Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
BERNIE SANDERS ENDORSES CLINTON!
#31
That Bernie and his supporters would ever make a path available for a Trump Presidency has been crystal clear from day one, that you got a bit hyperventilated over the threat to your candidate is understandable. Give Bernie credit, he kept the Clinton train from veering so far right as to be indistinguishable from Republicanism - Republicanism as it was before the crazies took over.

She's not the friend you think she is Vision. She's also damn lucky the wacko minority over in that other party took the nomination away from anyone electable. She may yet turn Trump into an electable candidate, we'll see. Against any credible candidate, she'd be toast.

Problem now is to find a way for Bernie to transfer his energy downstream and make sure the Senate flips because she sure as hell isn't going to do that without a lot of help.
Reply
#32
DeusxMac wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=rjmacs]
(and before you all start, Bernie Trump never had a chance in hell of becoming the party's nominee, so just stop).

Sound familiar?
Yeah, except the parties, the candidates, and the competition are 100% different. So, actually, i guess, no.
It's not a matter of the candidates, nor of the party, it's your excessive "never... a chance in hell" certainty.
Difference being, I'm right, and they were wrong. :emoticon-animal-022:
Reply
#33
Bernie's already working hard on the down ballot, and on getting young people to stay engaged. He didn't need to rest up, he's fine. Following Sanders on FB and Twitter and getting his campaign's emails goes a long way to dispelling the media version of what happened/will happen.
Reply
#34
vision63 wrote:
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
Reply
#35
DeusxMac wrote:
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.

You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
Reply
#36
vision63 wrote:
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.

You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
What "hindsight" of mine are you referring to?

hindsight noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed

Vision, if you stated just this week that Trump's accession should come as no surprise, but back last year made statements that you thought he wouldn't succeed, wouldn't that be an example of that "20/20" hindsight you pronounce?
Reply
#37
DeusxMac wrote:
[quote=vision63]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.

You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
What "hindsight" of mine are you referring to?

hindsight noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed

Vision, if you stated just this week that Trump's accession should come as no surprise, but back last year made statements that you thought he wouldn't succeed, wouldn't that be an example of that "20/20" hindsight you pronounce?
You're the one mining the forum not me and then contrasting it with the results. Jeb is the one that quit in February. Weeks into this thing. Bernie should could have quit on Super Tuesday but he kept going. My predictions didn't even get a chance to play out. I dropped it when he quit. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
Reply
#38
vision63 wrote:
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.

You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
What "hindsight" of mine are you referring to?

hindsight noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed

Vision, if you stated just this week that Trump's accession should come as no surprise, but back last year made statements that you thought he wouldn't succeed, wouldn't that be an example of that "20/20" hindsight you pronounce?
You're the one mining the forum not me and then contrasting it with the results. Jeb is the one that quit in February. Weeks into this thing. Bernie should could have quit on Super Tuesday but he kept going. My predictions didn't even get a chance to play out. I dropped it when he quit. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
No answers to my two questions, so I'll just drop it.
Reply
#39
DeusxMac wrote:
[quote=vision63]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.

Hmmmm...

vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.

vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.



I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.

You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
What "hindsight" of mine are you referring to?

hindsight noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed

Vision, if you stated just this week that Trump's accession should come as no surprise, but back last year made statements that you thought he wouldn't succeed, wouldn't that be an example of that "20/20" hindsight you pronounce?
You're the one mining the forum not me and then contrasting it with the results. Jeb is the one that quit in February. Weeks into this thing. Bernie should could have quit on Super Tuesday but he kept going. My predictions didn't even get a chance to play out. I dropped it when he quit. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
No answers to my two questions, so I'll just drop it.
I didn't really read all of your post.

The answer is no.

Oh, I can battle you better when I go on break.
Reply
#40
Why on earth go back and find old posts to try to prove someone was wrong? Isn't this something that could be done via Private Message? Look at the acres of space on my computer screen taken up by this BS. Thread shitting at its finest.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)