Liberal Forum

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 8:43 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:43 pm

decade to decade.

not year to year.

not month to month

not day to day

not hour to hour

in 2023, DIsney was worth twice as much as it was in 2013. FACT.

^^ ******* is trying to redefine what a decade is now, because he got caught lying again.   
Here, let me help you out:

decade:   dĕk′ād″, dĕ-kād′noun

1. A period of ten years.
2. A group or series of ten years

Now, answer the question.  What was the date, a decade ago from yesterday when you made your ignorant statement?


 

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 8:46 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:46 pm

^^ ******* is trying to redefine what a decade is now, because he got caught lying again.   
Here, let me help you out:

decade:   dĕk′ād″, dĕ-kād′noun

1. A period of ten years.
2. A group or series of ten years

Now, answer the question.  What was the date, a decade ago from yesterday when you made your ignorant statement?

Is 2023 a decade more than 2013?

Yes or No?
 

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 8:47 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:47 pm

Is 2023 a decade more than 2013?

Yes or No?

Yes.  As long as you're on the same date. 
January 1, 2013 is not a decade away from December 31, 2023

Now answer my question, what was the date, a decade from yesterday when you made your ignorant claim?
 

and where the **** does 63 versus 99 come from?

I mean, besides your Mexican teenaged jism soaked ***, that is?
                   

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 8:50 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:50 pm

Yes.  As long as you're on the same date. 
January 1, 2013 is not a decade away from December 31, 2023

Now answer my question, what was the date, a decade from yesterday when you made your ignorant claim?

my claim was not ignorant. It was just not as "precise" as you would like.  I was talking decade to decade, not day to day.

My statement was correct.  63 versus 99?  not so much.

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 8:50 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:50 pm

and where the **** does 63 versus 99 come from?

I mean, besides your Mexican teenaged jism soaked ***, that is?
                 

Poor mainbitch is going to keep dodging the question, because he doesn't know how to read a **** graph. 
It's no surprised, really, is it?
 

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 8:53 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:53 pm

Poor mainbitch is going to keep dodging the question, because he doesn't know how to read a **** graph. 
It's no surprised, really, is it?

I know that in 2023, Disney is worth twice as much as it was worth in 2013.  

63 veresus 99?

out your ***?  I bet when you pulled it out, it gave you a chubby, didn't it?        

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 8:52 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:52 pm

my claim was not ignorant. It was just not as "precise" as you would like.  I was talking decade to decade, not day to day.

My statement was correct.  63 versus 99?  not so much.

Your claim was ignorant, because you were unaware of the actual numbers. 
That's the literal definition  of ignorant. 
*******.
 

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:56 pm

I know that in 2023, Disney is worth twice as much as it was worth in 2013.  

After being proven wrong, now mainbitch is trying to redefine his claim.   Weird, almost like when you claimed a bill couldn't pass the senate with fewer than 50 votes, and you started adding the "when all members are present and voting". 
 

Face facts, you're my bitch.

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 8:56 pm

Your claim was ignorant, because you were unaware of the actual numbers. 
That's the literal definition  of ignorant. 
*******.

I was totally aware of the actual numbers.  I knew that, in 2023, Disney was worth twice as much as it had been worth in 2013.

63 versus 99????

WTF

you keep running away from that.  dyslexia, perhaps?
 
 

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm

After being proven wrong, now mainbitch is trying to redefine his claim.   Weird, almost like when you claimed a bill couldn't pass the senate with fewer than 50 votes, and you started adding the "when all members are present and voting". 
 

Face facts, you're my bitch.

"yes *******, fifty votes are all that is needed to pass a bill in the senate if all senators are present and voting"

your words, not mine.

dead wrong then.

dead wrong today.

when the gang's all there and voting, you GOTTA have 51.  It's either gonna be 51-49 or 51-50.  EVERY SINGLE **** TIME.

             

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm

I was totally aware of the actual numbers.  I knew that, in 2023, Disney was worth twice as much as it had been worth in 2013.

63 versus 99????

WTF

you keep running away from that.  dyslexia, perhapS?

Now I'm going to laugh at you every time you make this claim, just like I do about the "when all Senator...". 
Just more proof that you're my bitch. 

******* didn't know what a decade was. 
 
 

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 9:06 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:06 pm

Now I'm going to laugh at you every time you make this claim, just like I do about the "when all Senator...". 
Just more proof that you're my bitch. 

******* didn't know what a decade was.

MY CLAIM IS CORRECT.  IN 2023 Disney is worth twice as much as it was in 2013.

And your statement about ME being a ******* for thinking that 50 was NOT enough to pass a bill when the gang's all there is classic.  Classicly stupid.

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 9:09 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:09 pm

MY CLAIM IS CORRECT.  IN 2023 Disney is worth twice as much as it was in 2013.

And your statement about ME being a ******* for thinking that 50 was NOT enough to pass a bill when the gang's all there is classic.  Classicly stupid.

Except that wasn't your claim. 

THIS was your claim:  "Disney is still worth TWICE as much as it was just a decade ago..."
You having to alter your claim, is proof that you're my bitch.

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 9:17 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:17 pm

Except that wasn't your claim. 

THIS was your claim:  "Disney is still worth TWICE as much as it was just a decade ago..."
You having to alter your claim, is proof that you're my bitch.

in 2023, a decade ago is 2013.

How **** stupid ARE you

63-99??? where the **** did THAT come from, you idiot?

and tell me again how "Yes *******, 50 votes is all that is needed to pass a bill in the senate if all senators are present and voting" isn't STILL one of the dumbest things you've ever said.

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 9:37 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:37 pm

and tell me again how "Yes *******, 50 votes is all that is needed to pass a bill in the senate if all senators are present and voting" isn't STILL one of the dumbest things you've ever said.

^^ didn't know a bill could pass with fewer than 50 votes. 
Also didn't know what a decade was. 

You'll always be my bitch.
 

golfboy » 21 Apr 2023, 9:46 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:46 pm

^^ didn't know a bill could pass with fewer than 50 votes. 
Also didn't know what a decade was. 

You'll always be my bitch.

of course I knew... and I know that 2023 is a decade longer than 2013.

tell me again hoiw your "fifty votes" statement is correct EVER?

63-99?????

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
 

and the only person who thinks I am YOUR bitch is you.....

which is why you will always be EVERYBODY'S laughing stock.

Everybody.

"Yes *******. fifty votes IS all that is needed to pass a bill in the senate if all senators are present and voting"

                                   
 

maineman » 21 Apr 2023, 9:52 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2023, 9:52 pm

and the only person who thinks I am YOUR bitch is you.....

which is why you will always be EVERYBODY'S laughing stock.

Everybody.

"Yes *******. fifty votes IS all that is needed to pass a bill in the senate if all senators are present and voting"

                                 

^^ doesn't realizing the laughing is coming from all those people pointing at him.