Again, you really love telling others what they are saying, don’t you?
Here you are, ironically trying to catch me one of your gotcha fails while not even acknowledging the hypocrisy of your argument that’s blindly in favor of the original statement:
All democratic Representatives,
Since you clearly have difficulty understanding things others say before you get your chance to rewrite their words for your little straw men…
What I was implying- was that it must have meant that the age limit should be set for ONLY democratic representatives, yes?
Which then it seems to go without saying, based on your poor ability to see what the argument even is- that one is to assume that the suggested age limit wouldn’t apply to only those you consider to be in your ring. It was very kind of you to remove all doubt from what would have normally been a suspicion.
I don’t know… seems a bit hypocritical if you ask me. But I’m sure you’ll change everything I’ve said here to mean something entirely different.
What I was implying- was that it must have meant that the age limit should be set for ONLY democratic representatives, yes?
Yes. Considering how democrats have spent the past few decades fighting progressives and not republicans, the democratic party is run by inflexible old centrists whose only concern is enriching themselves. The party should implement an age limit. If republicans want to be run by idiotic old fossils, let them. It’s to their detriment, as it has been to democrats’ detriment. If anyone can be elected as an independent despite being old, more power to them.
But I’m sure you’ll change everything I’ve said here to mean something entirely different.
I’m sure you’ll conveniently misunderstand this comment as well.
I knew one of you would come along to move the goalposts.
So now he’s a democrat because it’s convenient for you?
Man you love telling others what they are saying, don’t you?
Your entire comment history is you editing the words of others. I wonder why that is……
Hey, you wanted to disqualify Sanders from public service on the grounds that he is both old and a democrat.
He’s not a democrat. And he is neither posturing nor out of touch, largely as a result of not tying himself to a party with no credibility.
Again, you really love telling others what they are saying, don’t you?
Here you are, ironically trying to catch me one of your gotcha fails while not even acknowledging the hypocrisy of your argument that’s blindly in favor of the original statement:
All democratic Representatives,
Since you clearly have difficulty understanding things others say before you get your chance to rewrite their words for your little straw men…
What I was implying- was that it must have meant that the age limit should be set for ONLY democratic representatives, yes?
Which then it seems to go without saying, based on your poor ability to see what the argument even is- that one is to assume that the suggested age limit wouldn’t apply to only those you consider to be in your ring. It was very kind of you to remove all doubt from what would have normally been a suspicion.
I don’t know… seems a bit hypocritical if you ask me. But I’m sure you’ll change everything I’ve said here to mean something entirely different.
Yes. Considering how democrats have spent the past few decades fighting progressives and not republicans, the democratic party is run by inflexible old centrists whose only concern is enriching themselves. The party should implement an age limit. If republicans want to be run by idiotic old fossils, let them. It’s to their detriment, as it has been to democrats’ detriment. If anyone can be elected as an independent despite being old, more power to them.
I’m sure you’ll conveniently misunderstand this comment as well.
But Bernie is exempt right? Because he’s your guy? It’s always great when you people call yourselves out.
We’re done here.
Why would democrats be able to impose rules on someone outside of their party?
You have no problem with all the ancient democrats, right? Because they’re your guys?