Law School Discussion

POTUS

Re: POTUS
« Reply #260 on: March 01, 2016, 09:37:30 PM »
Super Tuesday has arrived and looks like Bernie will be in this for the slog.

He's got the money, he's got the momentum, he's got the message.  He does NOT have the FBI investigating a criminal case against him draining votes.

Again- Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Colorado, and more to come.

Let the FBI take its time-- the drip drip drip is eroding away at the Clinton campaign.  And when they knock on hill's door for an interview Bernie will be positioned well.

Somebody get the butter!!!! Lol!!!
The results aren't even in yet and I already know you are wrong
get a life man

Its ALREADY down to Trump vs Hillary, and she won't lose to Trump

Re: POTUS
« Reply #261 on: March 02, 2016, 12:08:52 AM »
Super Tuesday has arrived and looks like Bernie will be in this for the slog.

He's got the money, he's got the momentum, he's got the message.  He does NOT have the FBI investigating a criminal case against him draining votes.

Again- Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Colorado, and more to come.

Let the FBI take its time-- the drip drip drip is eroding away at the Clinton campaign.  And when they knock on hill's door for an interview Bernie will be positioned well.

Somebody get the butter!!!! Lol!!!
The results aren't even in yet and I already know you are wrong
get a life man

Its ALREADY down to Trump vs Hillary, and she won't lose to Trump

How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

Nah, Bernie's wins have nothing to do with his message nor the FBI, right?

Guess he's getting out of the race now?

Guess again, Sherlock.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #262 on: March 02, 2016, 10:16:03 AM »
How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

He did fine in those states, but so what? There were twelve primaries and Clinton won eight of them. The number of delegates she got from Texas alone practically nullifies Sanders' wins. She will be the nominee.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #263 on: March 03, 2016, 09:27:29 AM »
How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

He did fine in those states, but so what? There were twelve primaries and Clinton won eight of them. The number of delegates she got from Texas alone practically nullifies Sanders' wins. She will be the nominee.


Oh, so I wasn't wrong about those 4 states?  Obama did better than Bernie in Massachusetts when he ran in 2008? I wasn't wrong about those insignificant states and votes?

What about Kansas? Or Nevada? Is Hillary going to win them?

I know sone on this board think the fbi criminal investigation doesn't exist, but you know its real? Right?  You know its seriously taking her down, right.

Hell, one voter is all it will take to completely take out Hillary.

His name? Bryan pagliano

Re: POTUS
« Reply #264 on: March 04, 2016, 01:34:03 AM »
You create a side argument that means nothing and go your usual full retard on it

-reading comp...........learn it/use it

Re: POTUS
« Reply #265 on: March 04, 2016, 07:17:25 PM »
You create a side argument that means nothing and go your usual full retard on it

-reading comp...........learn it/use it

The results are in and you were totally wrong.   

My argument is that the FBI has been draining on clinton like some of you trolls on LSD drain mindlessly on politics from some kool aide drinking hillary cheerleading section--

aside from Bernie's message winning him pledged delicates the FBI has eroded her losing campaign.

Learn it;live it;suck up your own side argument, sherlock

Re: POTUS
« Reply #266 on: March 04, 2016, 07:44:00 PM »



[/quote]

I will be brief.  (YOU ARE a funny one, if only not unaware of what the word BRIEF means, lol)

Here's the problem. Essentially, your predictions are non-falsifiable, as are those of any troll. That's why we're not responding to you (this will be my last exception). Other people bother with facts, and what is. That doesn't mean they will be right- after all, no one knows the future. But it means that they are basing on something other than want to happen.

 If Clinton is elected, you will just say, "Oh, there must have been a cover up!

(No cover up, here the FBI criminal investigation is real)

In the meantime, enjoy your popcorn. Whether you are right

(I have been right all along-no fbi criminal investigation and hillary would already be the nominee-the fact is that she is not the runaway nominee.  Why? You ask? FBI, get it)
[/quote]

Here lol, read this-----

"The F.B.I.ís case did begin as a security referral from the inspectors general of the State Department and the nationís intelligence agencies, who were concerned that classified information might have been stored outside a secure government network. But multiple law enforcement officials said the matter quickly became an investigation into whether anyone had committed a crime in handling classified information."


-a periodical


Now what have you been yammering on about, mr. Naive troll?

Re: POTUS
« Reply #267 on: March 04, 2016, 09:19:54 PM »
I'm pretty sure I know cin in real life.............

Re: POTUS
« Reply #268 on: March 06, 2016, 07:27:19 PM »
Sanders wins Maine, Kansas and Nebraska. 

Nah, messaging and FBI had nothing to do with that, right?

Keep reading kool aide drinkers

Re: POTUS
« Reply #269 on: March 06, 2016, 09:47:27 PM »
Sanders wins Maine, Kansas and Nebraska. 

Nah, messaging and FBI had nothing to do with that, right?

Keep reading kool aide drinkers
Stop drinking the local water........