*does the same, sees the "little bit of math on a Sunday morning" post*
Thaaaaat's not very good math
Delusion: Convince yourself.
*does the same, sees the "little bit of math on a Sunday morning" post*
Thaaaaat's not very good math
Mr. Makhzoomi, 26, knew something was wrong as soon as he finished his phone call and saw that a woman sitting in front of him had turned around in her seat to stare at him, he said. She headed for the airplane door soon after he told his uncle that he would call again when he landed, and qualified it with a common phrase in Arabic, inshallah, meaning god willing.
That is when I thought, Oh, I hope she is not reporting me, because it was so weird, Mr. Makhzoomi said.
Worst partLaw enforcement officials arrived shortly after Mr. Makhzoomi accused the airline employee of anti-Muslim bias, he said. He was brought into the terminal and searched in front of a crowd of onlookers while half a dozen police officers, including one with a dog, stood watch.
Three agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrived and brought him into a private room where they questioned him, he said. They asked about his mother, who lives with him and his younger brother in Oakland. They also asked about his father, Khalid Makhzoomi, a former Iraqi diplomat who was jailed in Abu Ghraib prison by Saddam Hussein and later killed by the dictators regime, according to Mr. Makhzoomi. His family came to the United States in 2010.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/1...ic-removed-southwest-airlines-plane.html?_r=0Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the San Francisco Bay Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said there had been at least six cases of Muslims being pulled off flights so far this year.
Christ that email from Bernie is slimy as hell.
Clooney's point immediately after saying that quoted line was that you can't change the campaign finance system without taking its money because you need to win the downticket seats to change anything. So basically the exact opposite of what Bernie keeps saying.
It's ok, we just need to push Hillary below the viability threshold in California and we'll win!*does the same, sees the "little bit of math on a Sunday morning" post*
Thaaaaat's not very good math
I think someone says it every time, but the need to label everything in political cartoons is annoying
Probably Bernie16.So which campaign (has) made more unforced errors, Hillary08 or Bernie16?
But the email said "Here's the truth", so that's clearly a lie.
Yooooooo.Watching the absolutism in the more fanatical Sanders supporters has been quite fascinating. You must be 100% in all ways, 100% in line with Sanders internet consensus (and not even necessarily what Bernie even says), 100% in agreement with affiliated social media groups. Any areas of disagreement? Out of the movement. Burned. Corrupt. And the cognitive dissonance in some areas is cringe worthy. We're deep into #NoTrueScotsman territory on some topics, too. It's starting to look like Gamergate's stubborn hive mentality, and I don't use that comparison lightly.
That Clooney swipe is a good example, as it blatantly ignores the reality of politics. Democrats would die in national elections without that kind of money coming in. It's not even money attached to corporations. A fraction of the money is going to Clinton. It's just money that wealthy people are choosing to donate, as if being wealthy and a Democrat is a crime. Hell, if I had that much spare cash I'd be all over that shit. It's George Clooney talking about how much he'd rather not have to do these events in the future. It's the message I 100% agree with and I 100% want to see a Democrat win the Presidency, along with a Congress that can actually help pass their agenda. That's something I would be interested to participate in! It sounds like it'd be a very memorable evening, which is the whole point for the donors.
If you lean Sanders? It's filthy, tainted money, period, regardless of the details. Anyone participating? A threat to democracy. They could well be dedicating their lives to all the same causes Sanders chases behind the scenes and it wouldn't matter. Because the money is being handed over at an event Clinton headlines it's corrupt. No middle ground. Absolutism only. To be a part of the revolution you must be 100% "pure."
Watching the absolutism in the more fanatical Sanders supporters has been quite fascinating. You must be 100% in all ways, 100% in line with Sanders internet consensus (and not even necessarily what Bernie even says), 100% in agreement with affiliated social media groups. Any areas of disagreement? Out of the movement. Burned. Corrupt. And the cognitive dissonance in some areas is cringe worthy. We're deep into #NoTrueScotsman territory on some topics, too. It's starting to look like Gamergate's stubborn hive mentality, and I don't use that comparison lightly.
That Clooney swipe is a good example, as it blatantly ignores the reality of politics. Democrats would die in national elections without that kind of money coming in. It's not even money attached to corporations. A fraction of the money is going to Clinton. It's just money that wealthy people are choosing to donate, as if being wealthy and a Democrat is a crime. Hell, if I had that much spare cash I'd be all over that shit. It's George Clooney talking about how much he'd rather not have to do these events in the future. It's the message I 100% agree with and I 100% want to see a Democrat win the Presidency, along with a Congress that can actually help pass their agenda. That's something I would be interested i participating in! It sounds like it'd be a very memorable evening, which is the whole point for the donors.
If you lean Sanders? It's filthy, tainted money, period, regardless of the details. Anyone participating? A threat to democracy. They could well be dedicating their lives to all the same causes Sanders chases behalf the scenes and it wouldn't matter. Because the money is being handed over at an event Clinton headlines it's corrupt. No middle ground. Absolutism only. To be a part of the revolution you must be 100% "pure."
Bernie hasn't said anything anywhere nearly as bad as Hillary's RFK commentProbably Bernie16.
Hillary was simply caught flat-footed by the best politician in a generation. Bernie's campaign has devolved into a raving lunatic emporium.
Rush Limbaugh's, "Don't doubt me on this," is a pretty good sign you just stepped in bullshit.I find that anything said after the words "Here's the truth" or immediately before asking you to give money is usually bullshit, so this is a nice double whammy.
"He is undermining the values that we stand for in New York and across America. And hes hurting us around the world. He can say whatever he want to say about me. I really could care less."
Come on, guys! Let's make 1.3mil phone calls by Tuesday and Bernie WILL defeat killary!It's ok, we just need to push Hillary below the viability threshold in California and we'll win!
All Bernie has to do is hit his "credibility threshold" and he'll be on track. What is that, 20%?
Mark Penn was a walking, talking and frequent memo writing unforced error. Hillary's 08 campaign is winning currently but Sanders has plenty of time to take the title,So which campaign (has) made more unforced errors, Hillary08 or Bernie16?
Hillary has gotten a little better too. But Bill is still horrible.Mark Penn was a walking, talking and frequent memo writing unforced error. Hillary's 08 campaign is winning currently but Sanders has plenty of time to take the title,
So many people make that mistake these days. I usually make them dizzy explaining why it is could not care less. With a blank stare and a quick you're wrong as their only response.Nooooooooo Hillary...
Sanders deserves to be endlessly criticized for this shit with downballot fundraising. I can't believe how hard he is going in on trying to raise money for anyone but his own selfish self.
This kind of shit is actively harmful for this fall.
Well, the good thing is this will all be completely and officially over soon, and then we can stop the pretext Bernie ever had a chance and start moving behind a candidate who actually understands the importance of funds for downticket races.
I dont think bernie is going anywhere until Cali votes. And we gotta put up with another month full of smaller western states voting for bernie.Well, the good thing is this will all be completely and officially over soon, and then we can stop the pretext Bernie ever had a chance and start moving behind a candidate who actually understands the importance of funds for downticket races.
It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
Well, for one, they're not going to go against the will of the people. Hillary leads in votes cast and pledged delegates, so I don't see any argument for switching to Bernie that isn't a slap in the face to the Democratic process.It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
Brazil's impeachment vote will likely begin within the next 10 minutes.
SO nervous.
PoliGAF is too local
For Bernie? Naw, he's going to drag his campaign's corpse* here to California where the death throes will be put on display. Lots of Bernie supporters on my campus, but he won't win the state. At least not by the amount he needs.Two more days, then the madness hopefully ends and I can begin to pay attention again... And if not, PA/MD/CT/DE will definitely nail that coffin shut a week later.
Well, for one, they're not going to go against the will of the people. Hillary leads in votes cast and pledged delegates, so I don't see any argument for switching to Bernie that isn't a slap in the face to the Democratic process.
This post does remind me of how a child rapist attempted to indict Bill Clinton, but I am interested in this indictment in Brazil...
For Bernie? Naw, he's going to drag his campaign's corpse* here to California where the death throes will be put on display. Lots of Bernie supporters on my campus, but he won't win the state. At least not by the amount he needs.
*Obviously not Bernie's actual corpse but I know how some people like to twist words.
It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
So you are suggesting that the Supers ignore Clinton's long history of work with the Democrats, her very large multi-million vote lead, her 200+ delegate lead?
Why would they?
Reminds me of Bernie's comment about the only reason she is leading in popular vote is because of the South. Like their votes don't count as the will of the people or something....Well, for one, they're not going to go against the will of the people. Hillary leads in votes cast and pledged delegates, so I don't see any argument for switching to Bernie that isn't a slap in the face to the Democratic process.
It seems to me these Super Delegates are more reluctant to change their pledge than they were in 2008. It's disappointing because I truly believe Sanders would win the General Election against a Trump/Cruz.
Isn't that why they are supporting Clinton? Because they feel she has a better chance in November? What evidence is there to suggest they are right?
So you are suggesting that the Supers ignore Clinton's long history of work with the Democrats, her very large multi-million vote lead, her 200+ delegate lead?
Why would they?
Ok this cuts off that camera jump and looks smoother.
Aside from the Super Delegates, what are the forecasts for future primaries? Does Sanders have a realistic chance of winning of closing that gap enough to beg the question of a switch?
Aside from the Super Delegates, what are the forecasts for future primaries? Does Sanders have a realistic chance of winning of closing that gap enough to beg the question of a switch?
Aside from the Super Delegates, what are the forecasts for future primaries? Does Sanders have a realistic chance of winning of closing that gap enough to beg the question of a switch?
They need to have a really good reason to override the popular and pledge delegate vote.
That can happen, like if John Edwards's affair on his wife with cancer came up right before the convention and he had a lead in votes.