She repeats herself... repeatedly.
You can say that again!
She repeats herself... repeatedly.
She repeats herself... repeatedly.
That is simply not true. For much of our history there were no primaries.
The only candidate in the history of the United States that never received one primary vote to be able to run for president.
How is that even lawful?
Judging from the way people lined up to give they/them their opinions, I don’t think anyone was intimidated by more than tempering their replies to stay within forum rules.I agree to an extent. But when one throws around words like racist, misogynistic, and rarely used big words like sesquipedalian. That did nothing but intimidate many when used the way it was. I have a major problem with it. The diversity that we use to celebrate in this country was that people can have different opinions. But I will be d@mnned if I will let someone bully their opinion on me or my family using bigoted name calling. It's my opinion that there was a line crossed with that posters methods. Now if he tried a different method, than there might have been some common ground that could've been found. Or at least a mutual respect.
I remembered what it meant. Someone called me that once. Might have been on INGO.I love when someone is making an online argument, then uses a thesaurus to throw out a big word no one knows or uses, as if they now have the upper hand from the usage of said big word. Oh no…. They just showed me how dumb I am by using a large word they must frequently use in their vocabulary…
Gonna be awkward if she pulls the same ****.I was told on INGO that the VP can’t do anything else anyway…
Well I did say primary so I'm not talking about the time before.That is simply not true. For much of our history there were no primaries.
Odds are it was probably Bug.I remembered what it meant. Someone called me that once. Might have been on INGO.
Mea culpa.Judging from the way people lined up to give they/them their opinions, I don’t think anyone was intimidated by more than tempering their replies to stay within forum rules.
Huh? Every candidate before the primaries ran for President having never received a primary vote, starting with Washington.Well I did say primary so I'm not talking about the time before.
The only candidate in the history of the United States that never received one primary vote to be able to run for president.
How is that even lawful?
Primaries were established in the early 1900's because parties picked candidates the people didn't like. So they changed it to give people a say.Huh? Every candidate before the primaries ran for President having never received a primary vote, starting with Washington.
And there is no law that says anything about how parties pick their candidates. The Constitution is silent about it too. Of course there were no parties when they wrote it, so it wouldn't.