☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlM to United States | News & Politics@lemmy.mlEnglish · 5 days agoVote harderlemmy.mlimagemessage-square30linkfedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1imageVote harderlemmy.ml☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlM to United States | News & Politics@lemmy.mlEnglish · 5 days agomessage-square30linkfedilink
minus-squarepiefood@feddit.onlinelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoNo, the court agreed that they are allowed to cheat.
minus-squareSatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoCheating is when you don’t play by the rules not when you disagree with what the rules should be. That’s why the DNC won this case.
minus-squarepiefood@feddit.onlinelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoYou can keep dancing around the fact that they cheated all you want. I find it very telling that you can’t even keep your original argument straight.
minus-squareSatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoThat Clinton got more votes then Bernie?
minus-squareGrapho@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 days agoDear God, are you an eight year old or just acting like one? “How was Jon Jones cheating? He literally won”, how the fuck is that a rebuttal of the original statement?
No, the court agreed that they are allowed to cheat.
Cheating is when you don’t play by the rules not when you disagree with what the rules should be.
That’s why the DNC won this case.
You can keep dancing around the fact that they cheated all you want. I find it very telling that you can’t even keep your original argument straight.
That Clinton got more votes then Bernie?
Dear God, are you an eight year old or just acting like one?
“How was Jon Jones cheating? He literally won”, how the fuck is that a rebuttal of the original statement?