instead of text...

When text is posted..

...

:roll:

You'd think they'd just admit it; they can't honestly rebut the arguments

Any of us ever brought up a personal detail about someone to add to an argument? No, because it doesn't add to an argument..

It does the opposite; it detracts from an argument
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
travisw said:
Click to expand...
travisw said:
Still beating this drum kiddo? Nobody is disputing your rather selective claim that Bernie passed more roll call amendments in a Republican Congress than any other member from 1995 to 2007. But, if you're actually interested in his effectiveness as a senator, we can explore that. Hell, the Washington Post already did.

You seem fixated on Hillary Clinton so lets use her record as a basis of comparison.

For this debate about effectiveness, the most important pieces of legislation are arguably bills which the two members sponsored, and which proposed substantive changes in law. This excludes commemorative bills; both Clinton and Sanders, for example, passed several bills renaming post offices after prominent local residents. This also excludes resolutions, which are either symbolic or procedural in nature.

This also excludes legislation that Sanders and Clinton co-sponsored. A bill’s sponsor typically shepherds the bill through Congress and is usually (but not always) the bill’s primary author. By contrast, a co-sponsor merely signs his or her name on to a bill after it has been written and introduced, to indicate that she or he supports it.

Here’s what the numbers say: During her eight years in the Senate, Hillary Clinton sponsored 10 bills that passed the chamber. The mean senator passes 1.4 bills a year, so Clinton’s 1.25 bills per year is approximately in line with the chamber average. By contrast, Bernie Sanders has been in the Senate nine years and has sponsored only one bill that passed.

Another way members of Congress can influence legislative outcomes is to amend a bill someone else has sponsored, particularly in the Senate. The rules in the Senate allow for much more and freer amending activity than in the House, so senators introduce (and pass) many more amendments than House members do.

Clinton successfully amended bills 67 times in her eight years in the Senate. Sanders did so 57 times in nine years. On a year-by-year basis, that comes to 8.4 per year for Clinton and 6.3 per year for Sanders. Moreover, the mean senator passed 7.4 amendments. Clinton’s is significantly higher than the mean, and Sanders’s is significantly below the mean. Put differently, Clinton passed 33 percent more amendments per year than did Sanders.

Sanders’s legislative effectiveness score was below the House median in seven of the eight Congresses in which he served.



Hillary Clinton was a more effective lawmaker than Bernie Sanders
ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/04/07/hillary-clinton-was-a-more-effective-lawmaker-than-bernie-sanders/?utm_term=.51b24db93874
Click to expand...
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
When the point is discussed in detail, it's a 'meltdown'

If a clip is posted for brevity, it's irrelevant because it's a video, instead of text...

When text is posted..

...

:roll:

You'd think they'd just admit it; they can't honestly rebut the arguments

Any of us ever brought up a personal detail about someone to add to an argument? No, because it doesn't add to an argument..

It does the opposite; it detracts from an argument
Click to expand...
These are his standard tactics now. It's as if he doesn't even know how to have an intelligent conversation.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
'sanctimonious'
Click to expand...
Trot out a new epithet every once in awhile but never meaningfully address the conversation.

I swear the establishment Democrats are actually worse than Republicans.

They're being squeezed by authoritarians on the right and an increasingly louder and insistent Left demanding they be represented.

The wealthy in this country are justifiably terrified that all the lies, dirty tricks and massive frauds they've been perpetrating on the American People for decades are coming home to roost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top