What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Democratic Debate (2 Viewers)

Anyhow Chris Cillizza is a guy who usually knows his stuff. And I think he's dead on here. Seems like the online polls are dominated by Bernie people (just as they are by Trump fans as well.) I'm probably too partial to Hillary; I think most people will see it as a draw- which, as Cillizza correctly notes, is a loss for Bernie. 

 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/06/winners-and-losers-from-the-7th-democratic-presidential-debate/?postshare=2701457320146330&tid=ss_tw

Chris Cillizza

Winners
Hillary Clinton: The former Secretary of State came ready to fight on Sunday night. She kept her hit on Sanders's opposition to the auto bailout well hidden in the run-up to the debate in order to get maximum impact when she dropped it on his head. Ditto her attack on him being the long Democrat to vote against the Export-Import bank.  She is still not great when it comes to answering questions she doesn't want to answer.  Her I'll-release-my-Wall-Street-speeches-when-everyone-else-does answer to a question on her high-paid speaking gigs was, still, not very good. And, she remains overly cautious as a candidate; when pressed whether people at the Environmental Protection Agency should lose their jobs over what happened in Flint, Clinton was unwilling to say they should -- a swing and a miss at a hanging curveball.  Still, overall, this was a very solid showing by Clinton. On guns, on failing schools and on Flint, she was confident and effective.

Losers
Bernie Sanders: The Vermont Senator had effectively walked a fine line in the previous six debates when it came to attacking Clinton without coming across as either bullying or condescending. He tripped and fell while trying to execute that delicate dance on Sunday night. Sanders's "excuse me, I'm talking" rebuttal to Clinton hinted at the fact that he was losing his temper with her. His "can I finish please" retort ensured that his tone and his approach to someone trying to become the first female presidential nominee in either party would be THE story of the night.

Put aside the fact that Sanders misstepped on tone, he also did nothing to change the underlying dynamics of the race. If you think Wall Street is the problem for much of what ails the country, you were for Sanders before this debate and certainly for him after it too. But, as we know from the first 40 percent or so of states that have voted, there aren't enough of those people to make him the nominee.  Sanders didn't knock Clinton off her game in any meaningful way, making the debate a loss for him. (Sidebar: His answer about white people not knowing what it is like to live in a ghetto or be poor would have been a massive gaffe if he was not as far behind in the delegate chase as he is.)
If we are in a place where a woman can not be spoken to in a certain way because of their sex, perhaps we aren't ready for a female president. Isn't that what equality was about?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meanwhile Bernie's rude "Excuse me, I am talking" is getting plenty of attention on the net, being seen as sexist by many women:

https://www.google.com/search?rls=aso&client=gmail&q=excuse%20me%20I'm%20talking

Plus on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/search?q=excuse%20me%20i'm%20talking&src=tyah

 
squistion said:
Voluntary online polls are an interesting curiosity, but are meaningless.  Time online poll has no more value than Drudge. Figures an alias like Willie would promote it as the last word on the debate.
You always have to get personal. You can't stick to the issues.  And you're the one who spent the debate finding random pro-Hillary tweets to spew here as if they meant something.  On behalf of the footballguys.com free for all community please cut the crap.

 
Meanwhile Bernie's rude "Excuse me, I am talking" is getting plenty of attention on the net, being seen as sexist by many women:

https://www.google.com/search?rls=aso&client=gmail&q=excuse%20me%20I'm%20talking

Plus on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/search?q=excuse%20me%20i'm%20talking&src=tyah
Why? Can you not debate with a woman these days? She interrupted him. 

 
Anyhow Chris Cillizza is a guy who usually knows his stuff. And I think he's dead on here. Seems like the online polls are dominated by Bernie people (just as they are by Trump fans as well.) I'm probably too partial to Hillary; I think most people will see it as a draw- which, as Cillizza correctly notes, is a loss for Bernie. 
you might as well have linked something from the washington times. the post is a shell of its former self 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meanwhile Bernie's rude "Excuse me, I am talking" is getting plenty of attention on the net, being seen as sexist by many women:

https://www.google.com/search?rls=aso&client=gmail&q=excuse%20me%20I'm%20talking

Plus on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/search?q=excuse%20me%20i'm%20talking&src=tyah
Just Hillary supporters playing whatever card they need to play.

Bernie sat there and listened to every word Hillary said and as soon as Bernie started talking, she interrupted him. He asked her to PLEASE stop and then she did it again five seconds later.

 
squistion said:
Sorry I don't like fake, alias accounts. I stick to the issues when I have some idea who I am talking to, not someone who has been banned or who also posts under multiple handles.
I have never been banned.  And I am one of the few non staff posters who posts using (at least part) of his real name. I've been here for 7 years.  Who are you?  What is going on in your real life that makes you so nasty on this board?  You have to be compensating for something. You have alienated many people here with your tone and personal attacks. Your attitude here has not brought any people to your side either. 

 
Just Hillary supporters playing whatever card they need to play.

Bernie sat there and listened to every word Hillary said and as soon as Bernie started talking, she interrupted him. He asked her to PLEASE stop and then she did it again five seconds later.
And it is playing really well because, judging from the initial headlines it has overshadowed what he actually had to say in the debate.

 
Gotta love the media. Extremely substantive debate, and the takeaway is "Bernie's tone wasn't very nice during that one part. Sexist!"

 
And it is playing really well because, judging from the initial headlines it has overshadowed what he actually had to say in the debate.
Its easier to topple governments from afar than to deal with a leader face to face. 

"We came, we saw, he died."

 
Now, we have been online here, we have had as avowed dyed in the wool Hillary guys as you can have in this thread, good back and forth tonight... and not one person mentioned Bernie's "tone".  Yet this is a significant shared perspective in the aftermath on CNN... where we live in a world were women are strong, capable and in the arena, but agreed "it wasn't a good look" and compared it to Rick Lazio's infamous moment.  

And in this defense of the fairer sex, they lamented Hillary's challenges facing sexism in the debates.  

Mystifying.  
Makes no sense 

 
squistion said:
That could be true. However I was looking through the 2012 election thread Otis started and there are about 3 pages of people agreeing you are an alias and debating who you really are and what other handle you have posted under (so it wasn't just me). And this shtick about being an independent living in Tulsa and polling you friends with names like Cronin trying to decide for months who to vote for was about as believable as what SWC posts, brohan, although that I suppose could be true also. The problem was, the day after the election you seemingly disappeared from the board for almost a year and since you had posted almost on a daily basis prior to the election, you were conspicuous by your absence.

It seemed like complete shtick at the time, as have your recent podcasts where you claimed to have actual corporate sponsors. Yet you expect you engage you in a serious discussion. Please.
No one cares but you. 

 
squistion said:
That could be true. However I was looking through the 2012 election thread Otis started and there are about 3 pages of people agreeing you are an alias and debating who you really are and what other handle you have posted under (so it wasn't just me). And this shtick about being an independent living in Tulsa and polling you friends with names like Cronin trying to decide for months who to vote for was about as believable as what SWC posts, brohan, although that I suppose could be true also. The problem was, the day after the election you seemingly disappeared from the board for almost a year and since you had posted almost on a daily basis prior to the election, you were conspicuous by your absence.

It seemed like complete shtick at the time, as have your recent podcasts where you claimed to have actual corporate sponsors. Yet you expect you engage you in a serious discussion. Please.
I explained the podcast sponsors many times.  I made about 4 cents per sponsor based on unique listens. I sunk over a thousand dollars into those podcasts with the hopes making it bigger thing, getting it to itunes and making some real money from it. I gave it a shot. It failed but at least I tried.  You've cherry picked some things I've said in certain threads from four years ago and missed many other things I said in other threads.  I have no idea where you're getting the other stuff.  My friend Cronin passed a few years back. I discussed that here as well but I guess you missed that too.

 
LEMON: As a black man in America, if I were born today I’d have a one in three chance of ending up in prison in my life. Secretary Clinton, on the campaign trail, you are calling for an end to the era of mass incarceration, but a lot of folks in the black community blame the 1994 Crime Bill, a bill you supported for locking up a generation of black men.

Given what’s happened since 1994, why should black people trust you to get it right this time?

CLINTON: Well, Don’t, let me say this, Senator Sanders voted for that bill, we both supported it. And, I think it’s fair to say we did because back then there was an outcry over the rising crime rate, and people from all communities were asking that action be taken.

Now, my husband said at the NAACP last summer that it solved some problems, but it created other problems, and I agree. And, one of those problems was, unfortunately, a move to expand the reasons why people would be incarcerated, not just at the federal level which is what this bill about, but in states and localities as well. And, that’s why the very first speech that I gave in this campaign was about criminal justice reform, and ending the era of mass incarceration because I believe absolutely that too many families were broken up, too many communities were adversely affected. So, we’ve got to do a bunch of things.

On the criminal justice side, look, we’ve got to have better policing. That means body cameras, that means ending profiling, that means doing everything we can to make sure there’s respect between the community and the police.

And, when it comes to incarceration...

LEMON: But, Secretary...

CLINTON: ... That means we have to limit mandatory minimums, we have to end disparities and treatment at last through (ph) incarceration...

LEMON: The question is why should black people trust you this time to get it right? That’s the question.

CLINTON: Well, Senator Sanders voted for it as well. Are you going to ask him the same question?

SANDERS: Probably will.

LEMON: Do you think your support — your husband has said that this bill was a mistake. Do you think it was a mistake?

CLINTON: I just said that. He said at the NAACP that there were some aspects that worked well. The violence against women provisions have worked well, for example. But, other aspects of it were a mistake and I agree. That’s why I’m focused, and have a very comprehensive approach toward fixing the criminal justice system, going after systemic racism that stalks the criminal justice system, ending private prisons, ending the incarceration of low-level offenders, and I am committed to doing that.

(APPLAUSE)

LEMON: And, Senator Sanders, before you respond, I want to ask you this. Back in 1994, here’s what you warned, we are dooming tens of millions of young people to a future of bitterness, mystery, hopelessness, drugs, crime, and violence, but you voted for the bill anyway. Was your vote a mistake?

SANDERS: You know, as I think Secretary Clinton knows, as we all know, there are bills in congress that have bad stuff, there are bills in congress that have good stuff. Good stuff and bad stuff in the same bill.

Now, if I have voted against that bill, Secretary Clinton would be here tonight and she’d say, “Bernie Sanders voted against the ban on assault weapons. Bernie Sanders voted against the violence against women act.” Those were provisions in the bill, as the Secretary just indicated. So, in that bill there was some good provisions, I have been a fierce fighter against domestic violence ever since I was mayor in Burlington.

Violence against women act has protected millions of women in this country, it was in that bill. The ban on assault weapons, that’s what I have fought for my whole life. It was in that bill.

Now, what you are reading though is I went to the floor, as I recall, and that’s what I said. I tried to get the death penalty aspects in that bill out. Secretary Clinton have a disagreement. I was then, and I am now opposed to the death penalty.(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: So, to answer your question, what you read was a congressman who was torn, who said there are good things in that bill, there are bad things overall. I voted for it.

But where we are right now is having more than 2.2 million people in jail — more than any other country on earth. This is a campaign promise, at the end of my first term, we will not have more people in jail than any other country.

 
Perhaps. If so, then scroll past what I have to say and then I will just be talking to myself.
No one cares but you, you try to derail the convo and eliminate someones point of view by discrediting them. No one cares if he is an alias, if he is trolling, giving false testimony but you. If you think he is not a real person then ignore him and move on. Otherwise let the man speak and the forum will take his opinion without your derailment. Its childish for you to attack him. 

 
No one cares but you, you try to derail the convo and eliminate someones point of view by discrediting them. No one cares if he is an alias, if he is trolling, giving false testimony but you. If you think he is not a real person then ignore him and move on. Otherwise let the man speak and the forum will take his opinion without your derailment. Its childish for you to attack him. 
That isn't true. Obviously you don't care (hmmm) but many people here don't want to discuss things with posters who use multiple handles.

From the pinned thread near the top of the forum page, entitled Free For All FAQ:

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/319399-free-for-all-faq/

0. Alias accounts

Are a pain for moderators. If you feel the need to create several accounts perhaps this message board isn't for you. We see them, we ax them. New accounts created in response to having your original account suspended/banned will also be axed.

 
That isn't true. Obviously you don't care (hmmm) but many people here don't want to discuss things with posters who use multiple handles.

From the pinned thread near the top of the forum page, entitled Free For All FAQ:

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/319399-free-for-all-faq/
Then report him, mods will be able figure out if he is an alias. If he is an alias the ip will be banned, otherwise it looks like you are trying to shame someone into silence. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont care about him, I care about you trying to shame someone into silence. You are slime if he is not an alias.

 
Meanwhile Bernie's rude "Excuse me, I am talking" is getting plenty of attention on the net, being seen as sexist by many women:

https://www.google.com/search?rls=aso&client=gmail&q=excuse%20me%20I'm%20talking

Plus on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/search?q=excuse%20me%20i'm%20talking&src=tyah
:lmao:  at "rude"

 
kicking myself for not remembering why i stay out of the political threads. 

you d-bags need to find a better way to determine who has the smaller penis.

good luck with that. 

 
Not surprising you wouldn't consider it rude. :hophead:
This is a surefire way to make sure Bernie supporters don't back Hillary in general. Hillary is about as tough as they come, she can handle herself without her supporters flashing the "sexist" card or assuming that she is being talked down to because she's a woman. And to accuse Bernie of all people.  :lol:

We have candidates accusing other candidates of having small ##### and people are taking offense to Bernie saying "Excuse me."  :lmao:

 
This is a surefire way to make sure Bernie supporters don't back Hillary in general. Hillary is about as tough as they come, she can handle herself without her supporters flashing the "sexist" card or assuming that she is being talked down to because she's a woman. And to accuse Bernie of all people.  :lol:

We have candidates accusing other candidates of having small ##### and people are taking offense to Bernie saying "Excuse me."  :lmao:
It was more than that as evidenced by the reaction online and in the media. Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks is hardly an overly sensitive liberal, but mentioned in their broadcast after the debate that Bernie blew it big time with that response to Hillary because he should have known it would provoke a reaction like that. Take a look at the headlines tomorrow morning and you will probably see that my reaction was not atypical.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wanna try this random twitter quote thing:

@danozzi: bernie sanders is a rock star and hillary clinton is the person on youtube covering his songs with a ukelele

 
@naejasme: So Bernie Sanders is a sexist for speaking on HIS turn while Hilary interrupted him but Donald called NUMEROUS women out and he's fine? Ok

 
I wanna try this random twitter quote thing:

@danozzi: bernie sanders is a rock star and hillary clinton is the person on youtube covering his songs with a ukelele
Not bad for your first try, although be aware some of the older folks on this forum don't appreciate this new fangled social media.

 
Matt Binder ‏@MattBinder
Bernie Sanders mentions how poor his Polish family was in every debate but now the meme tonight is he doesn't think white people can be poor
 
Matt Binder ‏@MattBinder
the guy who threw away using the FBI investigating his opponent because he didn't want to go there wasn't courteous tonight apparently
 
You know that's not what he meant. But it makes a great soundbite.
Thats what he said, say good bye to bernie. He just insulted the only people voting for him and played right into the democrat narrative of identity politics. He just sank his run playing the same old game of divide and conquer. Bye bernie. 

 
I didn't think Bernie was sexist. 

But what's interesting about the reaction is this: very soon now Hillary is going to face an opponent who has a long history of sexism, seems to be very uncomfortable around women in power, and is sure to say very crude and insulting remarks. How will she respond? 

 
Does either candidate have a stance to fix our crumbling mental health system?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do either candidate have a stance to fix our crumbling mental health system?
As Bernie and Hillary correctly pointed out, we have like a billion things that we need to spend more money on: infrastructure. Mental health. Education. Energy. Healthcare.  The Republicans want to spend more money on the military, and they want to cut taxes. Meanwhile we're 19 trillion in debt already. Neither side has any real way to solve that- we can't even slow down the increase very much. Bernie seems to think taxing the very wealthy will pay for everything and at the same time he wants to make it much harder for them to accumulate their wealth. But while this seems unrealistic, it's not like any of the other candidates have more realistic plans. 

 
I didn't think Bernie was sexist. 

But what's interesting about the reaction is this: very soon now Hillary is going to face an opponent who has a long history of sexism, seems to be very uncomfortable around women in power, and is sure to say very crude and insulting remarks. How will she respond? 
She will respond like she did tonight (which is to not visibly react  and/or take offense) and will let social media and the political pundits run with it the next day.

Look at how she handled some ridiculous questions and lines of questioning at the Benghazi hearing. In an 11 hour grilling she didn't lose her cool once. She won't let Trump get under her skin, although he will certainly try.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top