• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Evidence against Manafort includes emails to Bernie’s top strategist

Hmmm. I suppose I've just about only seen it meant to refer to the post itself, not the person who made it. Though a quick sweep of google reveals some claims that it can mean the poster, as you say.
I wouldn't lie to you, Mr. Person! ;)
 
He hasn't worked for Sanders since the 90s, so I'm gonna expect not.


I thought were were talking about "Tad Devine, Bernie Sanders’ top strategist in the presidential campaign." ...
 
Yeah, that's an interesting point.

And Devine worked on Bernie's campaign, but previously worked with Manafort on Viktor Yanukovych's Ukraine campaign?

If true, yeah, that's going to slap Bernie pretty hard I think.

Oh Bernie was well aware of who he was and who he worked for.
 
OP means "original post". A post cannot be a troll.

FYI OP may also mean "opening post", and, more to the point in this case, ""opening postER": i.e. the person who wrote the opening post.

And FYI an opening postER who submits a tabloid cite may properly be termed a "tabloid troll" just as an opening postER who submits a conspiracy theory cite may properly be termed a "conspiracy theory troll".

It is good and well to be a usage stickler, but listen, I was an English Lit and PoliSci major (Phi Beta Kappa) and you would do well to pause before accusing me of a usage error.
 
FYI OP may also mean "opening post", and, more to the point in this case, ""opening postER": i.e. the person who wrote the opening post.

And FYI an opening postER who submits a tabloid cite may properly be termed a "tabloid troll" just as an opening postER who submits a conspiracy theory cite may properly be termed a "conspiracy theory troll".

Which were you calling "a" troll, the post or the poster?

And if the answer is the post, why would you call a post "a" troll?




It is good and well to be a usage stickler, but listen, I was an English Lit and PoliSci major (Phi Beta Kappa) and you would do well to pause before accusing me of a usage error.

That's terribly interesting; improper semicolon!
 
Does that mean Bernie colluded with the Russians?

That is running down the path a bit briskly. If your read the article, Manafort and Devine had common ties to Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Their e-mail exchange ended in the spring of 2014, way before Sanders made his run. The commonality, however, could be two campaign managers with Russian connections; kind of one-man Russian sleeper cells. The Manafort cell awoke, however.

Had Bernie been elected, this would be a bigger deal.... but, since Trump turned out to be such a great Russian asset, this is now relegated to interesting background noise.
 
That is running down the path a bit briskly. If your read the article, Manafort and Devine had common ties to Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Their e-mail exchange ended in the spring of 2014, way before Sanders made his run. The commonality, however, could be two campaign managers with Russian connections; kind of one-man Russian sleeper cells. The Manafort cell awoke, however.

Had Bernie been elected, this would be a bigger deal.... but, since Trump turned out to be such a great Russian asset, this is now relegated to interesting background noise.

It could also explain why Bernie's campaign hung on so long (when it was apparent he was not going to win) and the complaints they made. It really looked as if he was trying to damage Clinton as much as possible. I never understood why he did that. Now I think I do.
 
I thought were were talking about "Tad Devine, Bernie Sanders’ top strategist in the presidential campaign." ...

The article makes a seemingly incongruous statement later "Devine — who worked for Sanders in the 1990s "
 
The article makes a seemingly incongruous statement later "Devine — who worked for Sanders in the 1990s "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tad_Devine
Devine was a senior adviser in Al Gore's 2000 and John Kerry's 2004 Presidential campaigns.[2] He was also the chief strategist for Bernie Sanders' 2016 presidential campaign
 
Actually, when he dies, the last vestige of decency within the Republican party dies with him.

I disagree that Sen. McCain is the last decent Republican, though we will all shed tears for him. We must believe we’re better than where McConnellism has led the GOP to naked power.

I have enormous respect for Sen. Sasse from Nebraska as an example. And for the Democrats right now, I love the governor from Montana. For me, Garland for Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court would be a good start to healing our Nation.
 
Last edited:
Let's find out.

Let the investigation go where the evidence leads. This coming from a staunch Bernie supporter.

Notice how I don't immediately go into "IT'S A WITCH HUNT!!11!!!!!" lying snowflake mode.
 
You wish!

Bernie, hell no. I love Bernie. He fights for the working man and social safety nets.

Devine and Stein, quite a different story, yet to fully play out.
 
Jesus F***ing Christ a goddam New York Post link????

OP is a tabloid troll.

I trust Sen. Burr from your state, another great Republican. Your Sen. Tillis is just walking back his past for his 2020 election. I hope he stays on his current course though.
 
possible. Third parties are more tightly linked to Russia. Ron Paul. Stein. Etc...

Don’t forget Rand Paul, as he’ll be going to Russia soon. Bad move by the 8 gop senators to get played by the Russians this past July 4th.
 
Back
Top Bottom