DiscussMormonism.com

...has white guys polling as their 3 top choices for 2020. will anyone really notice this and care?

I suspect you’ll be fine with that. You had a hard enough time with the black guy and the grandmother.

canpakes wrote:I suspect you’ll be fine with that. You had a hard enough time with the black guy and the grandmother.

Yeah, except its only 2 OLD RICH white guys...the other guys is just a crooked YOUNGER white guy.....and to be fair, he wasn't a black guy, he was a mulatto.

subgenius wrote:

canpakes wrote:I suspect you’ll be fine with that. You had a hard enough time with the black guy and the grandmother.

Yeah, except its only 2 OLD RICH white guys...the other guys is just a crooked YOUNGER white guy.....and to be fair, he wasn't a black guy, he was a mulatto.

“He wasn’t black enough”. Lol.

subgenius wrote:...has white guys polling as their 3 top choices for 2020. will anyone really notice this and care?

Has anyone noticed that the three people with the most national name-recognition polled favorably in Iowa? Biden=former Vice-President. Sanders=former Presidential candidate. O'Rourke=most reported on senate candidate from the mid-term elections. "Does anyone intelligent think this means anything?" would be a better question except the answer is a quick, "No" leaving little reason to even bother to ask.

honorentheos wrote:

subgenius wrote:...has white guys polling as their 3 top choices for 2020. will anyone really notice this and care?

Has anyone noticed that the three people with the most national name-recognition polled favorably in Iowa? Biden=former Vice-President. Sanders=former Presidential candidate. O'Rourke=most reported on senate candidate from the mid-term elections. "Does anyone intelligent think this means anything?" would be a better question except the answer is a quick, "No" leaving little reason to even bother to ask.

so it's just a coincidence that they're white guys...got it!

canpakes wrote:“He wasn’t black enough”. Lol.

naw, he just wasn't too black for Democrats.

subgenius wrote:

canpakes wrote:“He wasn’t black enough”. Lol.

naw, he just wasn't too black for Democrats.

They didn't seem to waste their time quantifying his level of blackness, as you are.

But let us know when Republicans are nominating more diverse candidates, since you seem to be concerned with the issue.

canpakes wrote:They didn't seem to waste their time quantifying his level of blackness, as you are.

But let us know when Republicans are nominating more diverse candidates, since you seem to be concerned with the issue.

Yeah, its not like his keynote address at a national convention had such a notion as a central theme...or that anyone in his party promoted anything other than "look he is black".
Yeah, i get ya...these 3 white candidates are great examples of how I am racist and the Democrats are so diverse (a.k.a. can't wait to see the new congress group photo that Democrats love to parade around...so proud of their coloreds they are).

subgenius wrote:Yeah, i get ya...these 3 white candidates are great examples of how I am racist and the Democrats are so diverse (a.k.a. can't wait to see the new congress group photo that Democrats love to parade around...so proud of their coloreds they are).

The three ‘white’ dudes, undeclared and out of a field of almost a dozen possible Democrat presidential candidates, have nothing to do themselves with your highlighting of them as white and accusation that their existence makes others racist. I also note your implications about Obama not being either black or white enough, depending upon which corner you’ve been backed into, and your odd preoccupation with him two years after he has left office.

But, please, do a little more of your racism and privilege dance. It’s cute, and revealing.