Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

You just brought up Benghazi coverage like it refutes that supposition.

Saying "CNN is not in the tank for Clinton" is not the same thing as saying "CNN hates Clinton".

So you are accusing me of drinking the Kool-Aide... because you blur all views you disagree with together.

^^Legit!

[evilcherry]

Well, the social media post-mortems seem to be giving the debate to Sanders by a pretty big margin. Be interesting to see how that translates to poll numbers now.

EDIT: heh...meanwhile, the assorted punditry are gushing over Clinton. Interesting illustration of the generational gap.

This is a battle which both sides can claim victory. Bernie got his message known probably the first time for many voters, and HRC played a very conservative game by talking about "safe" issues, hoping that she would not bleed much to Sanders after this debate (which should happen due to her high name recognition).

[mainiac]

Sanders has pretty high name recognition at this point.  Most gains he makes now are going to have to come from taking voters from Clinton or Biden.

[nenjin]

So you are accusing me of drinking the Kool-Aide... because you blur all views you disagree with together.

No, I'm saying you're drinking the Kool-Aide because you've been defensive of Clinton pretty much since the start of this. Basically anyone that has said they don't like or want Clinton, you've dived down their throat. Doesn't matter if it was Watergate, Benghazi, or anything, you've been defending her (and basically saying anyone doesn't like her is some variety of stupid/misinformed/confused/partisan.)

Christ you dived down my throat for basically saying something about CNN that relates to Clinton, because it disagreed with your "Witch Hunt" on Clinton.

So yeah. Enjoy your Kool-Aide bub.

[mainiac]

Yeah, I'm diving down your throat by addressing your points while you engage in childish name calling.

[nenjin]

You "addressed my points" by doing a quick google search of CNN headlines with Hilary in them. (Some of them don't even have Hilary in them, btw) and using that as proof.

[Flying Dice]

The truly amusing part about the situation is how CNN (among others) are blathering about how Clinton carried the debates, but every post-debate poll has given the edge to Sanders by a pretty substantial margin (I'm talking 80%+ of respondents saying that he took them). It's about as blatant as media favoritism gets.

[mainiac]

As foretold by Nate Silver.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I think at this point we can put Nate Silver at 4 Sigma, so the real question is "How many sigmas do we need for a witch burning?".

[Frumple]

Seven. The sigma scale is only supposed to go up to six. If it goes over, there's a problem.

[Descan]

Y'all should just give Nate the presidency, maybe his witchcraft can fix your damn country, and hey, first openly gay president!

[Helgoland]

Nate Silver is gay? Huh, I didn't know that.

Have there been confirmed in-the-closet presidents in the past?

[NullForceOmega]

Okay, completely serious.  I don't want Hillary as president because regardless of what she stands for (if anything) and how she votes, she is polarizing as all get out, and what we need right now is some really serious bipartisan activity.

We cannot continue down this path of your side my side, it is creating a near-insurmountable deadlock in the U.S.A.'s basic functions, and from my perspective that is totally unacceptable.

[penguinofhonor]

James Buchanan.

[Helgoland]

I don't want Hillary as president because regardless of what she stands for (if anything) and how she votes, she is polarizing as all get out, and what we need right now is some really serious bipartisan activity.

Wasn't that precisely what Obama promised, and tried to deliver? Doesn't seem like a good reason to oppose Hillary.