Politics 2020 Field - DNC

[yankeesince59]

Nobody suggested you were a Democrat. Read slowly bud.

No need to read slowly...I can read you, ...like a comic book.

 

[donkiez]

Not sure of your point. Obviously not every poll gives exactly the same result. Some polls he does better in, some he does worse. I was quoting the RCP polling average (which I'm not necessarily endorsing as a good methodology, I just happened to have that page handy at the time).

I'm also not anti-Yang, although he's not my first choice. I'd vote for him if he gets the nomination.

barfo

My point is that he is a credible candidate with a good message who deserves more respect than you, old school democrats and MSNBC give him. You are admittedly quoting polling numbers that you don't endorse as good methodology and give MSNBC a pass on ignoring him during the debate and omitting him from graphics he has earned the right to be part of. Why do you feel like you need to work so hard to dismiss him? If you want a unified democratic party then you should endorse a legitimate process.

 

[barfo]

My point is that he is a credible candidate with a good message who deserves more respect than you, old school democrats and MSNBC give him.

Is he a credible candidate? Overall I'd agree with that, but it depends on your definition of credible. By credible do you mean electable? Qualified? Something else?

On the qualified scale, I'd say he's basically a random smart guy with a good sense of humor. He doesn't actually have any qualifications for the job other than that.
He's probably more qualified than Marianne Williamson (and of course Donald Trump), but I'm not sure there are any other less qualified candidates. Maybe you could say Tom Steyer?

On the electable scale, I'd say he's borderline electable (given Trump, we can never say never again). But unless his poll numbers increase drastically in the next few weeks, he'll cease to be plausibly electable.

You are admittedly quoting polling numbers that you don't endorse as good methodology and give MSNBC a pass on ignoring him during the debate and omitting him from graphics he has earned the right to be part of.

To be clear, I don't endorse just averaging different polls, because there are some polls that are just crap, either methodologically or because of partisanship. Those should be thrown out or at least given a lower weight. But that said, there's no way that Yang is at 8 or 10% no matter how you select the polls. Maybe he's at 4% instead of 3%. He just hasn't caught on. Maybe he still will. There is still time. But it hasn't happened yet.

Why do you feel like you need to work so hard to dismiss him?

Why do people feel they need to work so hard to make excuses for him? Fact is, every candidate faces some headwinds. And only one candidate can win.

If you want a unified democratic party then you should endorse a legitimate process.

What is a legitimate process? Can the party order MSNBC to put Yang's name on their graphics?

Yang made the December 19 debate. More conventional democrats like Booker and Castro didn't. And yet you think Yang has reason to complain about the process?

barfo

 

[donkiez]

Is he a credible candidate? Overall I'd agree with that, but it depends on your definition of credible. By credible do you mean electable? Qualified? Something else?

Im sure we could argue credibility all day long. It's not like he has been a mayor of South Bend for 7 years, that's pretty much like running a country right?

He just hasn't caught on. Maybe he still will. There is still time. But it hasn't happened yet.

You are working really hard at that narrative. His support has been increasing. Its still very early in the process and he is making benchmarks and qualifying for debates still, he is still getting his name out there. What he has done this year coming from nowhere has been pretty impressive, despite your odd attempt to dismiss and discredit it.

Why do people feel they need to work so hard to make excuses for him? Fact is, every candidate faces some headwinds. And only one candidate can win.

What is a legitimate process? Can the party order MSNBC to put Yang's name on their graphics?

No one is making excuses. Just pointing out obvious BS. MSNBC is basically the FOX news of the democratic party, and the people who follow it line for line are no better than FOX News Trumpers from a different party.

Yang made the December 19 debate. More conventional democrats like Booker and Castro didn't. And yet you think Yang has reason to complain about the process?

Yes Yang has every right to complain about MSNBC and their BS. The December debate was a great accomplishment by his campaign which he can brag about, and he accomplished it despite certain media bias. Booker didn't even qualify and he is a great candidate also, I personally would like to see more of him. This all seems to contradict your earlier point that he isn't catching on.

I was surprised to find out Castro was still running.

 

[Lanny]

You contradicting yourself to prove a point doesn’t whitewash the ill intentions of the media.

Do you ever ask yourself why you have so much trouble with so many people? It's possible they could all be wrong and you are right but I wouldn't bet any money on it.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Im sure we could argue credibility all day long. It's not like he has been a mayor of South Bend for 7 years, that's pretty much like running a country right?



You are working really hard at that narrative. His support has been increasing. Its still very early in the process and he is making benchmarks and qualifying for debates still, he is still getting his name out there. What he has done this year coming from nowhere has been pretty impressive, despite your odd attempt to dismiss and discredit it.





No one is making excuses. Just pointing out obvious BS. MSNBC is basically the FOX news of the democratic party, and the people who follow it line for line are no better than FOX News Trumpers from a different party.



Yes Yang has every right to complain about MSNBC and their BS. The December debate was a great accomplishment by his campaign which he can brag about, and he accomplished it despite certain media bias. Booker didn't even qualify and he is a great candidate also, I personally would like to see more of him. This all seems to contradict your earlier point that he isn't catching on.

I was surprised to find out Castro was still running.

I actually like yang if I “had” to vote democrat he’d probably be my choice, but MSNBC, Fox and all that stuff are going to follow the green, if Yang isnt getting the clicks / views, they arent going to promote him.

 

[barfo]

Im sure we could argue credibility all day long. It's not like he has been a mayor of South Bend for 7 years, that's pretty much like running a country right?

It's definitely the case that Pete is very thin on qualifications as well. Not quite as thin as Yang, Pete has at least that tiny bit of tiny-government experience.

You are working really hard at that narrative. His support has been increasing. Its still very early in the process and he is making benchmarks and qualifying for debates still, he is still getting his name out there. What he has done this year coming from nowhere has been pretty impressive, despite your odd attempt to dismiss and discredit it.

I'm neither discrediting it or dismissing it. He started with name recognition of absolute zero, and at least by some measures, is now a top-7 candidate. That is impressive!

But he's also a long way from being a real contender. Maybe this debate will change his trajectory. So far it has not been a rapid rise, and since he started at zero, he needs a rapid rise.

No one is making excuses. Just pointing out obvious BS. MSNBC is basically the FOX news of the democratic party, and the people who follow it line for line are no better than FOX News Trumpers from a different party.

Yes Yang has every right to complain about MSNBC and their BS.

He has every right to, but he should resist the temptation. It makes him look quite petty.

The December debate was a great accomplishment by his campaign which he can brag about, and he accomplished it despite certain media bias.

And Amy accomplished it despite sexism, and Corey failed because of racism, and Biden overcame his stutter, and Bernie overcame his heart attack, and Pete accomplished it despite homophobia, etc. etc. etc. Everyone's got challenges they could point to if they were so inclined.

Being left off of a few MSNBC graphics and yet continuing to campaign is not an example of legendary bravery in the face of the enemy.

Booker didn't even qualify and he is a great candidate also, I personally would like to see more of him. This all seems to contradict your earlier point that he isn't catching on.

I was surprised to find out Castro was still running.

barfo

 

[donkiez]

He has every right to, but he should resist the temptation. It makes him look quite petty

I think you confusing me and JB trying to convince you that it is not just some accident with him complaining and being petty. I think he has handled it well.

And Amy accomplished it despite sexism, and Corey failed because of racism, and Biden overcame his stutter, and Bernie overcame his heart attack, and Pete accomplished it despite homophobia, etc. etc. etc. Everyone's got challenges they could point to if they were so inclined.

Sure ok, this is the DNC most of those are positives till they have to face the GOP.

Being left off of a few MSNBC graphics and yet continuing to campaign is not an example of legendary bravery in the face of the enemy.

I don't think anyone has made that claim. Your dismissal of it as business as usual is just causing more of a discussion on it, that's all.

A few is actually 14 though

 

[jonnyboy]

Do you ever ask yourself why you have so much trouble with so many people? It's possible they could all be wrong and you are right but I wouldn't bet any money on it.

Look in the mirror bud. You’re on here fighting more than I am.

I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, with that being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.

 

[barfo]

Your dismissal of it as business as usual is just causing more of a discussion on it, that's all.

I don't have a problem with that. I'm happy to discuss Yang and his persecution complex

barfo

 

[GhostOfPGA]

At this point I’m just waiting for Pantsuit McCankles now to enter.

 

[donkiez]

I don't have a problem with that. I'm happy to discuss Yang and his persecution complex

barfo

I think Barfo's antagonist complex is more relevant.

 

[Lanny]

Look in the mirror bud. You’re on here fighting more than I am.

I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, with that being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.

My difficulties lie mostly with you and Maris. In this I think I'm in good company.

 

[yankeesince59]

My difficulties lie mostly with you and Maris. In this I think I'm in good company.

^^^This.

 

[MARIS61]

The media had nothing to do with it. It happened because of the Democratic Party and the long held rules on the subject. Tulsi should have known wha

Uh, the Ducks?

False.

Totally new rules this year, dependent upon supposedly reliable polling from DNC selected puppet media.

The DNC controls who is in the debates, who is ahead in the "polls"...

All fake news.

 

[MARIS61]

Look in the mirror bud. You’re on here fighting more than I am.

I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, with that being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.

Can I co-sign this post to Lanny (and the other 2 posters)?

It's funny because they probably think you and I agree on everything.

 

[yankeesince59]

Can I co-sign this post to Lanny (and the other 2 posters)?

It's funny because they probably think you and I agree on everything.

Name dropper.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

My difficulties lie mostly with you and Maris. In this I think I'm in good company.

I hate to weigh in on petty political spats that have no real “right” answer but what the f**k. Some people have a need to spend their lives pissed off and I’m here to help.......I have to agree with @jonnyboy when he says, “I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, withthat being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.” Some people in this forum don’t like opinions that are contrary to their own and when it happens they get their panties in a very tight wad. They’d rather make snarky comments than debate in good faith. Others (ahem, Lanny) choose flight from the discussion when they find they can’t sell their point of view. They choose to dismiss the ones they disagree with as a “waste of their time” (or place far more value on their higher education than it is actually worth is these types of discussion) rather than ponder the idea they might be wrong once in awhile, or that perhaps a story has more than one side to it. And that is on both sides of The Great Divide”. It’s disgusting, no matter your political persuasion.

I guess I’m not in the aforementioned “good company”, because I for one am tired of what has become the “S2 (and “Democratic”) Narrative”; mainly that all liberals are good and all conservatives are bad. I consider myself a moderate. I loath Donald Trump and am utterly appalled by the things he has done, but I also think that AOC is just this side of an idiot. So sue me. @jonnyboy has stated numerous times that he does not like Trump and does not support him, but that he was elected president so he’s prepared to ride the term out. But no one seems to want to hear that. My own opinion is that impeachment is a waste of time with a Republican controlled Senate, and that the time and energy would be better spent on ousting Trump in the 2020 election. I think Jonny has alluded to that also. Some folks here are so livid over the shit heel in the White House they can’t think rationally, they attack all who don’t believe EXACTLY as they do and for that very reason it’s looking more and more like Trump will win again (God damnit!!!). I mean Jeezus, call me anything you like but challenge my intelligence and I’d vote for Trump purely out of spite. Anger does that to a person. (Note to Hillary Clinton).

I just wanted to say that I get along just fine with Jonny and his point of view so please don’t lump me in with a phantom majority. Personally I’d call @jonnyboy a realist at best and a pragmatist at worst. And I think too many of his detractors believe in the Tooth Fairy. The impeachment makes for great drama but it’s an utter waste of time that would be better spent preparing to put together a winning team before the next election.

And now the oh so brilliant SC2 political pundits can trash me as a MAGA hat wearing, immigrant hating, Trump lover......all because I don’t automatically exclude or dump on folks who don’t believe exactly as I do.....you’re welcome.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I hate to weigh in on petty political spats that have no real “right” answer but what the f**k. Some people have a need to spend their lives pissed off and I’m here to help.......I have to agree with @jonnyboy when he says, “I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, withthat being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.” Some people in this forum don’t like opinions that are contrary to their own and when it happens they get their panties in a very tight wad. They’d rather make snarky comments than debate in good faith. Others (ahem, Lanny) choose flight from the discussion when they find they can’t sell their point of view. They choose to dismiss the ones they disagree with as a “waste of their time” (or place far more value on their higher education than it is actually worth is these types of discussion) rather than ponder the idea they might be wrong once in awhile, or that perhaps a story has more than one side to it. And that is on both sides of The Great Divide”. It’s disgusting, no matter your political persuasion.

I guess I’m not in the aforementioned “good company”, because I for one am tired of what has become the “S2 (and “Democratic”) Narrative”; mainly that all liberals are good and all conservatives are bad. I consider myself a moderate. I loath Donald Trump and am utterly appalled by the things he has done, but I also think that AOC is just this side of an idiot. So sue me. @jonnyboy has stated numerous times that he does not like Trump and does not support him, but that he was elected president so he’s prepared to ride the term out. But no one seems to want to hear that. My own opinion is that impeachment is a waste of time with a Republican controlled Senate, and that the time and energy would be better spent on ousting Trump in the 2020 election. I think Jonny has alluded to that also. Some folks here are so livid over the shit heel in the White House they can’t think rationally, they attack all who don’t believe EXACTLY as they do and for that very reason it’s looking more and more like Trump will win again (God damnit!!!). I mean Jeezus, call me anything you like but challenge my intelligence and I’d vote for Trump purely out of spite. Anger does that to a person. (Note to Hillary Clinton).

I just wanted to say that I get along just fine with Jonny and his point of view so please don’t lump me in with a phantom majority. Personally I’d call @jonnyboy a realist at best and a pragmatist at worst. And I think too many of his detractors believe in the Tooth Fairy. The impeachment makes for great drama but it’s an utter waste of time that would be better spent preparing to put together a winning team before the next election.

And now the oh so brilliant SC2 political pundits can trash me as a MAGA hat wearing, immigrant hating, Trump lover......all because I don’t automatically exclude or dump on folks who don’t believe exactly as I do.....you’re welcome.

Good post, I also feel obligated to think of something to call you, but I'm having issues coming up with something mean to say, I've gotta work on my personal insult game.

 

[MARIS61]

Yang is up from 2.8% four months ago all the way to 3.2% today. If his 3% support had been shown in a few MSNBC graphics, I'm sure he'd be at 30% today. The same goes for all the other candidates who were in the low single digits.

barfo

The point is, CNN is rigging the primary election and the 2020 election by pumping up certain candidates with fake polls while deliberately erasing others from not only daily coverage but from "facts" charts and pretty much any mention at all.

CNN is a total puppet of the DNC.

They did it to Bernie against Hilary in 2016, and they're doing it against Bernie in 2020:

Bernie Sanders snubbed on separate graphics by CNN, CBS News
By Joseph A. Wulfsohn | Fox News

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., was given the cold shoulder on Thursday by multiple news outlets downplaying some strong polling of his.

One new poll from California showed former Vice President Joe Biden and Sanders leading among Latino voters with 27 and 25 percent respectively. However, the graphic at the bottom of the screen read, "CNN Poll: Biden, Waren lead among California Latino voters" despite how Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., was polling only at ten percent in the demographic.

Sanders speechwriter David Sirota took notice and asked his followers for other examples of such errors.

However, CNN wasn't the only one to knock the leading progressive. CBS News cited a new poll from New Hampshire that completely omitted Sanders from the graphic.

Appearing on-screen: South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg leading with 18 percent, Biden with 17 percent and Warren with 12 percent. Sanders, though, had 15 percent of support in that same poll.

Sanders' 2020 rival Andrew Yang has had a long history of news outlets snubbing him from polling and fundraising graphics, so much so that Yang had vowed to boycott MSNBC, a repeat offender, until the liberal network issued an on-air apology.

Back in November, the Yang campaign slammed MSNBC for its Twitter apology over another instance in which the tech businessman was omitted from a graphic.

"Thank you @MSNBC, for making this apology for the 15th time. The #YangGang is very excited for #16," Yang campaign manager Zach Graumann reacted."
https://www.foxnews.com/media/bernie-sanders-snubbed-cnn-cbs-news-graphics

 

[barfo]

I think Barfo's antagonist complex is more relevant.

Well, let's discuss that then! It sounds fascinating!

barfo

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I hate to weigh in on petty political spats that have no real “right” answer but what the f**k. Some people have a need to spend their lives pissed off and I’m here to help.......I have to agree with @jonnyboy when he says, “I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, withthat being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.” Some people in this forum don’t like opinions that are contrary to their own and when it happens they get their panties in a very tight wad. They’d rather make snarky comments than debate in good faith. Others (ahem, Lanny) choose flight from the discussion when they find they can’t sell their point of view. They choose to dismiss the ones they disagree with as a “waste of their time” (or place far more value on their higher education than it is actually worth is these types of discussion) rather than ponder the idea they might be wrong once in awhile, or that perhaps a story has more than one side to it. And that is on both sides of The Great Divide”. It’s disgusting, no matter your political persuasion.

I guess I’m not in the aforementioned “good company”, because I for one am tired of what has become the “S2 (and “Democratic”) Narrative”; mainly that all liberals are good and all conservatives are bad. I consider myself a moderate. I loath Donald Trump and am utterly appalled by the things he has done, but I also think that AOC is just this side of an idiot. So sue me. @jonnyboy has stated numerous times that he does not like Trump and does not support him, but that he was elected president so he’s prepared to ride the term out. But no one seems to want to hear that. My own opinion is that impeachment is a waste of time with a Republican controlled Senate, and that the time and energy would be better spent on ousting Trump in the 2020 election. I think Jonny has alluded to that also. Some folks here are so livid over the shit heel in the White House they can’t think rationally, they attack all who don’t believe EXACTLY as they do and for that very reason it’s looking more and more like Trump will win again (God damnit!!!). I mean Jeezus, call me anything you like but challenge my intelligence and I’d vote for Trump purely out of spite. Anger does that to a person. (Note to Hillary Clinton).

I just wanted to say that I get along just fine with Jonny and his point of view so please don’t lump me in with a phantom majority. Personally I’d call @jonnyboy a realist at best and a pragmatist at worst. And I think too many of his detractors believe in the Tooth Fairy. The impeachment makes for great drama but it’s an utter waste of time that would be better spent preparing to put together a winning team before the next election.

And now the oh so brilliant SC2 political pundits can trash me as a MAGA hat wearing, immigrant hating, Trump lover......all because I don’t automatically exclude or dump on folks who don’t believe exactly as I do.....you’re welcome.

I agree with a lot of this. But, while I don't agree with everything AOC and her ilk say, I think it is undeniable that she is less of a piece of shit, morally bankrupt person than Trump is. And yes, I do think anyone who disagrees with that is extremely morally questionable.

Of course "not all Republicans, not all Democrats, etc" but if those are the two poles right now, one side is unequivocally better than the other. I have no party loyalty, but the left has the high ground right now.

 

[yankeesince59]

The point is, CNN is rigging the primary election and the 2020 election by pumping up certain candidates with fake polls while deliberately erasing others from not only daily coverage but from "facts" charts and pretty much any mention at all.

CNN is a total puppet of the DNC.

Hypocritical much?....you don't think Faux News is completely biased and "a total puppet" of Tromp and the GOP?

 

[jonnyboy]

I hate to weigh in on petty political spats that have no real “right” answer but what the f**k. Some people have a need to spend their lives pissed off and I’m here to help.......I have to agree with @jonnyboy when he says, “I’m also conservative leaning in a forum full of people from Portland Oregon. And actually, withthat being said, I fare pretty well. You are one of about 3 people who respond to my every post negatively. I get along with most others pretty well.” Some people in this forum don’t like opinions that are contrary to their own and when it happens they get their panties in a very tight wad. They’d rather make snarky comments than debate in good faith. Others (ahem, Lanny) choose flight from the discussion when they find they can’t sell their point of view. They choose to dismiss the ones they disagree with as a “waste of their time” (or place far more value on their higher education than it is actually worth is these types of discussion) rather than ponder the idea they might be wrong once in awhile, or that perhaps a story has more than one side to it. And that is on both sides of The Great Divide”. It’s disgusting, no matter your political persuasion.

I guess I’m not in the aforementioned “good company”, because I for one am tired of what has become the “S2 (and “Democratic”) Narrative”; mainly that all liberals are good and all conservatives are bad. I consider myself a moderate. I loath Donald Trump and am utterly appalled by the things he has done, but I also think that AOC is just this side of an idiot. So sue me. @jonnyboy has stated numerous times that he does not like Trump and does not support him, but that he was elected president so he’s prepared to ride the term out. But no one seems to want to hear that. My own opinion is that impeachment is a waste of time with a Republican controlled Senate, and that the time and energy would be better spent on ousting Trump in the 2020 election. I think Jonny has alluded to that also. Some folks here are so livid over the shit heel in the White House they can’t think rationally, they attack all who don’t believe EXACTLY as they do and for that very reason it’s looking more and more like Trump will win again (God damnit!!!). I mean Jeezus, call me anything you like but challenge my intelligence and I’d vote for Trump purely out of spite. Anger does that to a person. (Note to Hillary Clinton).

I just wanted to say that I get along just fine with Jonny and his point of view so please don’t lump me in with a phantom majority. Personally I’d call @jonnyboy a realist at best and a pragmatist at worst. And I think too many of his detractors believe in the Tooth Fairy. The impeachment makes for great drama but it’s an utter waste of time that would be better spent preparing to put together a winning team before the next election.

And now the oh so brilliant SC2 political pundits can trash me as a MAGA hat wearing, immigrant hating, Trump lover......all because I don’t automatically exclude or dump on folks who don’t believe exactly as I do.....you’re welcome.

Killer post, and I appreciate you taking the time. You’re spot on.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

I agree with a lot of this. But, while I don't agree with everything AOC and her ilk say, I think it is undeniable that she is less of a piece of shit, morally bankrupt person than Trump is. And yes, I do think anyone who disagrees with that is extremely morally questionable.

Of course "not all Republicans, not all Democrats, etc" but if those are the two poles right now, one side is unequivocally better than the other. I have no party loyalty, but the left has the high ground right now.

I’m not saying AOC is a POS. Far from it. I think her intentions are good but very, very unrealistic for a country this big, diverse and divided. And yes, right now it could very easily be argued that the Democrats have the high “moral” ground. The best I can say about AOC is that someone has to start somewhere to try and make things better for all. And she has chosen to be one of those persons. But her approach is such that it will wear thin quickly. And it’s tough to effect change when you have been voted out of office because your aspirations are so lofty that you end up achieving nothing but voter fatigue.....

 

[Lanny]

The Democrats from the Democratic Party who are running for The Democratic nomination.

Are you confused?

I guess this lets Bernie Sanders off the hook.

 

[Lanny]

Putting Gabbard as VP would help too. Too bad the Dems said shes a Russian asset.

Holy shit the Dems are incompetent as fuck. Clown show.

Are you saying that all the Democrats have labeled Gabbard as a Russian asset? Or, perhaps, you meant one Democrat labeled her as a Russian asset. There's quite a difference.

 

[Lanny]

I’m guessing Amy out debates EW next debate.
Her message is more palatable imo.

Wouldn't be a bad thing but I just can't stretch my imagination that far. I'm actually a fan of Amy's. Not as big a fan as I am of Mayor Pete but still a fan. I'd be very happy with her as President.

 

[Lanny]

How long would my list have to be to satisfy you? What is your definition of “the Dems”?

Lol. I don’t have to provide citations in a fucking basketball forum. How about you look it up yourself instead of demanding people do research for you. Such a dumb tactic you guys use:

If I don’t take the time to copy and paste a bunch of links that you wouldn’t read anyway, then I lose the argument.

There are plenty of democratic supporters who’ve publicly said they think Tulsi Gabbard has some ‘connection’ to Russia.

Do you do have to speak without including nonsense or else others might label you as having nonsense.
Now, I only know of one Democrat who has labeled Gabbard as a Russian asset. Not saying other prominent Democrats haven't also said that but I am saying I haven't heard any. Please give some examples.

 

[Lanny]

2020 Democratic front runner right there.

Say what? How did you come up with that?