The only "purity politics" that matters in my view is donor money and the Iraq War. The rest can be discussed and debated.I thought the purity test stuff applied to making a choice after your choice in the primary was rejected or accepted. Now we're applying purity politics charges when discussing possible candidates before we get to the primary? Isn't this the point that you're supposed to vet and scrutinize candidates?
BBC News retweeted several versions of the story on their social media channels.I’ll be honest when I saw he first thread regarding Corbyn I took it at face value but Nap you looking a little funny pushing the Daily Mail as a reliable source.
Daily Mail isn’t even on NY Post level.
Basic search shows story only being pushed by Daily Mail, The Sun (Murdoch), Telegraph, Brietbart..
Sounds a bit collusion-y to me...
I don't respect your gods, or your idols.listen NAP........... man, stop going off in these twitter finger wars in this thread about anything beside trumps and impeachment... This thread the last 3 pages has been a shyt show about bullshyt, stay on topic man and keep your thread clean. you've done that for the most part but u don't have to fight every battle man. This thread has been great until now. Drop heat concerning the thread and keep these old ass troll arguments out dude.
I don't respect your gods, or your idols.
No one is free from criticism.
Sanders. Corbyn. Podesta.
Lets get it.