Lese Majeste! Clinton Fury With Sanders Grows

[FieldTheorist]

That addresses the part of your post that I want to respond to.

Translation: "I cannot respond to the obviously true argument you just made that has laid waste to the nonsense I've been spouting for months."

I thought as much.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

Then don't.

I CAN...and have.

I'll do it again:

Any Bernie supporter who is willing to help the Republicans win the White House because of their petulant, childish snit...is a jerk.

So people who disagree with you are jerks? I think Sanders supporters are incredibly misguided and don't understand how extreme and dangerous his positions are.. But jerks?

That is a childish label.

 

[Kal'Stang]

sure

you mentioned several reason why Hillary is a no for you but then said you would vote for Trump in spite of knowing he is a bigot.

he is more than just a bigot, I think we would both agree on that too

A bigot is fairly high on the list of qualities that make a human being despicable in numerous ways so I am curious what trait of Hillary's you think sinks her below what is one of the most loathsome qualities a human being can possess

I don't think its one of the lowest. But that aside, Hillary's gun control stance is a huge no no for me.

 

[Frank Apisa]

View attachment 67201737



Huh. Because that's exactly what it sounds like you're telling them, Frank.

Oh?

Point out the word "traitor" to me.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Translation: "I cannot respond to the obviously true argument you just made that has laid waste to the nonsense I've been spouting for months."

I thought as much.

You are as poorly equipped for "translating" as you are for determining what has "exactly" been said.

Which is to say...not very well equipped at all.

When a person starts a post with a hyperbole like you did, I often don't read the rest.

Acknowledge the hyperbole...and I'll bother.

 

[Frank Apisa]

So people who disagree with you are jerks? I think Sanders supporters are incredibly misguided and don't understand how extreme and dangerous his positions are.. But jerks?

That is a childish label.

I did not say people who disagree with me are jerks.

I did say:

Any Bernie supporter who is willing to help the Republicans win the White House because of their petulant, childish snit...is a jerk.

They are.

 

[FieldTheorist]

Oh?

Point out the word "traitor" to me.

Ah, I see, so when you say:

"But I don't think there is much that Hillary can say to entice Bernie supporters to support her."

"If they are not bright enough to realize NOT SUPPORTING HER...is the same as SUPPORTING DONALD TRUMP AND THE REPUBLICANS [...] I personally think many (very likely MOST) are NOT bright enough to make that realization. I think they are jerks who will do to the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party candidates what the Tea Party has done to the Republican Party and the Republican Party candidates."​

In other words, it's wrong for RabidAlpaca to saying you're calling him a "traitor." All you meant was that they are obligated to vote for Hillary because otherwise they're "jerks" who are doing awful things to the Democratic party and are actively helping Republicans.

Yes, Frank, those are wildly different claims. :roll:

You are as poorly equipped for "translating" as you are for determining what has "exactly" been said. Which is to say...not very well equipped at all.

Well, that's a Trumpian level of eloquence. Well done.

When a person starts a post with a hyperbole like you did, I often don't read the rest.

Acknowledge the hyperbole...and I'll bother.

No hyperbole, just truth and pointing out your inability to addressing points that concretely demonstrate the problem with your worldview. If you can't or won't address this, it's not my issue. The posters on this thread can judge for themselves who's being hyperbolic and who's presenting coherent, evidenced arguments.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Ah, I see, so when you say:

"But I don't think there is much that Hillary can say to entice Bernie supporters to support her."

"If they are not bright enough to realize NOT SUPPORTING HER...is the same as SUPPORTING DONALD TRUMP AND THE REPUBLICANS [...] I personally think many (very likely MOST) are NOT bright enough to make that realization. I think they are jerks who will do to the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party candidates what the Tea Party has done to the Republican Party and the Republican Party candidates."​

In other words, it's wrong for RabidAlpaca to saying you're calling him a "traitor." All you meant was that they are obligated to vote for Hillary because otherwise they're "jerks" who are doing awful things to the Democratic party and are actively helping Republicans.

Yes, Frank, those are wildly different claims. :roll:



Well, that's a Trumpian level of eloquence. Well done.




No hyperbole, just truth and pointing out your inability to addressing points that concretely demonstrate the problem with your worldview. If you can't or won't address this, it's not my issue. The posters on this thread can judge for themselves who's being hyperbolic and who's presenting coherent, evidenced arguments.

FieldTheorist...I'm sure you can get more trite if you put your mind to it...although I may be wrong about that.

What YOU presented was hyperbole...plain and simple.

Apparently you are the kind of poster who cannot acknowledge being wrong...so no problem. I get a kick out of your kind.

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between the terms "jerk" and "traitor." Get a grade schooler to help you with that...ummm...problem.

Anyway...if you and Alpaca want to do as much as possible to insure that Hillary Clinton does not get elected...(feel free to read that: Do as much as possible to get Donald Trump elected)...

...DO IT.

I have no problem with you doing it...especially if it makes you feel morally superior to the rest of the world.

I think my use of the word "jerks" to describe people like you two was rather benign...considering some of the stuff I see used here every day. I didn't realize your were so thin skinned. The stuffy avatar you use made me think you are an adult. My bad.

As an aside: Thin skin makes for a poor adversary in an Internet Forum dedicated to political debate...although it does provide more than its fair share of laughs for those of us with a well-developed sense of humor.

Thank are in order.

 

[nntwored12]

Greetings, nntwored12. :2wave:

Then the Sanders' supporters should not have a beef - yet they appear to. What do they hope to gain?

You have to ask them
The fact as they do not have a a legitimate beef

I can only speculate that they hope to secure a the nomination of Bernie Sanders
Though intimidation the way they tried to to reverse the results of the Nevada primary

What makes you think they have a beef

Hillary Clinton is far ahead of Bernie Sanders without super delegates

 

[Frank Apisa]

A lot of people are going to have to grapple with the "anyone but Hillary" problem...and soon.

The Republicans seem to have made up their minds. They are going to back Donald Trump. He won. They didn't want him...but he won.

And for the most part...they are going to back him.

We gotta see how the Bernie people handle the situation on that side of the coin.

 

[FieldTheorist]

FieldTheorist...I'm sure you can get more trite if you put your mind to it...although I may be wrong about that.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

What YOU presented was hyperbole...plain and simple.

Let's review, shall we?

This is why Donald Trump stands a great chance of becoming president in 2017. A total, absolute denial of polling data, and a total inability to assimilate polling data or the zeitgeist of the average American's feelings on politics.

Are you saying she is a monster?

Firstly, that's the most non-sequitur response you could possibly give. [...]

You're right though. Maybe you could have said something even more of a non-sequitur, like "I like toast!" I'm not sure why you'd want to point that out though.

Apparently you are the kind of poster who cannot acknowledge being wrong...so no problem. I get a kick out of your kind.

Again, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between the terms "jerk" and "traitor."

The issue is that you're calling someone a "jerk" on the basis of them not fighting "against Republicans" by voting for Democrats. If you can't understand why someone would summarize that as "calling them a traitor," well, I can't help you.

Get a grade schooler to help you with that...ummm...problem. [...] I think my use of the word "jerks" to describe people like you two was rather benign...

Frank, if you continue with the personal insults, I will report you. I don't know where DP mods draw the line, but you're clearly edging towards it.

I think my use of the word "jerks" to describe people like you two was rather benign...considering some of the stuff I see used here every day. I didn't realize your were so thin skinned. The stuffy avatar you use made me think you are an adult. My bad.

It's not about being thin-skinned. If you insinuate someone is a jerk, and they respond with why what you're saying is nonsense, that's not being "thin-skinned." It's called "responding."

Thank are in order.

Thank you. I love it when the lack of a challenge allows me to take less than one minute to respond.

Frank, I'm done with you. You can move along now.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

More trite. Do you trite often?

Let's review, shall we?

​

You're right though. Maybe you could have said something even more of a non-sequitur, like "I like toast!" I'm not sure why you'd want to point that out though.

If you cannot see that "Firstly, that's the most non-sequitur response you could possibly give" IS HYPERBOLE...then you are probably over-reaching to be having a discussion in an Internet forum. FOR THE RECORD...it is hyperbole.

Again, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

So you think I cannot acknowledge when I am wrong?

YOU APPARENTLY CANNOT.

I can.

And I can show that I do.

The issue is that you're calling someone a "jerk" on the basis of them not fighting "against Republicans" by voting for Democrats. If you can't understand why someone would summarize that as "calling them a traitor," well, I can't help you.

If you cannot see a significant difference between "jerk" and "traitor"...you are probably over-reaching by having discussions in an Internet forum.

There is a huge difference.

Frank, if you continue with the personal insults, I will report you. I don't know where DP mods draw the line, but you're clearly edging towards it.

In over 15 years of Internet battles, I have never reported anyone. If you want to be a woozie and report me...do so. I'll live with the consequences.

I've tried to be reasonable with you...but you are unaccepting of the courtesy.

It's not about being thin-skinned. If you insinuate someone is a jerk, and they respond with why what you're saying is nonsense, that's not being "thin-skinned." It's called "responding."

Considering some of the descriptors used by posters in this forum...the term "jerk" is as benign as a long eyelash.

If you are bothered because I used that descriptor...you probably are over-reaching by participating in an Internet political discussion.

Grow up.

Thank you. I love it when the lack of a challenge allows me to take less than one minute to respond.

That was lame...but nice try.

Frank, I'm done with you. You can move along now.

That was even lamer. It is the kind of thing people who have been in the forums for less than a month use.

 

[Geoist]

I am finished with the Democratic Party. The Nevada convention and how it was misrepresented by the party leadership afterward was the last straw for me. It's Greens, Libertarians, and Independents only for me now in the future.

I heard some of the first-hand accounts on Thom Hartmann. The lengths Dems will go to ostracize their own people is appalling. They even broke their own rules to prevent the Bernie supporters from gaining any traction! :doh

 

[Geoist]

she represents the BEST chance of keeping the Republicans out of the White House

How is that? Polls have Sanders currently beating Trump by ~13 points while Clinton loses to Trump by ~2 points.

 

[Geoist]

She is not looking for sympathy. She is clearly the winner of the primary season...and now she is asking the opposition to get out of the way.

He is saying "no"...and that is the way it goes.

Some people think she has no right to ask that he get out of the way...so she can concentrate on the true opposition.

Why does she not have that right?

Because she did the same thing to Obama.

 

[Geoist]

Ah, jerks and a sad, sad group just because they don't want to get behind Hillary.

Yeah, gotta be a special kind of jerk for an anti-establishment-type to refuse to vote for an establishment candidate.

 

[Geoist]

Then don't.

I CAN...and have.

I'll do it again:

Any Bernie supporter who is willing to help the Republicans win the White House because of their petulant, childish snit...is a jerk.

Help the Republicans how? By not voting for Hillary? Many, if not most, Bernie supporters were never going to vote for her in the first place. Heck, I would bet about 40% of Bernie's supporters were not even Democratic members a year ago (my wife, me, and my best friend are included in that group). We are not loyal to political parties.

 

[ludin]

Bernie may be reassuring them, but i think his supporters will vote Trump to hurt Hillary.

I saw an article that said this thing.
one of the biggest reasons for trump catching Clinton in the polls was
a revolt of the sanders voters that are fed up with the DNC.

if DNC super delegates were tied to the primary winner at least for the first vote like RNC are
then this race would be a lot closer than what it is.

however for every state that sanders wins the super delegates run to Hillary.
he is going to need to get big wins in the next few elections before he can convince any defectors over
to his side.

Clinton is almost there she is less than 80 delegate away from
winning the pre-vote nomination.

mostly due to her 500 super delegates some of which should have gone to sanders.
if sanders losses it will be by the super delegates.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I heard some of the first-hand accounts on Thom Hartmann. The lengths Dems will go to ostracize their own people is appalling. They even broke their own rules to prevent the Bernie supporters from gaining any traction! :doh

I watched all the footage I could find on it and even the first hand accounts of the Hillary supporters there made the leadership look bad.

 

[Frank Apisa]

How is that? Polls have Sanders currently beating Trump by ~13 points while Clinton loses to Trump by ~2 points.

Give Bernie the nomination...and he will trail Trump by 30 points within a week.

The guy has been given a major league pass...nothing approaching serious has been thrown at him...not by Hillary or by the Republicans.

They would LOVE for Bernie to be the candidate...and would annihilate him the moment he got it...if the Dems were silly enough to let it happen.

But Bernie supporters are going to keep at it no matter if it results in less chance for the Democrats to win in November...and they have every right to do so.

I acknowledge that.

 

[Geoist]

I watched all the footage I could find on it and even the first hand accounts of the Hillary supporters there made the leadership look bad.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at Barbara Boxer's antics...

 

[Geoist]

Give Bernie the nomination...and he will trail Trump by 30 points within a week.

How so? Does he have some skeletons in the closet the media hasn't exposed yet? Pretty much anyone who is going to vote already knows Sanders is a socialist.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at Barbara Boxer's antics...

She said she feared for her life. I doubt the booing made her fear for her life. For one, as she walked off the stage she was sarcastically blowing kisses to the Bernie supporters. They were outraged over the rule breaking and then were mocked for their outrage. The outrage was vocal. Zero violence. No chairs thrown, nobody assaulted. The police there didn't have to arrest or detain anyone. But the DNC chose to lie about it. Seriously, **** them.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

How so? Does he have some skeletons in the closet the media hasn't exposed yet? Pretty much anyone who is going to vote already knows Sanders is a socialist.

Wait, what? He's a socialist??? I didn't know that. Why hasn't the media been talking about that over and over and over again? This changes everything!

 

[Frank Apisa]

Help the Republicans how? By not voting for Hillary? Many, if not most, Bernie supporters were never going to vote for her in the first place. Heck, I would bet about 40% of Bernie's supporters were not even Democratic members a year ago (my wife, me, and my best friend are included in that group). We are not loyal to political parties.

I was not asking for loyalty to a political party.

I AM NOT loyal to any political party...I am a registered Independent.

I am asking for sanity...and in my opinion, "sanity" in this election is doing as much as possible to prevent Donald Trump from attaining the Oval Office.

I'd vote for George W. Bush to return in order to do that.

But I respect your right to continue doing what you are doing...even if it is helping Trump get that office.