Hillary is saying Tulsi is being groomed by the Russians
- Thread starter BrunoMars420
- Start date
Clinton Boomlet
Michael S. Rozeff
On Predictit, Clinton has risen to $0.10 (9:1 odds of being nominated.) Warren has fallen significantly to $0.36 (1.78:1 odds). Biden is holding at $0.22 (3.5:1). Buttigieg’s at $0.15, Sanders at $0.13 and Yang at $0.09. Clinton’s move places her now at the low end of the latter three, who have been distinctly behind the front-runners for quite some time.
Warren’s decline of about $0.16 from the 50 cent area owes partly to Clinton’s rise of about $0.06, but the rest is spread among the field. Her decline apparently comes from rising rejection of her due to her lengthy menu of extreme proposals, her pregnancy fiasco, and her inability to address costs of her proposals.
Clinton’s spat with Tulsi seems to have been taken as a signal that she’s open to being nominated. Bloomberg at $0.04 (24:1) has also chipped away at Warren’s lead.
Trump is predicted at this time to be impeached in his first term, $0.75 yes (1:3 odds). By the end of 2019? The betting there is $0.58 yes and $0.42 no. The number of impeachment articles shapes up as follows: (none, $0.25), (one, $0.16), (two, $0.29), (three, $0.18), (four, $0.12), and (five or more, $0.16).
Michael S. Rozeff
On Predictit, Clinton has risen to $0.10 (9:1 odds of being nominated.) Warren has fallen significantly to $0.36 (1.78:1 odds). Biden is holding at $0.22 (3.5:1). Buttigieg’s at $0.15, Sanders at $0.13 and Yang at $0.09. Clinton’s move places her now at the low end of the latter three, who have been distinctly behind the front-runners for quite some time.
Warren’s decline of about $0.16 from the 50 cent area owes partly to Clinton’s rise of about $0.06, but the rest is spread among the field. Her decline apparently comes from rising rejection of her due to her lengthy menu of extreme proposals, her pregnancy fiasco, and her inability to address costs of her proposals.
Clinton’s spat with Tulsi seems to have been taken as a signal that she’s open to being nominated. Bloomberg at $0.04 (24:1) has also chipped away at Warren’s lead.
Trump is predicted at this time to be impeached in his first term, $0.75 yes (1:3 odds). By the end of 2019? The betting there is $0.58 yes and $0.42 no. The number of impeachment articles shapes up as follows: (none, $0.25), (one, $0.16), (two, $0.29), (three, $0.18), (four, $0.12), and (five or more, $0.16).
FUNFACT: Evan McMullin (and others) have stated the same thing Hillary did.
Where are the Tulsi "ads" decrying them?
what are the majority of the 2020 candidates saying about it?
Unbelievable how gullible you are especially since you’re so vocal on how the trump supporters are so gullible.
This has already been explained to you more than once.
Why do you keep throwing out some nobody former CIA clown Egg McMuffin into this conversation as if anybody cares?
What’s your game here, friend? Why are you so eager to repeat CIA talking points? Weren’t you a military man as well? Who is paying you to post online in constant defense of political elites and the status quo?
That is awesome! He is obviously adhering to the Pompeo confession that the CIA has a training manual teaching, "We lied, we stole, we cheated." But Joe genuflects to these warmongering neocons. I'm telling you, Joe's job is to prevent truth from gaining traction. The government has its official lies, excuse me, story, and thought must never go outside the bumper lanes in a bowling alley and challenge their position. He's a disinformation machine.This has already been explained to you more than once.
Why do you keep throwing out some nobody former CIA clown Egg McMuffin into this conversation as if anybody cares?
What’s your game here, friend? Why are you so eager to repeat CIA talking points? Weren’t you a military man as well? Who is paying you to post online in constant defense of political elites and the status quo?
This has already been explained to you more than once.
Why do you keep throwing out some nobody former CIA clown Egg McMuffin into this conversation as if anybody cares?
What’s your game here, friend? Why are you so eager to repeat CIA talking points? Weren’t you a military man as well? Who is paying you to post online in constant defense of political elites and the status quo?
FUNFACT: "Operatives" are not "Al Qaeda"
FUNFACT II: In the days of the mafia, we'd convince "operatives" to work with the government/FBI, too, in order to take down those organizations. Stating this like it's a "bad" thing implies you're in favor of AQ and organized crime.
Or maybe she is unhappy with the current state of the democratic party. Like most sane people.
Wtf I’m totally convinced now since you’ve made up your own incorrect definitions
Al Qaeda operative Ibrahim Suleiman Adnan Adam Harun was sentenced to life in prison on Friday in New York City.
He was convicted in US District Court in March 2017 for participating in lethal attacks against US and coalition troops in Afghanistan and for attempting to bomb the US Embassy in Nigeria.
Government link
Jamal al-Badawi, the Yemeni al-Qaeda operative accused of organizing the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, has been killed in a U.S. airstrike, President Trump said Sunday.
WaPo link
You may want to contact our government and media to tell them they don’t understand what an operative is.
Which doesn't make sense, either, but qualifies as condescending. That's why, when he tries to point-out the details of his stance on Climate Change, he creates more enemies and turns more people off to his information. Which, in turn, only increases the damage that humans are creating.
There is a lot of that on this board. Strange phenomenon. Seems to be a lack of awareness and an inclination to follow those that support my opinions and then present them as fact.
AQ Operative = DIFFERENT FROM CIA Operative
I'm sure your local 5th grader can sort that out for you....
Why would anyone pay attention to Evan McMullin? He's wrong on pretty much everything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_McMullin#Political_stances
How does this reply make any sense, let alone have you thinking this was a devastating retort?
I was only semi-serious. Both are bad. Most of the time when Joe uses "protip" he's not actually a pro.
Well, I think he's sharp and thorough. He's intelligent, too. I just wish he wasn't a democrats-always thinker.
I didn't understand Tulsi's point about Libya and nuclear proliferation, but otherwise a good statement.
Last edited:
Joe's Place is among the best here on climate change.
If he offends you, get over it. It's too important and too close to disaster to be letting hurt feelings get in the way.
Oh, no... he doesn't "offend" ME. No, not at all. I agree with him a great deal on his climate change positions and trust what he brings to the board regarding climate change. However, when you denigrate people... all the time... who DON'T agree, then you're just making it less likely for them to ever be on-board with it and help to correct it. It takes tact and patience as much as it takes knowing what is happening. It would almost be better to not say anything than to denigrate them. Some subjects and issues, you might as well just insult them because... who cares? If we're making the planet uninhabitable, then the more people you turn-off, the faster we die-off.
You've made that point a lot. And you're not wrong. But when friendly persuasion doesn't seem to be working, mere facts are ignored, and the problem is too serious to walk away, what are your choices? If you back off, you simply abandon the field to folks like Hannity or Inhofe or Trump.
I know.
I'll let you know if I ever see that technique get used.
If true, that was a dumb comment by Tulsi. Hardly a reason to throw her under the bus considering her good positions on most issues.
I just don't get what she is trying to accomplish here. If you are trying to win the democratic nomination, this makes no sense. I'd like to see the full clip to see if in context it's any better.
“It was speculated in the media (especially in the Middle Eastern media) that NATO's 2011 intervention in Libya (which led to Gaddafi's overthrow and killing at the hands of the Libyan rebels) would make Iran, North Korea, and possibly other countries more reluctant to give up their nuclear programs and/or nuclear weapons due to the risk of being weakened and/or double-crossed as a result.”
Link
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Jaxx DeJean Creating His Own Path, Forging Relationships with Iowa
- Latest: Eliot Clough
