Like I said, you don’t know what hack means. Or do you just not like her because she’s anti-interventionist and you get a boner from war, like the piles of shit you’re on here cheerleading for? You need to hop off that establishment dick and come up with a few original thoughts once in awhile. It’s clear as day you absorb CNN and MSNBC like a dry sponge and disregard the work of any independent journalists. It’s funny how the people on here who can’t think for themselves are the ones always posting other people’s twitter ideas and linking to corporate news stories. And they attack any original thoughts if they don’t include a link to THEIR favorite news source. You’re constantly on here parroting mainstream talking points, almost verbatim, and trying to pretend you’re having a thoughtful discussion. You’re not. If we wanna know what Calvin Natt thinks we can just flip on the television to one of 2 channels. Your input here is really just redundant.
You know just as well as I do the DNC cheated in 2016, it’s a fact that we shouldn’t even have to argue about. As to the points about the current debate criteria being arbitrary and not transparent, that’s more debatable. I think there’s some truth to it, although i don’t think it’s outright cheating as some would claim. I would guess it’s definitely by design though, and helps the DNC groom certain candidates they find desirable. That’s not something I can prove, however. The DNC doesn’t offer any reasoning behind their choice of acceptable polls. It’s just a guess based on the poor character of the DNC.
You can say what you want about her but I believe her to be speaking from the heart. Not my heart, but her heart.
Cheated in what? How do we know whether to respond or not when we don't know what you're talking about?
If you are so informed, then you should be able to show us those verifiable facts that you speak about. Otherwise it's just more conspiracy theories. Like the saying goes, put up or shut up.
She’s a fraud. She’s a fake Dem. and this little antics of taking her ball and going home is pathetic.
I like how Democrats are the new resource-driven, interventionist Republicans. And their cheerleaders just jump right on board, no questions asked. No thinking necessary.
You guys need to discuss the thread topic instead of snipping at each other or I will close the thread.
I wasn't snipping at Marazul, I was turning his post into a porn haiku. I was adding culture and art to the thread.
And we weren't, until you just brought it up. You know that's not the subject here. The criteria is arbitrary? What would a non-arbitrary criteria look like? There's no objective way to decide where the cutoff should be placed, but I think everyone would agree there should be some cutoff (otherwise both of us could get up there on the stage). She's saying the DNC cheated against Bernie last time, and this time they are cheating in favor of Bernie. Maybe Bernie is establishment now? The fact that "non-establishment" candidates like Bernie, Steyer, and Yang have made the debates, and "establishment" candidates like Bennet and Bullock and Hickenlooper and so on didn't make the cut makes the charge something less than convincing. barfo
Is this not more recent? https://www.senate.gov/legislative/...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=2&vote=00181 Roll Call Vote 115th Congress - 2nd Session XMLVote SummaryH.R. 5515 (John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 ) Measure Title: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2019 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. Vote Counts: YEAs87 NAYs 10 Warren (D-MA), Nay