You got the three guys saying either their amounts or terms were misrepresented. But you don’t know how many others there might be.
The broader issue is that only a small percentage of the money she claimed to have in pledges ended up coming through. Combining this fact with several known instances of her fudging the pledges suggests that the reason for this may have been a broader pattern of this type of fudging.
Really? Here it is–in its entirety:
What in this post do you classify as either (to use your exact words) “crowing in glee” or “jumping up and down in glee”…? Please be specific. A reply along the lines of ‘the whole thing’ will regarded by intelligent readers as your admission that you have nothing.
Wrong again, fg. Though you may be able to find polls in which “the majority” state that they find politicians to be untrustworthy, you will find no reputable poll in which “the majority” state that they regard Hillary Clinton as (again, to use your exact words) “a crook.”
Sherrerd, you’ve been following along in the elections forum for a while and should know perfectly well dalej42 very much has a hate on for Sanders and most certainly crows with glee at every misstep.
This seems very wrong-headed to me. If someone claims “X is crowing with glee,” then that someone, when challenged about the ugly claim, is obligated to back up the claim with actual evidence–not with mind-reading.
Alternatively, the OP could just tell us how much glee he’s feeling. The answer may surprise you.
Am I ecstatic that there are allegations against Bernie and Jane? Yes. I believe that Bernie Sanders cost Hillary Clinton the 2016 election. Let’s flash back to a year ago today. Shitbag Sanders was still keeping his secret service protection one month after he got crushed in the California and DC primaries. He was hemming and hawing like Hamlet with a Messiah complex as to endorsing Hillary. His cult members were harassing super delegates in a futile attempt to convince them to flip to Sanders even after Sanders was utterly crushed in the Democratic primary race. Sanders’ post-primary idiocy really hurt, it allowed the vile, despicable Jill Stein to have some legitimacy as well as continuing the stupidity of Bernie or Bust.
So, yes, I’d love to see Jane Sanders shackled and jailed and hopefully there’s enough of an ethical cloud over Bernie that he chooses not to run for the Senate again in 2018. In fact, I’d love to waggle my finger right under that arrogant fuck’s nose.
Surprised yet, Sherrerd ?
Somehow, you’ve failed to notice that the claims about “crowing with glee” and “jumping up and down in glee” were not supported by any evidence at the time they were made–the claims depended entirely on mind-reading. With this most recent post (made today), dalej42 has used the word “ecstatic,” but instead of actual crowing, we see a list of concrete, specific reasons for forming a negative opinion about Bernie Sanders.
So, still no “crowing.”
All this, of course, illustrates the incapacity of members of certain factions to advance persuasive, respectable arguments–an incapacity that, perforce, devolves into personal insults (a la ‘you are, in essence, a vindictive person who spends time jumping up and down in glee instead of doing anything worthwhile’). That inability to create an actually-convincing case for one’s position is often expressed, as in this thread, in bluster and hyperbolic smears.
Is that surprising? You tell me.
You’re being silly. The OP was clearly quite happy with this turn of events and you just can’t admit you missed what everyone else caught.
“This could prove to be quite interesting and hopefully put an end to the perception that Bernie Sanders is the savior of the Democratic Party”
That’s some crowing with glee if you ask me.
You’ve completely misinterpreted the entire intercommunication.
I think I’m a little better at interpreting intercommunications so maybe you should just trust me on this.
This. But only to other Democrats of course…
Cause lord knows the Dems didn’t harass delegates in a futile turn to overthrow the election.
Haha! But: no. You failed to see a difference between this:
…and this:
The second one can fairly be classified as “crowing with glee” and/or “jumping up and down in glee.” The first one cannot–it’s a specific description of recent events as they concern a scorned politician.
Your failure to understand the difference between “glee” and “presenting facts about a scorned politician” has apparently led you to this silly position: that my observation that the opening post doesn’t constitute “glee” is equivalent to a claim that the opening poster admires Sanders. It isn’t.
It’s perfectly possible to present information about a detested politician, while maintaining a respectably-adult demeanor. That’s what most posters in this thread have done.
If only because deep pockets will always dig up something against those people, and if they can’t make it stick in court, they’ll control the perception of it via the media. You all should be very proud.
The hope 20odd percent of the voters have. You 20odd per cent don’t really want the other 80odd to have any hope at all, and why would you? The electoral college was a popular mandate to you: it’s your country now.
Trump and his people have done far worse than Jane Sanders ever had the chance to. But history is written by the victors, and right now they think they have the right to write that history and pillory Bernie by mere association. However it turns out, those of us who backed the Sanders groundswell will not forget.
Good for you. The internet would be so boring if everyone just admitted when they were wrong.
If Hillary had only backed down gracefully, claiming simply that Trump would beat her if she run, rather than sensibly saying ‘I am a vain idiot’, President Sanders would now be in the sweetheart period of his first term with very possibly — inspired by his example as much as she repelled, a faint Dem majority in both houses.
And Fox would implode.
Where would the human species be without its capacity for self-delusion?
Case in point (beyond Carnal and Ivan): Bernie himself. He’s been on television stating that Jane left Burlington College in wonderful condition:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/02/politics/bernie-sanders-jane-sanders-burlington-college/index.html
But if that’s the case, why did she leave under the circumstances described here…?
Seems a bit odd. Points to Bernie for being a loyal spouse, I guess, but he does appear to be re-writing the actual history.
So are you ecstatic, not gleeful because that’s totally different, that Sanders’ wife’s legal issues will knock him out of politics and thereby stop his crusade to be the Democrats’ messiah?
Well, that’s it then, they will never be able to recruit any candidate to run against Il Douche’s wildly popular agenda. Damn!