Official Bernie Sanders HQ: Not Me, Us!

[Perfectson]

Both are better causing than 800k to be jobless over a wall that's useless. Pocahontas >>>> Dotard.

Strawman. Can you stay on topic or are you trying to trick everyone into thinking I'm for Donald trump by using that statement?

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Strawman. Can you stay on topic or are you trying to trick everyone into thinking I'm for Donald trump by using that statement?

We are ontopic. You mentioned something frivolous and I compared it to something impactful. It's my way of saying, "if you want me to be concerned with her politics or for her qualifications to be President, try harder".

 

[Perfectson]

We are ontopic. You mentioned something frivolous and I compared it to something impactful. It's my way of saying, "if you want me to be concerned with her politics or for her qualifications to be President, try harder".

no you're creating strawman and red herring, no one was talking about Trump or the wall (which i assume neither of us support). You brought up warren and I mentioned her baggage and whether or not that was something you supported. If you don't want to defend her baggage then say so but don't be obtuse and act like you don't know what you'r doing and then try to logic your way out of it.

Again - I never supported Trump nor a wall (nor holding up the budgets for the wall) so you bringing it up is literally to try to get daps..

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Oh pocahontas ? Is she progressive enough or does stealing minority benefits make her a great candidate?

Strawman. Can you stay on topic or are you trying to trick everyone into thinking I'm for Donald trump by using that statement?

no you're creating strawman and red herring, no one was talking about Trump or the wall (which i assume neither of us support). You brought up warren and I mentioned her baggage and whether or not that was something you supported. If you don't want to defend her baggage then say so but don't be obtuse and act like you don't know what you'r doing and then try to logic your way out of it.

Again - I never supported Trump nor a wall (nor holding up the budgets for the wall) so you bringing it up is literally to try to get daps..

• We're in a thread about getting a presidential win. Which means that a candidate/nominee is going to have to go against Trump. So comparing any of the candidates to Trump is more than fair.
  
• You didn't mention Trump, but you go out of your way to use a term that he himself made up. What was the point of that?
  
• Like I said, her getting NA grants is trivial and frivolous in terms of her qualifications for President. Especially when far worse has been committed by previous Presidents. And worst still by the current President.
• Therefore, for something that happened 40 years ago, hurt no one, and has no bearing on her running for President, why would I think she has baggage? Clinton had baggage. Warren has none of that.

So my response to you still stands,

We are ontopic. You mentioned something frivolous and I compared it to something impactful. It's my way of saying, "if you want me to be concerned with her politics or for her qualifications to be President, try harder".

 

[Perfectson]

• We're in a thread about getting a presidential win. Which means that a candidate/nominee is going to have to go against Trump. So comparing any of the candidates to Trump is more than fair.
  
• You didn't mention Trump, but you go out of your way to use a term that he himself made up. What was the point of that?
  
• Like I said, her getting NA grants is trivial and frivolous in terms of her qualifications for President. Especially when far worse has been committed by previous Presidents. And worst still by the current President.
• Therefore, for something that happened 40 years ago, hurt no one, and has no bearing on her running for President, why would I think she has baggage? Clinton had baggage. Warren has none of that.

So my response to you still stands,

Sir you haven't addressed my point, instead you've doubled down on injecting trump into a dialogue that he has nothing to do with which was specifically Warren's baggage . Not the current events of donald trump .

Clinton has baggage and they wjll certainly use her abuse of minority programs and affirmative action as a white woman against her, to show she's a dishonest liar. So if you support the native American Rachael Dolezal then so be it but at least try to argue on the points and not make shyt up to argue against (strawman)

You can use all the fancy formatting, bullet points and embedded quotes, you did something really dumb and just continue to double down on it.

If you respond again explaining why you're being obtuse I'll yield my time cuz this will go no where as I'm well aware of your penchant of arguing nothingness for pages

 

[Don Homer]

Bernie can't even run his own campaign full of sex abuse. Dude would be Walter Mondale 2020.

negged

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

This woman is supported by the ALT RIGHT and CONSERVATIVES

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Sir you haven't addressed my point, instead you've doubled down on injecting trump into a dialogue that he has nothing to do with which was specifically Warren's baggage . Not the current events of donald trump .

• Like I said, her getting NA grants is trivial and frivolous in terms of her qualifications for President. Especially when far worse has been committed by previous Presidents. And worst still by the current President.

• Therefore, for something that happened 40 years ago, hurt no one, and has no bearing on her running for President, why would I think she has baggage? Clinton had baggage. Warren has none of that.

I already answered your question and expounded on it. Maybe you don't like the answer, but it doesn't change the fact that I answered it.

they wjll certainly use her abuse of minority programs and affirmative action as a white woman against her, to show she's a dishonest liar.

She was told she has Native American blood and has had DNA evidence to prove that she did. Therefore, there's no proof that she's a dishonest liar. In fact,

An investigation by The Boston Globe in 2018 found "clear evidence, in documents and interviews, that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools."[27]

If you know better than the Boston Globe, then please feel free to prove it. Though, you have a habit repeating a false narrative instead of providing proof.

So if you support the native American Rachael Dolezal then so be it then so be it but at least try to argue on the points and not make shyt up to argue against (strawman)

Talk about strawman and red herrings. Appeal to emotion even. Warren saying she has NA blood is not the same as Dolezal trying to pass herself off as black. Especially when nothing in her family indicates she has any African DNA in her, minor or major.

1st, Pocahontas. Now, Rachel Dolezal. Let's see how many smears you can trot before you provide any actual proof or evidence for your claims.

 

[Perfectson]

I already answered your question and expounded on it. Maybe you don't like the answer, but it doesn't change the fact that I answered it.



She was told she has Native American blood and has had DNA evidence to prove that she did. Therefore, there's no proof that she's a dishonest liar. In fact,



If you know better than the Boston Globe, then please feel free to prove it. Though, you have a habit repeating a false narrative instead of providing proof.



Talk about strawman and red herrings. Appeal to emotion even. Warren saying she has NA blood is not the same as Dolezal trying to pass herself off as black. Especially when nothing in her family indicates she has any African DNA in her, minor or major.

1st, Pocahontas. Now, Rachel Dolezal. Let's see how many smears you can trot before you provide any actual proof or evidence for your claims.

She filed a claims as native American, it doesn't matter if it was considered , it was the act itself . She attempted to use affirmative action, when we all know she looks like every other white women and that affirmative action was not meant for her.

No you didn't answer, you responded and have muddled up the argument as you typical do. I called you out on a specific point and instead of answering you've decided to do a breakdown analysis of my post which has nothing to do with the original question that you took , bent and created strawman and red herrings

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

This woman is supported by the ALT RIGHT and CONSERVATIVES

Go ahead, keep spamming this

 

[Secure Da Bag]

She filed a claims as native American, it doesn't matter if it was considered , it was the act itself . She attempted to use affirmative action, when we all know she looks like every other white women and that affirmative action was not meant for her.

As already stated, her family told her she has NA ancestry. DNA test proved she did. Her actions 40 years ago impacted nothing and no one. Also, plenty of NA people look and can pass for white.

No you didn't answer, you responded and have muddled up the argument as you typical do. I called you out on a specific point and instead of answering you've decided to do a breakdown analysis of my post which has nothing to do with the original question that you took , bent and created strawman and red herrings

So basically, you don't like my answer and don't like the fact that I took the time to show why your argument is flawed and lacking. Ok, that's fine.

But again, as I said, for the 3rd time,

• her NA ancestry and her claiming of it at Harvard Law had no impact on anyone;
  
• there was no attempt to deceive;
• it happened 40 years ago;
• none of it has any impact on her qualifications for running for or being President;
  
• there is no baggage to speak of.

Clinton has baggage. Trump has baggage. Warren has none of that. The best you can come up with is, according to you, she attempted to use affirmative action 40 years ago. Although that attempt had no impact on anything substantial in her life.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Warren was a Republican until W. Tulsi is a crypto-conservative. Beto is a fake Latino. Biden is the reason schools stayed segregated. (Bet you didn't know that. Look it up)

Bernie is our only hope.

 

[Perfectson]

As already stated, her family told her she has NA ancestry. DNA test proved she did. Her actions 40 years ago impacted nothing and no one. Also, plenty of NA people look and can pass for white.



So basically, you don't like my answer and don't like the fact that I took the time to show why your argument is flawed and lacking. Ok, that's fine.

But again, as I said, for the 3rd time,

• her NA ancestry and her claiming of it at Harvard Law had no impact on anyone;
  
• there was no attempt to deceive;
• it happened 40 years ago;
• none of it has any impact on her qualifications for running for or being President;
  
• there is no baggage to speak of.

Clinton has baggage. Trump has baggage. Warren has none of that. The best you can come up with is, according to you, she attempted to use affirmative action 40 years ago. Although that attempt had no impact on anything substantial in her life.

That's not the best I can come up with, that will be used period. Republicans are going to hammer that to death and that may resonate with actual minorities when a Lilly white woman gets to abuse affirmative action (despite white women being the core affirmative action recipients). You act like I'm making it up. Obama birther movement was a thing and he actually was born here. Warren has some small % that might have been native American and still went ahead and checked the box. You can believe she never used it to her benefit before if you want , she used it at Harvard and I'm doubtful Harvard would have a field like that and not use it . Regardless it's a thing and will be used. Is in heavy baggage ? No, but I can see the ads already

Then it's gonna be that lame ass livestream she did drinking beer lol

If she's the best candidate the Dems have, trump will have a second term

 

[Perfectson]

Warren was a Republican until W. Tulsi is a crypto-conservative. Beto is a fake Latino. Biden is the reason schools stayed segregated. (Bet you didn't know that. Look it up)

Bernie is our only hope.

Bernie is in last place

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Republicans are going to hammer that to death and that may resonate with actual minorities

Nah, she has that covered. At most, NAs may be bothered by it.