Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

The Eagles Message Board

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Featured Replies

Just now, Toastrel said:

Or that you are a clueless dolt.

 

You saying 1 when the truth is 4 does make a difference.

Or when he said that Bush asked for a statewide recount when that was the last thing he wanted. 

Or that Gore dropped the lawsuit, despite the fact that it went to SCOTUS (where Bush filed) and Gore lost. 

Like I said, he didn't get one fact correct. Which isn't surprising given what he usually posts.

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Views 343.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

The most aptly named poster on the board, once again firing shots with the same accuracy of 70 yd FG's.

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

Or when he said that Bush asked for a statewide recount when that was the last thing he wanted. 

Or that Gore dropped the lawsuit, despite the fact that it went to SCOTUS (where Bush filed) and Gore lost. 

Like I said, he didn't get one fact correct. Which isn't surprising given what he usually posts.

Yeah, but YOU used MORE words to say the truth, than he did in LYING.

So . . .kudos?

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

True, true. Solid point.

Oh, and I also got all the facts correct while you invented BS in your damaged mind. Maybe you should post less and actually read something to try and learn...assuming you can read.

None of what you added changes the analysis 🤷‍♂️ 
 

I just waste less air

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

None of what you added changes the analysis 🤷‍♂️ 
 

I just waste less air

Other than anything remotely resembling a fact you posted being an outright lie?

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Or when he said that Bush asked for a statewide recount when that was the last thing he wanted. 

Or that Gore dropped the lawsuit, despite the fact that it went to SCOTUS (where Bush filed) and Gore lost. 

Like I said, he didn't get one fact correct. Which isn't surprising given what he usually posts.

In the end they didn’t check the whole states votes.  It’s because there’s a high cost to force a count like that

1 minute ago, Toastrel said:

Other than anything remotely resembling a fact you posted being an outright lie?

You guys have some kind of mental illness that you’re unable to recognize.  Very defensive.  Apt to accusations without providing reasons…

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

None of what you added changes the analysis 🤷‍♂️ 
 

I just waste less air

Your "analysis" was predicated on the idea that Gore dropped the case and "we can take that to mean either he thought he had zero chance or that he thought there was a small chance compared to a serious blow to his reputation and campaign finances if he made a huge fuss and lost." But...GORE DIDN'T DROP THE CASE. So yeah...your "analysis" is worth about as much as that brown stain in your underwear.

What your post proved is that you are an imbecile with zero grasp of facts or reality. But to be fair...we all already knew that.

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

In the end they didn’t check the whole states votes.  It’s because there’s a high cost to force a count like that

OMFG. They were recounting the whole state until the SCOTUS stepped in.

You are breathtakingly stupid. Or an impressive troll. Either way, I'm moving along.

3 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

You guys have some kind of mental illness that you’re unable to recognize.  Very defensive.  Apt to accusations without providing reasons…

Yes. That must be what it is. What other answer is there?

It certainly isn't possible that the nutbag is you.

image.png.44241f2621deb14685e991caadc666a4.png

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Your "analysis" was predicated on the idea that Gore dropped the case and "we can take that to mean either he thought he had zero chance or that he thought there was a small chance compared to a serious blow to his reputation and campaign finances if he made a huge fuss and lost." But...GORE DIDN'T DROP THE CASE. So yeah...your "analysis" is worth about as much as that brown stain in your underwear.

What your post proved is that you are an imbecile with zero grasp of facts or reality. But to be fair...we all already knew that.

Well fine but then in that case this proves my original point about the integrity of the election because 2000 wasn’t decided based upon knowing the vote count but instead on the technicality that we didn’t allow enough time to count the votes.  
 

But I know you’re just going to keep fighting because your obsession resulting from your TDS leads you astray

Certain people just like the taste of revenge better than they like the fruits of peace

You Trump haters are a case in point

4 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Well fine but then in that case this proves my original point about the integrity of the election because 2000 wasn’t decided based upon knowing the vote count but instead on the technicality that we didn’t allow enough time to count the votes.  
 

But I know you’re just going to keep fighting because your obsession resulting from your TDS leads you astray

And you are going to keep fighting because you "think Trump may have won". Lmao. 

51 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Why should you get to have your beliefs fulfilled and ours not?

What is the case then or are you having another one of your ‘days’?

Because the country was founded in democratic principles... not fascist ones. Move to Russia or Belarus if that's what you want. 

48 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Why should democratic beliefs be fulfilled in America and not autocratic one's?  Seriously?  If you want to live in a dictatorship, move to one.  Problem solved.

Wow , beat me to it. 

3 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Because the country was founded in democratic principles... not fascist ones. Move to Russia or Belarus if that's what you want. 

Wow , beat me to it. 

We have a constitution and I don’t see how it’s all democratic.  
 

i think the Greeks tried democracy, why don’t you go try to convince them to try that again 

48 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

We have a constitution and I don’t see how it’s all democratic.  

572fd1b6-2153-4904-8c90-aef7542fd116_tex

21 minutes ago, Gannan said:

572fd1b6-2153-4904-8c90-aef7542fd116_tex

224FFCA9-A0B6-4792-A3F2-3B34C0D4CEF4.thumb.png.e52a00a8e87507a168a746cfe2aaea84.png

You may therefore be more at home in one of those "people’s republics”

fScmMuyJtEiC12IXcGOltEKtZazEOQvcDA_Ei6Co

30 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

224FFCA9-A0B6-4792-A3F2-3B34C0D4CEF4.thumb.png.e52a00a8e87507a168a746cfe2aaea84.png

But "chosen by the people does"

the-west-wing-sheen.gif

 

1 hour ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

We have a constitution and I don’t see how it’s all democratic.  

???

The part of the Constitution where they set up representatives being elected by the people - you don't think that's democratic?

The U.S. set up a republic like Ancient Rome - people elect representatives to represent them in government.  Contrast this with Europe where monarchs made important decisions that impacted people.  

Can I suggest a book (or pamphlet)?    Common Sense by Thomas Paine.  It's roughly 75 pages.

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

???

The part of the Constitution where they set up representatives being elected by the people - you don't think that's democratic?

The U.S. set up a republic like Ancient Rome - people elect representatives to represent them in government.  Contrast this with Europe where monarchs made important decisions that impacted people.  

Can I suggest a book (or pamphlet)?    Common Sense by Thomas Paine.  It's roughly 75 pages.

Yeah, but that’s just about what Thomas Paine wanted, so….

35 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Yeah, but that’s just about what Thomas Paine wanted, so….

To be honest a lot of Americans are done with democracy.  I was telling TEW he didn’t seem interested in American-style democracy even before Trump came along.  Some people just want to watch the world burn…

4 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

???

The part of the Constitution where they set up representatives being elected by the people - you don't think that's democratic?

The U.S. set up a republic like Ancient Rome - people elect representatives to represent them in government.  Contrast this with Europe where monarchs made important decisions that impacted people.  

Can I suggest a book (or pamphlet)?    Common Sense by Thomas Paine.  It's roughly 75 pages.

Cant tell if you're more illiterate or just trolling, but I said not "all" democratic, not just "not democratic".  The constitution does set a framework for voting.    You do know however, kids can;t vote.  Dead people can't vote.  Your vote is determined by where you live.  Your vote doesn't directly determine law, it determines the person who determines the law.  

So I just don't see how you, turning this back on you, think any of this would be any more "autocratic" if we voted for the person who votes for the person who determines the law.  That's essentially what we would be doing if we allowed the legislatures to vote.

Of course you think that means the guys you currently support would lose, and that's the only reason you think my proposal is unfair, despite the fact that your way of selecting a person is also undemocratic, just with one less layer of politician between you and the law.  I think you're wrong though.  The democrats would still win, they would just stop marketing themselves to idiots and the smart leftists would be at the table with the smart righties, and we might actually get something done for once

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Cant tell if you're more illiterate or just trolling, but I said not "all" democratic, not just "not democratic".  The constitution does set a framework for voting.    You do know however, kids can;t vote.  Dead people can't vote.  Your vote is determined by where you live.  Your vote doesn't directly determine law, it determines the person who determines the law.  

So I just don't see how you, turning this back on you, think any of this would be any more "autocratic" if we voted for the person who votes for the person who determines the law.  That's essentially what we would be doing if we allowed the legislatures to vote.

Of course you think that means the guys you currently support would lose, and that's the only reason you think my proposal is unfair, despite the fact that your way of selecting a person is also undemocratic, just with one less layer of politician between you and the law.  I think you're wrong though.  The democrats would still win, they would just stop marketing themselves to idiots and the smart leftists would be at the table with the smart righties, and we might actually get something done for once

I have no idea what you’re advocating for…

The reason people wanted the 17th Amendment was to make our political system less corrupt. I’d have to think taking elections out the hands of voters in Presidential elections would create the same problem we used to have with the U.S. Senate.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.