really surprised this forum didn’t realize and spam that for him it probably was technically something like 29 years 10 months ago, check mate warren.
1 Like
lovemuffin
Yeah I knew that one, did I miss a bunch of lovemuffin posts on this topic?
Not a bunch but more than zero.
It was a really stupid think for them to argue over, but the election he won was within the last 30 years. Technically what she said was false, technically what he said was true, realistically the point she was making was arbitrary and if her campaign management staff didn’t suck they would have told her to just say “nearly 30 years” and avoid the whole thing. Plus it opened her up to the whole “You were a Republican then,” attack and frankly she’s fortunate Bernie doesn’t want to alienate her supporters by going there.
More like 29 years and 2.5 months ago, but whatever. Every second of airtime they spend bickering over something stupid like that is one less second they can spend on actual progressive priorities and unifying their supporters.
1 Like
Co-signed
O’Reilly had a junk body language expert back in the day.
Of course, all of this has led to Trump.
dude
4 Likes
Lol.
1 Like
Who are you to be complaining about WN? Really, who are you?
1 Like
Stop cursing people out you tumbling, tumbling dickweed
1 Like
I agree this was a dumb thing to argue about, and I hate to belabor the point, but my point is that at no point during the exchange did Bernie even understand what the disagreement was about.
WARREN: And the only person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican any time in the past 30 years is me.
Bernie just heard “beaten an incumbent Republican” and didn’t register the “in the past 30 years” part. Look at how he responded (a few minutes later):
SANDERS: Well, just to set the record straight, I defeated an incumbent Republican running for Congress.
He’s not arguing arguing about whether he made the 30-year cutoff by a few months.
During the rest of the exchange he is obviously confused about why she’s harping on the 30 years part.
WARREN: When?
SANDERS: Nineteen-ninety. That’s how I won, beat a republican congressman.
…
WARREN: Thirty years ago.SANDERS: … of course, I don’t think there’s any debate up here…
WARREN: Wasn’t it 30 years ago?
SANDERS: I beat an incumbent Republican congressman.
Even at this point he still has no idea why she’s so obsessed with long ago it was.
WARREN: And I said I was the only one who’s beaten an incumbent Republican in 30 years.
SANDERS: Well, 30 years ago is 1990, as a matter of fact. But I don’t know that that’s the major issue of the day…
He finally understands that he’s stepped in it, and he just changes the subject, which is fine.
Arguing that Bernie was technically right is silly. Arguing that Warren was struggling to do math is insane. Her “Wasn’t it 30 years ago?” was on par with Obama’s “Please proceed, Governor.”
And if she had any sort of “deer in the headlights” look, it was because she simply couldn’t believe Sanders had fallen into her trap so easily.
1 Like
Exactly. Her trap! Thanks for admitting it. She’s being a disingenuous snake who know she can’t outflank Bernie on the left, so she’s resorting to shady tactics
I don’t see anything shady about that particular exchange.
Well, if she was trying to trap him on something that has nothing whatsoever to do with policy or the welfare of the American people in an effort to hurt her strongest opponent. That’s shady. And don’t get me started on the whole Bernie said a woman can’t be president bullshit. That was a calculated plot to hurt her opponent and nothing more. It’s straight up disingenuous bullshit and she’s lost a ton of ground with me
1 Like
I don’t think debates should be limited to policy.
Should they include lies and gotchas? The only thing more important than policies is authenticity. Bernie is nothing if not authentic and while Warren has lost all credibility at this point from incorrectly stating she’s Native American, to saying she was fired for being pregnant. She’s an opportunistic snake.
I’m not saying she isn’t eons better and more progressive than Biden or Mayor Pete, but this move will backfire tremendously for her and I predict this will hurt her big time
I was using “trap” ironically, which I thought would have been clear if you were following my argument. In order for it to be a trap, Warren would have had to anticipate that Bernie would latch onto the first part (“only one to beat a republican incumbent”) while ignoring the second part (“in the past 30 years”). That seems like a stretch.
You originally said Warren was having trouble doing math. Which was obviously nonsense. Now she’s a diabolical trap-laying snake. You’re just grasping at anti-Warren straws.
1 Like
I hate to fall into the trap of arguing minutiae, but it’s important to point out how disingenuous she is. Bernie has won some 15 elections to her two. Who the fuck cares that she beat a Republican? Bringing that up was just pretentious self grandiosity
And leaking a private conversation she had (WITH A FRIEND) from a year ago in order to make him look bad for her own political gain is absolutely diabolical and a snake-like thing to do! No one in their right mind believes Sanders thinks a woman can’t be president and instead of clearing the air and explaining it was a misunderstanding (or here’s an idea… How about coming out with what he actually said?!), she chose to continue with it and call him a liar. It’s possible this isn’t even coming from her and her campaign managers are just terrible. But mark my words, this will hurt her severely
1 Like
And to bring up what she was doing 30 years ago versus what Bernie was, doesn’t seem like a winning maneuver.