He's great, don't get me wrong, but he is also about the most unclutch pitcher in all of baseball. When the games really matter, he chokes big-time.

I still say not a big enough sample... He has had 3 bad innings, in 3 big games. And if you consider that the Cardinals were other teams hacking computers systems around that time... they might have had a little insider information to help them those years...

Yeah, I'm no fan of the Cardinals, but I don't think that argument would hold up anywhere. lol Baseball is a game of adjustments. You don't adjust, you lose.

>Best pitcher in the game
>Can barely get his fastball up to 95mph

KEK.

Best curve ball in game, one of the top 3 sliders...

Fastball is the least effective strikeout pitch, and most often hit for home run pitch for any pitcher...

He was awful at the beginning of the season.

Ok, what is your point...

He's great, don't get me wrong, but he is also about the most unclutch pitcher in all of baseball. When the games really matter, he chokes big-time.

I still say not a big enough sample... He has had 3 bad innings, in 3 big games. And if you consider that the Cardinals were other teams hacking computers systems around that time... they might have had a little insider information to help them those years...

Yeah, I'm no fan of the Cardinals, but I don't think that argument would hold up anywhere. lol Baseball is a game of adjustments. You don't adjust, you lose.

But he isn't. Hes number 7.

"I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic"

See, now you're starting to annoy me.That is a demonstrably false statement.
I clearly just showed you a video of him stating his position and his voting record and official stance is clearly supportive of an AWB.

His official position isn't rhetoric. I'm looking at his voting record and his actual words that you just saw him say, as well as his official statement on his website. ( www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban )

You're trying to refute all of that because of something you supposedly heard him say 5 years ago, so don't talk to me about rhetoric and thinking for yourself. You need to accept facts when they're presented to you instead of trying to spin everything. It's pretty pathetic.

He said it himself in public multiple times, and he publicly supports and votes for the AWB. Sorry, but that supersedes whatever he told supposedly told you 5 years ago.

This isn't rocket science, and if you have to spin your candidates positions maybe you shouldn't be supporting him.

Ok, I wasn't trying to pick sides... I even said that I wouldn't even likely vote for him, I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic. I am not spinning anything and I never said he was my candidate.

(YOU'RE) the one that can't look past the rhetoric.
Pretty (GAY) of you, I think.
It's too bad you are just as unable to think for yourself as those blindly following him...(LOL)

"I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic"

See, now you're starting to annoy me.That is a demonstrably false statement.
I clearly just showed you a video of him stating his position and his voting record and official stance is clearly supportive of an AWB.

His official position isn't rhetoric. I'm looking at his voting record and his actual words that you just saw him say, as well as his official statement on his website. ( www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban )

You're trying to refute all of that because of something you supposedly heard him say 5 years ago, so don't talk to me about rhetoric and thinking for yourself. You need to accept facts when they're presented to you instead of trying to spin everything. It's pretty pathetic.

Well if you wanna spin it like that any gun can be used for hunting. Full auto can be used for hunting. In fact any gun can be used to kill someone. If that was his whole argument he wouldn't want to ban any guns.

It's pretty obvious he was referring to any gun besides the stereotypical hunting rifle.

The idea that he was referring to full autos makes no sense as full autos are basically never used in a crime and in this interview they're talking about a "massacre" committed by a semi auto handgun. He even opens up the interview by saying he wants to ban "assault weapons" and wanting to close the non existent "gun show loophole".

Why is it that with Bernie we can never take what he says at face value, why do we have to try to spin everything he says into something less retarded.

His positions are in line with 92% of hilaries. People only like him because of internet may mays and the fact that he self describes as a socialist. It's bullshit.

I never claimed to like him, or even that I would vote for him. I just know that I have talked to him about it, in person (albeit over 5 years ago), and the way that YOU and the media are portraying it, differs from the way he explained himself to me.

He said it himself in public multiple times, and he publicly supports and votes for the AWB. Sorry, but that supersedes whatever he told supposedly told you 5 years ago.

This isn't rocket science, and if you have to spin your candidates positions maybe you shouldn't be supporting him.

Ok, I wasn't trying to pick sides... I even said that I wouldn't even likely vote for him, I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic. I am not spinning anything and I never said he was my candidate.

(YOU'RE) the one that can't look past the rhetoric.
Pretty (GAY) of you, I think.
It's too bad you are just as unable to think for yourself as those blindly following him...(LOL)

"I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic"

See, now you're starting to annoy me.That is a demonstrably false statement.
I clearly just showed you a video of him stating his position and his voting record and official stance is clearly supportive of an AWB.

His official position isn't rhetoric. I'm looking at his voting record and his actual words that you just saw him say, as well as his official statement on his website. ( www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban )

You're trying to refute all of that because of something you supposedly heard him say 5 years ago, so don't talk to me about rhetoric and thinking for yourself. You need to accept facts when they're presented to you instead of trying to spin everything. It's pretty pathetic.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_62eU2P2W2M

theres the video of him saying it, starts at 40 seconds

the fact is I know more about bernie than 99% of the fj mongos supporting him

Even in this doesn't say he would ban all guns "not used for hunting"... he says guns used exclusively to kill people (and not for hunting. That is a VERY open definition, to be sure. But, I have a AR-15 and 92-fs , that I use to kill groundhogs digging up my yard. I also have an SKS that I have used deer hunting. He never seemed to have a problem with those. He is, "I" believe, referring to guns like fully automatic shotguns, uzi's and such. Even in a state with almost NO gun control laws, we have VERY few of those to begin with.

Well if you wanna spin it like that any gun can be used for hunting. Full auto can be used for hunting. In fact any gun can be used to kill someone. If that was his whole argument he wouldn't want to ban any guns.

It's pretty obvious he was referring to any gun besides the stereotypical hunting rifle.

The idea that he was referring to full autos makes no sense as full autos are basically never used in a crime and in this interview they're talking about a "massacre" committed by a semi auto handgun. He even opens up the interview by saying he wants to ban "assault weapons" and wanting to close the non existent "gun show loophole".

Why is it that with Bernie we can never take what he says at face value, why do we have to try to spin everything he says into something less retarded.

His positions are in line with 92% of hilaries. People only like him because of internet may mays and the fact that he self describes as a socialist. It's bullshit.

I never claimed to like him, or even that I would vote for him. I just know that I have talked to him about it, in person (albeit over 5 years ago), and the way that YOU and the media are portraying it, differs from the way he explained himself to me.

He said it himself in public multiple times, and he publicly supports and votes for the AWB. Sorry, but that supersedes whatever he told supposedly told you 5 years ago.

This isn't rocket science, and if you have to spin your candidates positions maybe you shouldn't be supporting him.

Ok, I wasn't trying to pick sides... I even said that I wouldn't even likely vote for him, I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic. I am not spinning anything and I never said he was my candidate.

(YOU'RE) the one that can't look past the rhetoric.
Pretty (GAY) of you, I think.
It's too bad you are just as unable to think for yourself as those blindly following him...(LOL)

"I was just stating that what you are portraying is not what he said on one topic"

See, now you're starting to annoy me.That is a demonstrably false statement.
I clearly just showed you a video of him stating his position and his voting record and official stance is clearly supportive of an AWB.

His official position isn't rhetoric. I'm looking at his voting record and his actual words that you just saw him say, as well as his official statement on his website. ( www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban )

You're trying to refute all of that because of something you supposedly heard him say 5 years ago, so don't talk to me about rhetoric and thinking for yourself. You need to accept facts when they're presented to you instead of trying to spin everything. It's pretty pathetic.

And yes, I know I wasn't the first to post it!

Palest foundation by literally every makeup company is too dark for me.
10/10