• Democratic National Convention & Protests Super(delegate)thread - Goodbye, Bernie
    1,979 replies, posted
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50789320]Bernie lost. The game was not in favor of him, but you just have to accept it. Everyone who supported the other Republican candidates also must now shut up and vote for Trump.[/QUOTE] Nah... they can support whoever they like, on both sides. However, whilst it makes no sense for any Bernie supporter if thinking logically to support Trump, it makes a lot of sense for any moderate or neoconservative Republican to support Clinton. That's the difference.
[QUOTE=AnnieOakley;50789705]What was the GoT reference in quote?[/QUOTE] Not really a reference but he said "we never bow, we never, bend, we never break" and people pointed out that it's similar to House Martell's words "unbowed, unbent, unbroken".
What the fug, was looking at some twitter posts regarding the convention, and someone pointed out something which is pretty "holy fuck" [media]https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/758534612465385472[/media] Not sure if this was posted earlier on, but that looks eerily similar to the holes produced when tumors are removed from ones tongue.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50789889]What the fug, was looking at some twitter posts regarding the convention, and someone pointed out something which is pretty "holy fuck" [media]https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/758534612465385472[/media] Not sure if this was posted earlier on, but that looks eerily similar to the holes produced when tumors are removed from ones tongue.[/QUOTE] Rumors say Bill has AIDS and Hillary has seizures, and now cancer. People have been wondering why Clinton has so few press conferences and I'm beginning to believe its because she's in poor health.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50789889]What the fug, was looking at some twitter posts regarding the convention, and someone pointed out something which is pretty "holy fuck" [media]https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/758534612465385472[/media] Not sure if this was posted earlier on, but that looks eerily similar to the holes produced when tumors are removed from ones tongue.[/QUOTE] I won't speculate about Hillary's health record, but it's not apparent in [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyXGiHbWa6s]this video[/url] (the moment is at exactly 49:00-49:01) from a different angle where you see the same part of the tongue. In other news, I feel kinda weird having looked so closely at Clinton's mouth and tongue.
I wouldn't be surprised if a weirdo with no credibility like Mike Cernovich just straight up made it up or believed something that was made up.
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50789921]Rumors say Bill has AIDS and Hillary has seizures, and now cancer. People have been wondering why Clinton has so few press conferences and I'm beginning to believe its because she's in poor health.[/QUOTE] Bill doesn't have AIDS or cancer. Neither does Clinton. Rumours are just rumours and you can't really say anything unless there's been an official statement about their medical conditions.
They're just rumours and so can be ignored. I certainly wouldn't be speculating over Trump's health unless he actually came out and said X, Y, or Z about it. Just another way of spreading misinformation and fear about.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50790106]Bill doesn't have AIDS or cancer. Neither does Clinton. Rumours are just rumours and you can't really say anything unless there's been an official statement about their medical conditions.[/QUOTE] I know they're just rumors, I don't take them too seriously but its more interesting seeing what makes people think this way. Until a practicing doctor wants to make a claim just on visual evidence it can be dismissed. Hillary's seizure is referring to a minor freakout she had when the press swamped her with questions: [video=youtube;YMHOcmDVBP0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMHOcmDVBP0[/video] I don't know what that was about and I'm not qualified to call that a seizure but it was an odd response.
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50790155]I know they're just rumors, I don't take them too seriously but its more interesting seeing what makes people think this way. Until a practicing doctor wants to make a claim just on visual evidence it can be dismissed. Hillary's seizure is referring to a minor freakout she had when the press swamped her with questions: [video=youtube;YMHOcmDVBP0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMHOcmDVBP0[/video] I don't know what that was about and I'm not qualified to call that a seizure but it was an odd response.[/QUOTE] It's a bit strange to extrapolate that Hillary has regular seizures based on what she did in that video. It's typically common (when having a seizure) for the person to lose consciousness/fall over. She didn't seem to be confused or in a daze when it ended, which would mean that if she actually had a seizure it would have been an unusually rapid and complete recovery from it on her part. Plus seizures don't tend to be that short either. Also typically when important politicians have seizures their handlers tend to come in to help (they didn't in this case). She doesn't have seizures and I think people claiming she is are trying to spread rumours around based on flimsy understanding of medical knowledge.
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50790155]I know they're just rumors, I don't take them too seriously but its more interesting seeing what makes people think this way. Until a practicing doctor wants to make a claim just on visual evidence it can be dismissed. Hillary's seizure is referring to a minor freakout she had when the press swamped her with questions: [video=youtube;YMHOcmDVBP0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMHOcmDVBP0[/video] I don't know what that was about and I'm not qualified to call that a seizure but it was an odd response.[/QUOTE] you can see she fell backwards and they looped the video. the reporter shoved something in her face and she flinched, but why does the audio loop? i live with someone who has the kind of siezure they are implying, this was not a siezure its a fraud
FYI, she had some health problems before in the past and took six months of vacation in order to recover. [URL="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/05/hillary-clinton-took-6-months-to-get-over-concussion-bill-says-of-timeline/"]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/05/hillary-clinton-took-6-months-to-get-over-concussion-bill-says-of-timeline/[/URL]
As someone with a sister who had awful seizures a few years ago, that's simply a fucking insult to say those are seizures. That's a damn bloody lie and awful editing. But hey, since Trump supporters can't win with rhetoric, now they think they can win by shaming others for medical conditions they don't even have.
God damn you're grasping for straws with the seizures crap
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;50790297]As someone with a sister who had awful seizures a few years ago, that's simply a fucking insult to say those are seizures. That's a damn bloody lie and awful editing. But hey, since Trump supporters can't win with rhetoric, now they think they can win by shaming others for medical conditions they don't even have.[/QUOTE] Its politics, people throw shit on both sides. Another thing is that its the internet, and everyone on the internet thinks they are just as qualified as a practicing doctor, political analyst, and expert statistician when it comes to dispelling or confirming rumors. Its more of the stupidity of the internet + Hillary hate than it is uniquely Trump supporters that spread these rumors, at least in my view. Good example in my view is 9/11 conspiracies and jet fuel can't melt steel beams. Suddenly people become experts on world politics and material science when it comes to 9/11.
Even if Clinton is in such bad shape that she croaks, I'd feel more comfortable about Tim Kaine as president than Trump. And I don't even know who Kaine is.
Kaine as President would be interesting: he'd be the second ever Catholic president and like JFK he's also of Irish decent. You'd at-least have us onside for years :V
Wait isn't the convention on right now is anyone even watching??? [editline]28th July 2016[/editline] Yeah its on and [url=https://www.twitch.tv/dnc2016]hardly anyone is watching[/url], only 2k viewers right now
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50791252]Wait isn't the convention on right now is anyone even watching??? [editline]28th July 2016[/editline] Yeah its on and [url=https://www.twitch.tv/dnc2016]hardly anyone is watching[/url], only 2k viewers right now[/QUOTE] I guess people were only interested in a few selected speakers, Sanders, (Michelle), Obama
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50789320]Bernie lost. The game was not in favor of him, but you just have to accept it. Everyone who supported the other Republican candidates also must now shut up and vote for Trump.[/QUOTE] Only Trump won fair and square, even with the media and the Republican party doing their best to destroy him. Sanders had the nomination stolen from him. The DNC wasn't just "not in favor of him" and you're horribly downplaying the outrageous betrayal that took place.
[QUOTE=srobins;50791330]Only Trump won fair and square, even with the media and the Republican party doing their best to destroy him. Sanders had the nomination stolen from him. The DNC wasn't just "not in favor of him" and you're horribly downplaying the outrageous betrayal that took place.[/QUOTE] It wasn't even panic "oh shit sanders's beating us, lets turn the tide", it was all decided before the elections started Hillary could've won fair and square regardless, she chose not to, big fucking display of honesty and btw, i wouldn't vote for hillary, but for the party platform
[QUOTE=srobins;50791330]Only Trump won fair and square, even with the media and the Republican party doing their best to destroy him. Sanders had the nomination stolen from him. The DNC wasn't just "not in favor of him" and you're horribly downplaying the outrageous betrayal that took place.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say it was stolen, he might have lost anyway. If she hadn't "cheated", it would have probably been 50/50
[QUOTE=SebiWarrior;50791346]It wasn't even panic "oh shit sanders's beating us, lets turn the tide", it was all decided before the elections started Hillary could've won fair and square regardless, she chose not to, big fucking display of honesty and btw, i wouldn't vote for hillary, but for the party platform[/QUOTE] I honestly would be less angry if they just said "We aren't having a race this year, the DNC has decided to run Hillary Clinton." Still shitty, but at least it's not a fake race giving us the illusion of choice.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50791365]I honestly would be less angry if they just said "We aren't having a race this year, the DNC has decided to run Hillary Clinton." Still shitty, but at least it's not a fake race giving us the illusion of choice.[/QUOTE] Nah, democracy calls for illusion of choice
[QUOTE=phygon;50791357]I wouldn't say it was stolen, he might have lost anyway. If she hadn't "cheated", it would have probably been 50/50[/QUOTE] You can't prove or disprove that he would've lost in a fair race because [B]we never got one[/B] You could have fucking Vermin Supreme run as a democrat and you can't tell me if he will win or lose [B]if the system is [I]RIGGED FROM THE START[/I][/B]
[QUOTE=srobins;50791330]Only Trump won fair and square, even with the media and the Republican party doing their best to destroy him. Sanders had the nomination stolen from him. The DNC wasn't just "not in favor of him" and you're horribly downplaying the outrageous betrayal that took place.[/QUOTE] So the RNC was conspiring against Trump as well. Like, the party committee having a preferred candidate isn't something I find shocking. I think that just goes to show how much stronger Trump's support is than Sanders'.
[QUOTE=The Vman;50791483]So the RNC was conspiring against Trump as well. Like, the party committee having a preferred candidate isn't something I find shocking. I think that just goes to show how much stronger Trump's support is than Sanders'.[/QUOTE] The RNC was definitely conspiring against Trump, but because the RNC has half-decent cybersecurity it can't be proven as fact. Seriously, Clinton has two email scandals under her belt and we haven't reached the first presidential debate yet.
[QUOTE=The Vman;50791483]So the RNC was conspiring against Trump as well. Like, the party committee having a preferred candidate isn't something I find shocking. I think that just goes to show how much stronger Trump's support is than Sanders'.[/QUOTE] This is p much what it comes down to. If more physical Sanders voters went to the booth the DNC would be in a similar spot the RNC is right now.
[QUOTE=srobins;50791330]Only Trump won fair and square, even with the media and the Republican party doing their best to destroy him. Sanders had the nomination stolen from him. The DNC wasn't just "not in favor of him" and you're horribly downplaying the outrageous betrayal that took place.[/QUOTE] so trump won 'fair and square' even with his own party, and the media, against him. yet bernie got his nomination stolen from him when...the exact same thing happened to him?
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50791544]The RNC was definitely conspiring against Trump, but because the RNC has half-decent cybersecurity it can't be proven as fact. Seriously, Clinton has two email scandals under her belt and we haven't reached the first presidential debate yet.[/QUOTE] Maybe it's because the RNC has half-decent cybersecurity. Maybe it's because they weren't hacked by groups linked to Russian intelligence services. I dunno. Also her one* email scandal has already come and gone regarding voters. The people who wouldn't vote because of that already decided she was guilty long before the FBI reached a verdict. [editline]28th July 2016[/editline] Also when you say the "media was trying to destroy him" are you implying a conspiracy?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.