I wouldn’t be so discouraged by this kinda shit if we didn’t have a huge - probably supermajority - percentage of Americans who are prone to dismiss this shit as “well, maybe he just hasn’t had his coffee; everyone misspeaks from time to time” or worse: “fake news.” We can do far better than 45 - hell, we had…

i know, rookie mistake. i’m genuinely embarrassed about it.

At least you have finally admitted that your conjectures are based on your opinions; not facts.

i can see the article now, so either it was put back online, or maybe your browser settings are keeping you from seeing it, or something else i’m not thinking of. and i should have clicked on it earlier; that probably would have gotten me 90% towards making sense of Paul’s article.

jeez, i didn’t think to click the hyperlink. rookie move. probably could have pieced it together if i had. my bad! anyway, thanks

Uh... can anyone help me parse this? I can handle satire/social commentary on the level of Banksy and A Modest Proposal; anything deeper or weirder than that and I’m lost. Something about the tension between working class (whoever that is) and POC, also tension between the “working class” and “intellectuals”... I’m…

yeah... at minimum I’m not planning on spending much of any time engaging with him.

I offered you several historical events - some of which relate directly to the DNC’s bias against Sanders (at least in the recent past). Beyond that, I don’t know what would satisfy you; even if I wanted to, I can’t break into the DNC’s servers and tell you exactly what they’re talking about and doing right now. And…

Captain Cupholder>Katherine Krueger

What actual proof do you have of this?

Duly noted.

I guess we can change “beatings” to “pepper-sprayings”

First, take the debates away from the networks, who want as many candidates as possible because chaos = ratings.

This is probably the last time I’ll reply to you, because I feel like I have better things to do with my time.

How are you defining popular then? I smell shifting goalposts here.

I agree, we need to gradually cut more candidates, until by the convention we have maybe 2 or 3 candidates at most. IDK exactly what’s the fairest or most effective way to clear the deadwood, but I don’t think Dems should - or can - keep this many clowns around at this stage of the game if they want to win. And I…

Are you really proposing we don’t ban anything “popular”? Should taxes just be voluntary? Should spousal abuse and rape be legal?

You want to be a pendant for science, Neil deGrasse Tyson?

I’m more inclined to say “I’d rather we do nothing than pretend we’re doing something.” I do agree it’s probably difficult to make the executive branch do their fucking jobs... but until 2020, maybe you’re right, we should try passing this and hoping the next administration really runs with it, who knows.

*sigh* it wouldn’t surprise me if the shooter was trying to impress him. In fact it would be surprising if that wasn’t at least part of his motivation.