Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
and Jane Sanders has off shore accounts DURHAM D Jan 2016 #1
Do you have evidence of that assertion? n/t JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #3
What was that about two wrongs? chapdrum Jan 2016 #4
I suspect not -- the only google hits refer back here and involve conspiracies about Israeli ties. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #8
I think you have Jane mixed up with Hill2016. nt Live and Learn Jan 2016 #18
LOL! Good one! Hill2016 is middle class right? JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #20
Yep and have money hidden overseas, apparently. nt Live and Learn Jan 2016 #23
And Colonel Sanders is more visible in PR China than Chairman Mao. mwooldri Jan 2016 #50
Do tell, won't you? bvf Jan 2016 #53
See that is that fact adverse thingy we are talking about. Kalidurga Jan 2016 #70
Made up shit. cali Jan 2016 #92
Her whole angle on the ACA smacks of Burkean conservative incrementalism. I think the centrist Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #2
Ed, you're on to something chapdrum Jan 2016 #9
What are you going to do if she wins the nomination? LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #5
What a strange question. What relevance does that have to the present discussion? JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #7
Okay. As this is GD: Primaries, for the sake of discussion, LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #11
Why should I or the OP answer your question when you can't answer how it is relevant to the OP? JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #12
The OP presents a few adorned facts that may or not be relevant to the primary. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #14
Wait, what the actual FUCK? JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #16
+10,000 And well said! nt Live and Learn Jan 2016 #19
I'm not trying to get anyone TOS'd. We are discussing the primary. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #21
What effect does a hypothetical scenario where she won the primary have on our choices when voting.. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #24
The OP stated: Some HRC supporters are fact aversive RobertEarl Jan 2016 #48
You can "wait" all you want. senz Jan 2016 #29
Hijack? You are the third person to repond to me. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #34
Requesting personal information is not "disputing facts." senz Jan 2016 #41
The OP would impugn the fact-averse Hillary supporters and their choices. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #44
That's gobbledygook. senz Jan 2016 #49
Nobody is obligated to say whom they would vote for before an election passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #58
I'm not brow-beating anyone. I posed the question once to the OP. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #69
Yes you are. You have been told no over and over again yet you won't let up. passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #75
You are like the sixth person to initiate a discussion with me in this thread. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #80
In various ways you've asked the question or demanded an answer nine times in this thread passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #82
Harassment? I am responding to questions posed and restating my position in response to LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #85
keep on playing passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #87
What are you saying? JackRiddler Jan 2016 #10
There are a lot of facts about Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #15
Still irrelevant. JackRiddler Jan 2016 #22
Are we not discussing this in the context of the primary election? LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #28
You are avoiding the issues of the OP. Why? JackRiddler Jan 2016 #38
What are the issues of the OP? LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #43
.... woooowwww nt retrowire Jan 2016 #46
State the issues... LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #52
....t-they're in the OP. nt retrowire Jan 2016 #55
Which states that some Hillary supporters are as fact aversive as Republicans. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #77
Give up, man. Unknown Beatle Jan 2016 #94
It's fine if the OP does not want to answer. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #109
you're changing the subject of the op retrowire Jan 2016 #99
There are a lot of people here not disputing the facts. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #108
the purpose is to dispute the facts lol retrowire Jan 2016 #110
The purpose of the OP is to impugn Hillary and her supporters using a set of facts. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #112
as the op requested... retrowire Jan 2016 #113
The person you are stalking here is not the OP passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #63
What do you care what the OP will do? senz Jan 2016 #31
see my response #44 LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #45
Not your business at all. 840high Jan 2016 #33
The OP states that some Hillary supporters are as aversive to facts as are Republicans. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #37
I get what you are asking RobertEarl Jan 2016 #54
I'll several steps further than the OP does regarding Hillary's supporters. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #62
Yes RobertEarl Jan 2016 #65
Thanks for drilling down to the crux eom Arazi Jan 2016 #74
As I said, there are a lot of facts about Hillary. We can dispute LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #84
That's just it, don't you get it? Unknown Beatle Jan 2016 #95
Your last paragraph, for example, contains no facts. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #111
Silly me! Unknown Beatle Jan 2016 #118
ah 2 of the 3 D's of Hillsbara distract and divert I guess distort isn't really possible here azurnoir Jan 2016 #56
Hillsbara? Don't know about that. LuvLoogie Jan 2016 #90
How dare you post such negativity about The Inevitable One! reformist2 Jan 2016 #6
I support Clinton and O'Malley ecstatic Jan 2016 #13
Thanks for responding. chapdrum Jan 2016 #17
What's found about Peterson Foundation chapdrum Jan 2016 #36
What is Chelsea's connection to the Peterson Foundation? hedda_foil Jan 2016 #25
thanks Hedda chapdrum Jan 2016 #30
That doesn't answer my question about the Chelsea/Peterson connection you posit. hedda_foil Jan 2016 #32
I didn't notice your question chapdrum Jan 2016 #40
OK, now I see it chapdrum Jan 2016 #42
What do we do with Elizabeth Warren's $5.3 Million mansion? R B Garr Jan 2016 #26
She's not running for president chapdrum Jan 2016 #27
She was the Berniebros obsession before he announced, which R B Garr Jan 2016 #57
200,000 is not a golden parachute for a retiring president of a college. lol nt retrowire Jan 2016 #60
Yes, it was from her struggling former employer. R B Garr Jan 2016 #64
sure i do. a quick Google of retrowire Jan 2016 #67
LOL, how many of those worked for small, struggling R B Garr Jan 2016 #71
Yes, they used to be called pensions and a few of us are still lucky to get something at all. Fearless Jan 2016 #81
"SIZEABLE severance package" is a R B Garr Jan 2016 #83
Who are you even replying to?? Fearless Jan 2016 #117
point stands retrowire Jan 2016 #101
Post removed Post removed Jan 2016 #103
Nice edit there. You must be afraid that your R B Garr Jan 2016 #78
??? ooookay. lol try harder nt retrowire Jan 2016 #100
Yeah, same to you. Try harder yourself. R B Garr Jan 2016 #105
its clearly not the same but whatever. retrowire Jan 2016 #106
$200,000 is one speech for Hill. lob1 Jan 2016 #93
"Berniebros"? Z_California Jan 2016 #114
whoa uponit7771 Jan 2016 #88
aversive enid602 Jan 2016 #35
Yes. chapdrum Jan 2016 #39
K&R. JDPriestly Jan 2016 #47
FDR came from wealth and had tons of connections to wealth. OhZone Jan 2016 #51
FDR was born to his wealth. He was not paid by powerful lobbyists to speak to their meetings Ford_Prefect Jan 2016 #61
Giving a speech for money, which is super common - OhZone Jan 2016 #66
I assume that the people who pay her $200,000 and more per speech are investing in her future Ford_Prefect Jan 2016 #72
Damn good question that chapdrum Jan 2016 #79
HRC makes 15 million a year, 200,000 is a drop in the bucket for her... she's underpaid uponit7771 Jan 2016 #91
Seriously - OhZone Jan 2016 #96
+1 uponit7771 Jan 2016 #97
+1 uponit7771 Jan 2016 #89
The same can be said about Sanders' supporters. JohnnyRingo Jan 2016 #59
At least he's raising the issues chapdrum Jan 2016 #76
Link to promises to pull rabbits out of hats and magic wands please Z_California Jan 2016 #115
I can't believe I'm replying to this... JohnnyRingo Jan 2016 #119
The false narrative is yours Z_California Jan 2016 #120
If Bernie can't do those things... JohnnyRingo Jan 2016 #122
A Reason Hillary Is Best Friends With The Bushes billhicks76 Jan 2016 #68
Right you are chapdrum Jan 2016 #73
Exactly billhicks76 Jan 2016 #121
Bush even called her his sister-in-law. CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #102
So what!? tia uponit7771 Jan 2016 #86
Most importantly, she's the best candidate for president. DanTex Jan 2016 #98
These are facts that should alert peoples logic olddots Jan 2016 #104
You know HC gave a cautionary speech about the Iraq vote pandr32 Jan 2016 #107
note to "ecstatic" chapdrum Jan 2016 #116
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Some HRC supporters are a...»Reply #87