GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, Gary Busey said: Sean Smith said Bloomberg would be president by now. It's March. The "proof" is not factually based. Carry on in the deep state. No clue on who Sean Smith is. What does this have to do with Deep State? This is a worse dodge and weave than your usual backtracking. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Your point is comparing apples and oranges. Bloomberg could have spent every penny he had and he wouldn't have won the nom. He never had a chance. Just now, GG said: No clue on who Sean Smith is. What does this have to do with Deep State? This is a worse dodge and weave than your usual backtracking. Davis - see the edit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 It's apples to apples. Unless you're a dishonest person with a broken brain. The claim for three years is Russia's 100k swung the election. It was always bull####. Bloomberg's spending spree shows why. (as did Hillary's spending spree in 2016, but broken brains didn't get it then either) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: Your point is comparing apples and oranges. Bloomberg could have spent every penny he had and he wouldn't have won the nom. He never had a chance. Davis - see the edit From this exact moment, 4 years and 2 weeks ago, Trump had less of a chance than Bloomberg did, yet $100k from Russia carried him to the nomination & presidency. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bray Wyatt Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, GG said: From this exact moment, 4 years and 2 weeks ago, Trump had less of a chance than Bloomberg did, yet $100k from Russia carried him to the nomination & presidency. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, GG said: From this exact moment, 4 years and 2 weeks ago, Trump had less of a chance than Bloomberg did, yet $100k from Russia carried him to the nomination & presidency. Did they, though? Here's Quinnipiac from February 5, 2016 - 4 years and 4 weeks ago. https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2321 Donald Trump still leads the GOP presidential pack among Republican voters nationwide, with 31 percent, followed by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas with 22 percent and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida with 19 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today. Dr. Ben Carson has 6 percent, with 9 percent undecided and no other candidate above 3 percent. February 18th, 2016 - Cruz inches ahead by 2 points https://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/17/trump-falls-to-second-nationally-nbcwsj-poll.html Where can I see the evidence that Trump had less of a chance than Bloomberg did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 Broken brain + intellectual cowardice produces results like the above. Instead of taking the L, he chooses to be a dishonest asshat. Why his reputation as a complete waste of carbon is entirely deserved. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Have you gotten Tracy Beanz to call you back yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 Gary, trying desperately to run from his own stupidity: ***************************** 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 24 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: Did they, though? Here's Quinnipiac from February 5, 2016 - 4 years and 4 weeks ago. https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2321 Donald Trump still leads the GOP presidential pack among Republican voters nationwide, with 31 percent, followed by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas with 22 percent and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida with 19 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today. Dr. Ben Carson has 6 percent, with 9 percent undecided and no other candidate above 3 percent. February 18th, 2016 - Cruz inches ahead by 2 points https://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/17/trump-falls-to-second-nationally-nbcwsj-poll.html Where can I see the evidence that Trump had less of a chance than Bloomberg did? Here is Bloomberg leading the Dem pack in mid February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 https://mobile.twitter.com/NatSecCNN/status/1235273495371800578 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, GG said: Here is Bloomberg leading the Dem pack in mid February. According to Betfair you win - congrats If you look at predictions from British gambling site Betfair, the Democratic primary has a new top-tier candidate: Mike Bloomberg. His odds of winning the Democratic nomination shot up suddenly in the middle of this week, and on February 14 he briefly passed Bernie Sanders — who has won the popular vote in the two states that have voted so far and is leading in national polls — as the candidate likeliest to win the nomination and likeliest (behind Trump) to be our next president. At the peak on Valentine’s Day, bettors on Betfair gave Bloomberg a 34.5 percent chance of winning the nomination. FiveThirtyEight’s sophisticated election model, on the other hand, rates Bloomberg’s odds of getting a plurality of delegates at 15 percent (plus some chance he’s chosen at a brokered convention), behind Biden as well as Sanders. Most experts aren’t rating him much higher than that. The consensus is that he does have a shot, but he’s far from the easy frontrunner. Do the prediction markets know something experts don’t? Maybe. But anyone who has been watching the prediction markets for the last year might have an alternative hypothesis: They’re just not very good. Before Iowa, Betfair, and competitor PredictIt gave Pete Buttigieg only an 8 percent chance of winning the most state delegate equivalents (which he did, pending a recanvass). For much of last fall, PredictIt rated Andrew Yang and Hillary Clinton as tied for third in the nomination race (neither stood a chance, and Clinton wasn’t even running). In 2016, Betfair’s final assessments of candidates in elections that year were overall very good. But there can be a lot of noise — and a lot of nonsense — along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 So, weird tangents aside how stupid are Americans to fall for $100k of fake Facebook ads, but ignore a $500 million full media barrage? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, GG said: So, weird tangents aside how stupid are Americans to fall for $100k of fake Facebook ads, but ignore a $500 million full media barrage? A lot of Americans are quite stupid. I disagree that everyone ignored Bloomberg's big spend. It got him in the race and people voted for him in primaries. Do you think without the $500 million full media barrage Bloomberg would gotten the same amount of votes in the states he ran in? His money bought a sliver of the electorate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 Still missing the point. Because: broken brain. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 6 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: A lot of Americans are quite stupid. I disagree that everyone ignored Bloomberg's big spend. It got him in the race and people voted for him in primaries. Do you think without the $500 million full media barrage Bloomberg would gotten the same amount of votes in the states he ran in? His money bought a sliver of the electorate. Let's try one more time. If $100k was enough to sway a vote for POTUS, would $500 million get you to be King of the Universe, or at least become Thanos? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 8 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: A lot of Americans are quite stupid. I disagree that everyone ignored Bloomberg's big spend. It got him in the race and people voted for him in primaries. Do you think without the $500 million full media barrage Bloomberg would gotten the same amount of votes in the states he ran in? His money bought a sliver of the electorate. take a look at your response and the question asked. does it in any way seem out of context? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, GG said: Let's try one more time. If $100k was enough to sway a vote for POTUS, would $500 million get you to be King of the Universe, or at least become Thanos? Sure but you're assuming I have ever said 100k swayed votes for POTUS. Never have - try Google as the search function on here sucks. Edited March 4, 2020 by Gary Busey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: A lot of Americans are quite stupid. I disagree that everyone ignored Bloomberg's big spend. It got him in the race and people voted for him in primaries. Do you think without the $500 million full media barrage Bloomberg would gotten the same amount of votes in the states he ran in? His money bought a sliver of the electorate. I think that he would have been a larger factor had he gotten in the race months earlier and participated in more debates. Yes he had a bad debate performance but on average had he been a regular participant he would have done better in them IMO and he would have gained a greater share of the vote. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, Gary Busey said: Sure but you're assuming I have ever say 100k swayed votes for POTUS. Never have - try Google. Your posting history surely shows a preference that the Russian collision theory was plausible. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, GG said: Your posting history surely shows a preference that the Russian collision theory was plausible. Not to mention where this whole conversation began this morning. He's now reversed his position entirely... Because: Broken brain. *********************** Same guy who did this of course: Chuck is a bought and paid for thug of some very bad, very corrupt people. Vote. Him. Out. 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, GG said: Your posting history surely shows a preference that the Russian collision theory was plausible. Sean Smith/Sean Davis, collision/collusion - we all make mistakes. No need to be an ass about it Your point is fair. I've always thought collusion with Russia was plausible as the Trump campaign continuously had contacts with Russians but to suggest 100k in Facebook ads swayed the election is going too far for me until I see some concrete evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 Could have saved yourself two hours by just agreeing with the original post you objected to... But nah. You tried to dunk, and missed. Because you're a clown. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Vote. Him. Out. That would require the RNC to come into NYS and start building a bench from the ground up. Not gonna happen. Instead of sinking money and effort into the state, they have abandoned New York. The "wonderful" NYS Senate legislation that has been passed the last year+ is only going to get worse for us. It really sucks. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 And... Sigh. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 ************************ And Roberts responded: 1 3 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Egg Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 Cuomo has been ousted as the biggest elected A-hole in New York state by Schumer. .....they said it couldn't be done. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2020 Author Share Posted March 4, 2020 "Deliberate misinterpretation of what" he said, eh? It's on tape. Full context is given and clear. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 13 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: "Deliberate misinterpretation of what" he said, eh? It's on tape. Full context is given and clear. i may be mistaken, but didn't Sotomayor start the whole thing with her publicly stated partisan opinions? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: ************************ And Roberts responded: What the actual *****? You know the Supreme Court is taking it seriously when Roberts feels the need to respond that day. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 5, 2020 Author Share Posted March 5, 2020 (edited) Trump weighs in: Edited March 5, 2020 by Deranged Rhino 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: "Deliberate misinterpretation of what" he said, eh? It's on tape. Full context is given and clear. But....but... don't you see? It's all Trump's fault!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedge Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 2 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Hedge said: To quote our former President Obama to Democrats: Punch back twice as hard - POLITICO . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: "Deliberate misinterpretation of what" he said, eh? It's on tape. Full context is given and clear. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Such a severe punishment. Did Beardy McGee arrange it? I hear they will also not be able to participate in "Tapioca Tuesday" at the cafeteria for a full month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Zevon Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 Schumer is a moron. He needs to apologize, shut the ***** up about it, and rally support across the aisle in the Senate for the Covid 19 bill that passed the House yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 17 hours ago, Gary Busey said: I've always thought collusion with Russia was plausible as the Trump campaign continuously had contacts with Russians but to suggest 100k in Facebook ads swayed the election is going too far for me until I see some concrete evidence. You want concrete evidence? Mini MIke just spent half a BILLION on actual national television advertisements and it ‘swayed‘ him all the way through American Samoa! The Russia narrative was and is a complete fantasy invented to pacify Hillary fans. 2 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts