Even ***** does not endorse socialist candidate Ocasio-Cortez

[5burowz]

Sry, you really lose me when you align yourself with that ****roach Sarsour.

[Lords]

Dude, you cant cite supposed savings when the people you cite were wrong about supposed savings before.

This is basic logic dude.

Keep up.



Cut the Gotcha! ****.

Last warning.



If you cant see a guy calling for equality while owning three homes is hypocrisy, you're more stupid than your party says you are.

Do I really have to now teach you the concept of hypocrisy??? Really??



No, you are focusing on minutiae, obfuscation, and Gotcha! crap.



My guess, because you want to 'win' and you like to argue.

I'm still trying to figure out why as well, hence me asking why you defend those on video calling you stupid.

Someone calls me stupid, I sure as hell aint going to be defending them.

But maybe it's cool for people to call you stupid. I cant get an answer from you, so I'm stuck speculating.

There are so many things wrong in this response I’m not even going to bother. You’re easy to debate and I’ve proven this already multiple times in multiple threads. All you do is try to sound smart while offering nothing except asking questions that have already been answered. You’re funny because you try to prove others wrong and its cool but when they prove you wrong its a “stop playing gotcha”. I’ve already laid everything out for everyone to analyze and think about, I’m done here for now. You can put me on your ignore list, it doesnt bother me, just really shows who won here

[1bad65]

There are so many things wrong in this response I’m not even going to bother.

And yet here you are, bothering to respond....

You’re easy to debate and I’ve proven this already multiple times in multiple threads.

Thank you.

I do try and be easy to debate. You'll notice I stay on point, I dont obfuscate or use fallacy, nor hurl insults or duck points and questions.

I wish you didnt do those things and were also easy to debate.

To my credit, I'm trying to work with you on improving your debate skills.

All you do is try to sound smart while offering nothing except asking questions that have already been answered.

Ducked, not answered.

For example, I'm still waiting on you to cite ONE, just one, example of a government program that came in at or under budget.....

You’re funny because you try to prove others wrong and its cool but when they prove you wrong its a “stop playing gotcha”.

You were playing Gotcha!

Instead of addressing the hypocrisy which was the point, you focused on whether or not Sanders owned a specific car and ignored the rest.

That's playing Gotcha!, and not debating.

Now to your credit you did score some Gotcha! points, but what's that get you? Nothing. Hence me not playing Gotcha! games.

I’ve already laid everything out for everyone to analyze and think about, I’m done here for now. You can put me on your ignore list, it doesnt bother me, just really shows who won here

No one 'wins' here.

There's no competition here, no rules, officials, scoring system, etc.

It's just a forum. Dont be one of those guys who makes it more than it is and acts a fool.

Leave that winning nonsense to fools like SafeSpace.

[Lords]

Instead of addressing the hypocrisy which was the point, you focused on whether or not Sanders owned a specific car and ignored the rest.

I already addressed the hypocrisy, I'll further elaborate because nothing satisfies you for some odd reason.
Saying this is hypocrisy is actually laughable.
ALL US Senators own a home in there home state, and since they spend so much time in DC, a 2nd established residency in DC is a practical necessity and not uncommon, especially when you’ve been doing it for over a decade. His wife inherited a home when her parents passed and sold it because it was too far from there location and bought there 3rd home closer.
To validate hypocrispy point me in the direction of Bernie saying to not own 3 homes (or even 1 home).

The amount of homes you own or money you have doesn't impact someones ability to fight for the poor. Bernie owning 3 homes doesn’t mean he can’t represent the interests of the poor and fight for policies that would benefit them.

[Don Pichardo]

Lmfao at the "attorney" mimicking me like a child.
(And still not writing it in proper English. )

Come on SafeSpace, up your game.

I know imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but I'm not here for that.

Remember guys, I'm not here to be a trendsetter. Be yourselves. Talk like you do. Dont change yourselves to try to talk and be like me.

Don't be followers. Be yourself.

In your dreams Pedro in your dreams. Ubertard

[1bad65]

I already addressed the hypocrisy, I'll further elaborate because nothing satisfies you for some odd reason.
Saying this is hypocrisy is actually laughable.
ALL US Senators own a home in there home state, and since they spend so much time in DC, a 2nd established residency in DC is a practical necessity and not uncommon, especially when you’ve been doing it for over a decade. His wife inherited a home when her parents passed and sold it because it was too far from there location and bought there 3rd home closer.
To validate hypocrispy point me in the direction of Bernie saying to not own 3 homes (or even 1 home).

So you're still ducking it, or you don't know what hypocrisy is.

Please tell me which it is so we can move the discourse forward.

If you're ducking it, I'll accept you have no interest in answering it. If you don't grasp the concept of hypocrisy, I'll spell it out for you.

So please, let me know what I'm dealing with.

The amount of homes you own or money you have doesn't impact someones ability to fight for the poor. Bernie owning 3 homes doesn’t mean he can’t represent the interests of the poor and fight for policies that would benefit them.

While correct, that still completely ignores his glaring hypocrisy on the matter.

And fyi, socialist policies don't benefit the poor. See Venezuela, Cuba, Vietnam, etc for proof of that.

The only people who benefit from socialism are the political class. You know, people like Bernie Sanders.

They get rich while the populace starves.

[Theodore]

Not to get into a debate between 2 members, but one thing people hate is hypocrisy. I'm not saying the people on the right don't have any, but when your platform is talking about the rich and the have nots and you own multiple expensive properties and you are a multi-millionaire, yeah that sounds hypocritical. Kind of like Elizabeth Warren blasting the rich and saying they own too many properties and live in rich places when she lives in a multi-million dollar mansion. Talks about inequality but is for racial quotas and preferences in hiring and university placements via affirmative action.

[1bad65]

Lords, I'm still waiting on you to cite ONE, just one, Government program that came in at or under budget.....

You're ducking that.

Can we go ahead and say you can't cite a one, or are you planning on citing one sometime this month?

[1bad65]

Not to get into a debate between 2 members, but one thing people hate is hypocrisy. I'm not saying the people on the right don't have any, but when your platform is talking about the rich and the have nots and you own multiple expensive properties and you are a multi-millionaire, yeah that sounds hypocritical. Kind of like Elizabeth Warren blasting the rich and saying they own too many properties and live in rich places when she lives in a multi-million dollar mansion. Talks about inequality but is for racial quotas and preferences in hiring and university placements via affirmative action.

This isn't a debate, really.

Its Lords ducking points and questions, and coming back with superfan cheerleading and talking points.

I'm trying to keep him on point, but he refuses to do that.

We all know why.


He sees the hypocrisy. He just refuses to acknowledge it because it's a guy on his team who is the hypocrite.

Superfans will be superfans.

[maracho]

So you're still ducking it, or you don't know what hypocrisy is.

Please tell me which it is so we can move the discourse forward.

If you're ducking it, I'll accept you have no interest in answering it. If you don't grasp the concept of hypocrisy, I'll spell it out for you.

So please, let me know what I'm dealing with.



While correct, that still completely ignores his glaring hypocrisy on the matter.

And fyi, socialist policies don't benefit the poor. See Venezuela, Cuba, Vietnam, etc for proof of that.

The only people who benefit from socialism are the political class. You know, people like Bernie Sanders.

They get rich while the populace starves.

Speaking of hypocracy, those countries you mention now including Cuba have mixed economies ruled by Oligarchies just like the USA who like you force sancions all who refuse to agree