transplantbillsfan

And then there are old curmudgeons like you who are just angry at the world as far as I can tell in your generally unintelligible weird stream-of-consciousness writing style.

Not remotely a problem for me. Along with much of my family being Trump supporters, I watch football every Sunday morning at a bar here in Hawaii with another diehard Bills fan who's also an avid Trump guy. Wife and I have gotten together multiple times with him and his wife. When the Bills made it in the playoffs due to the Tyler Boyd TD, he and I screamed and ran around the bar like lunatics... jumping and hugging. I don't have a problem with real people I know who voted for Trump and still like him. I have issues with Internet message board Trump supporters who hide behind their computers, puff out their chests and pretend they know everything. And even those guys that I know are Bills fans I can easily separate and compartmentalize politics from sports.

And yet you continue to give me that attention, anyway. Hell, you followed me into this thread and have at this point already derailed what I believe was a well-intentioned question to "the other side." So congrats on that. The broader conversation was CLEARLY about "how much more enthusiastic Trump voters are as another example for why he wins!!!" And you jumped in with your statement about the top 4 candidates fundraising not even being in the same ball park as though it was a confirmation of less Democratic enthusiasm--and it would be absolutely disingenuous of you to say that you didn't mean that--except that argument entirely misses the mark in a field of 20 something Democrats. That was pretty clearly what I was disputing. And then in a pitiful effort to deflect, you claim I need to link the pretty obvious stuff I just brought up. So, this all just makes you intellectually dishonest, as another poster would put it. I won't call you the name you called me, clearly you're just projecting.

I see none of the others called out in the OP have decided to partake in this thread, which is just turning into the troll-fest I expected it would be... can't say I blame them

I suggest you learn to research the easy-to-find pretty common knowledge stuff on the Internet. I never moved the goalposts. My argument was consistent and I then even provided you with one of the EASY TO FIND AND OBVIOUS LINKS to support it and you just went on with your jackass trollin self. As far as not providing a link initially. Sorry, one isn't required to cite a source when it's common knowledge. And frankly, what I was arguing was pretty common knowledge if you weren't so damn blind red. Unfortunately in Trump's world of alternative facts common knowledge isn't even common knowledge to some of you, which forces some of us to triangulate and confirm things that are pretty obvious and widely known. And down the rabbit hole it takes you.

Guess I'll be the first of your call-outs to answer and just assume you aren't trolling but are asking a legitimate question you want answered for curiosity's sake. And I'm answering because with all the little quips you've given me over the years, I mostly respect you: So, when I see anyone post "sourced" material that's clearly sourced material, yes I try to read it. I especially did so when I first stated lurking over here. I say try to because I don't spend very much time in this sub-forum. The last couple weeks I was here mainly because it was the bye week and it's always entertaining to come in and see responses when the debates come on. But a lot of the "sourced" material, as you say yourself, is embedded or buried in otherwise clearly partisan bullcrap. I'm not sifting through that crap. I'm what you guys would absolutely call liberal, but I'm not as far left as some of the party is. I'm not the biggest fan of Warren or Sanders, largely because I think they're taking things too far left with their Medicare for All plans. And I will acknowledge that if Warren wins the nomination (I think Sanders is done, even if he hasn't conceded), I will be just a bit less confident in my current bet about the 2020 Presidential Race with @Deranged Rhino. Regardless, yes, I'm left. But I read as much as I can (with as often little time as I have) from both sides. Plenty of Trump supporters in my family, though, including my older sister and her husband and my younger sister's husband. My father-in-law, step-father-in-law, and mother-in-law are all hardcore Trump supporters along with my former brother-in-law, now divorced from my wife's sister. I'm able to have conversations with my sister, all my brother-in-laws and my step-father-in-law about politics. We talk and even will look things up together and have serious, sometimes heated conversations. And I still love all of them. There's a reason I've called this place toxic. It's very much not a place full of much open dialogue, with a handful of great posters that I've referenced in the past. But here's my consistent issue, getting back to your original question: so much of even the "sourced material" provided in this sub-forum is cherry-picked, provided without clear and objective context, which is more middle than the far right this place leans. The problem on all sides in this place is that it's really just about winning rhetorical arguments rather than taking whole picture, overarching looks at some of these issues. Then you have the handful of posters just trolling others and throwing out one-liner insults at others. What's the point? What are you accomplishing? I guess I'd turn the question back on those here, as well. Just the other day in another thread I was having a dialogue with a few others, brought up some facts after researching multiple sources for triangulation's sake in order to verify it, and admittedly didn't post all the links, largely because of the multiple places I went, time, and this just isn't the real world in here and I anticipated pretty much exactly what you're asking in the OP of the posters I was talking to. Plus the information was easily accessible. Once I was accused of not providing sources in an Ad Hominem attack, I provided the most obvious and reliable one as a starting point. But the truth is, I was just being trolled because the jackass poster didn't even address the issue.

Keep deflecting with your ad hominem attack rather than addressing the issue at hand. Start here. It's the obvious place to start, and notice the stark difference between blue and red: https://www.fec.gov/data/raising-bythenumbers/

Keep livin in the upside down as you cherry pick away rather than understanding the bigger picture.

Backup??? Bruh, it's not difficult to find the fundraising numbers for all the candidates and add them up. This isn't some overly complex thing to find. If you need guidance, use Google to find the official campaign numbers and a calculator to add them up. Or don't do that if you don't want. Seems some of you are desperate to keep up this false narrative.

*sigh* Trump has raised more than any individual Democrat by far because it's a numbers game. One Republican vs 20 or so Democrats. The 20 or so Democrats outraised Trump. That is fact. Look it up. The finger pointing at cash on hand seems to be a big deal and, frankly, I don't know why. Once the Democratic nominee is sifted out, he/she will get an inundation of money. There are pro Democrat organisations like Actblue that I referenced before that have already raised TONS of money to be used in the upcoming election. But aside from the money obsession, Democrats will get its voters to coalesce around one candidate. This time Democrats will go out and vote for the Democratic candidate rather than stay home or vote for a 3rd party candidate (which was what happened in 2016... BY FAR the highest number of 3rd party votes in history... like 3+ million more than EVER happened) because they saw what it did in 2016. And the majority of Independents will join because the majority of Independents, at this point, want Trump impeached and removed from office. I don't give a dime to political candidates and I absolutely shudder any time ANY political commercial comes on TV. The ads don't influence me at all. Do you think I'm alone? What do you think Trump's money will accomplish? The country leans more left than it does right at this point. Trump is in office thanks to a perfect storm. Maybe you should ask yourself who really has the blind spot as to what is happening in this country.

I will give you one thing, your stubbornness made me double check and dig even deeper. I honestly don't know at this point if you believe what you're saying because you got it from what you believe are reliable sources in the Twitter verse or if you're just flat out lying in the endless pursuit I've stated multiple times that you guys have over here of winning a rhetorical argument, but no, most of that post is just wrong. And honestly, I'm a little disappointed it is because I respect you. Democrats have hauled in more money in total and significantly more money from small dollar donors (less than $200) than Donald Trump. Weird obsession you guys have with these campaign war chests. Frankly, I'm a little surprised at the norms some of you expect to hold up in the midst of all of your "BUT THE WORLD HAS DRASTICALLY CHANGED WITH THE ELECTION OF TRUMP!!!" proclamations. Bizarro world over here sometimes... most of the time. Not all that concerned with Democratic war chests. They will get their money considering the likes of the online Democratic fundraising tool Actblue has raised over $3 billion for the party alone. I just don't understand why you can't see Trump's election was an outlier... You will, though

Movin goalposts. But whatever. Over the months it's been about the fundraising itself for you. You brought it up pretty consistently. Now it's about cash on hand, which involves many other factors. What's your reasoning behind cash on hand being so meaningful when these campaigns are constantly raising and using money? How many individual donors have donated to Trump's campaign and what's the average individual donation vs. How many individual donors have donated to Democratic candidates' campaigns and what's the average individual donation That might be meaningful.

Moving the goalposts I see. So you include all pro-Trump groups rather than just Trump's fundraising himself. Awfully disingenuous on your part if you aren't doing the same for pro-Democrat groups, of which there are many

I mean we don't necessarily need him this week, but groin injuries can be long lasting. Hope that's not the case here. Is Foster healthy and practicing fully now?

Uhhhhh... except it IS fact as far as exactly what I said combined with your own consistently proclaimed premises on this board. Are you implying that either the Trump campaign or Democratic candidates have incorrectly reported their 3rd quarter fundraising numbers? If so, who? Any evidence whatsoever to support those inflated or deflated numbers? 3rd quarter fundraising was precisely what I referenced. And you seem to equate fundraising numbers with enthusiasm. And the Democratic party outraised the Republican party in the 3rd quarter. And since you seem to be operating under the premise that fundraising = enthusiasm you should probably at least acknowledge that the Democratic party has more enthusiasm right now based on the most recent fundraising numbers. C'mon now... don't be a hypocrite... you're better than this. @TakeYouToTasker might call you intellectually dishonest if he were being intellectually honest

That was based on the presumption you guys here make that fundraising equals enthusiasm. Dems are raising more--which is a FACT, not propoganda--so they must have more enthusiasm according to you folks.

Damn. I like Fitz. Woulda preferred to pummel Rosen.

I know exactly what you stated, that's why I was very careful to put "all" in all caps so the evidently illiterate you would understand that the most important point here is that there is more Democratic enthusiasm than Republican enthusiasm... assuming of course that you measure it by fundraising, which is what you folks over here seem to do... errr... I guess... if you want to measure it by polling.... well... Dems have it there, too... Awwwww shux What I would guess. And then there are those like me who have never given a cent to a political candidate but already knows it's Anybody But Trump, prepared to get behind whoever the Democratic nominee is.

Warren was evasive and irritating. Sanders was pretty strong but his heart attack will kick him out of the race relatively quickly. Yang looked like he was just reading off a script half the time. Gabbard was good in her limited time, but definitely got cut off at certain important (though admittedly impertinent) moments. Biden was good. Not great, but good. He's just been steady throughout. Harris, Booker, O'Rourke, and Castro were all MEH.... Steyer introduced himself well, if briefly. Mayor Pete and Klobuchar destroyed everyone else in the relatively limited time they had. I personally prefer both of those candidates over the 3 frontrunners, but let's be honest, these debates don't typically do much.

It's possible. Not the absolute you claim it is. I still think he ends up the nominee. Warren didn't handle herself very well tonight as the "frontrunner" and Sanders just had a heart attack. I really and truly want Mayor Pete, but he's still a longshot. Don't get the obsession with fundraising unless there are consistently wild discrepancies. This is getting kinda funny how enamored you are with Biden. You resemble the Never-Trumpers in 2015-2016. If Biden wins the nomination, will you follow their paths? PS: Since you seem to care and it relates to our bet... 3rd Quarter Fundraising Donald Trump = $125 million Democrats = $135+ million $135+ million for ALL Democratic candidates. Yeah... Democratic enthusiasm >>>>> Orange Man enthusiasm

Being one of the top 5 teams in the NFL. Yes. Are you stalking me or just this passive aggressive all the time?

...and I was one of them initially

Yes. It might be. The Bills are one of the 5 best teams in the NFL right now and if Allen keeps learning and improving, we have a legitimate shot this year to hoist the Lombardi in February. Playoffs should be an expectation at this point.