Sanders wins Time's poll of 100 most influential people

[pantsonfire]

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has won Time magazine's readers' poll of the world's 100 most influential people, garnering more than three times as many votes as his rival Hillary Clinton.

Sanders had been leading the readers' poll from the start and finished with 3.3 per cent of the total 'yes' votes when the poll closed midnight yesterday.The 74-year-old Vermont senator not only beat Clinton, 68, who has finished with one per cent of the 'yes' votes but also a host of world leaders and cultural figures.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/540438/sanders-wins-times-poll-100.html

[pdsimdars]

1. He got most votes last year too, but they ignored him and chose someone else without even

mentioning him.

[pantsonfire]

2. Yup. Just worthy to note, this is his second win....n/t

[mythology]

13. You do realize that the online poll has no relationship to the selection right?

The online poll reflects nothing other than an online campaign. Unless you think in 1998 the most important person in the world was the winner of the online poll professional wrestler and author Mick Foley.

[Tarc]

3. "has won Time magazine's readers' poll"

If there's one thing that Sanders supporters excel at, is clicking/tapping a webpage.

[MADem]

4. LOL--because click-click-click is the same as "actual support!" nt

[pantsonfire]

5. If Hillary won, you'd be be saying something else.....n/t

[MADem]

8. No--the Sanders Experience has caused me to believe that online polls are, by and large,

utter bullshit.


They'd do a better job of making it appear "real" if they'd just ratchet back the enthusiasm a bit.

The BernieBro PTB should tell the Brigaders to vote five times--not a hundred.

When they go OTT like that, it's ... OBVIOUS.

[Human101948]

6. Says the one who has apparently nothing else to do but post here...

There's something strangely OCD about having 130,000 posts.

[MADem]

7. Look at you, clicking to tell me how BAAAAAAAAD I am!

I post when I wait for little old ladies at the grocery, or at their doctor's appointments.

I do this kind of volunteer work a lot, so I have time on my hands. It's more interesting than reading a paperback.

What's your excuse, hmmm?

"Strangely OCD?" How charming of you to use a mental condition as a slur--is that SOP in your set, or are you just UNUSUALLY boorish and obtuse all on your own?

Human101948
6. Says the one who has apparently nothing else to do but post here...
View profile
There's something strangely OCD about having 130,000 posts.

[Human101948]

10. Yes, 130,000 posts is obsessive...

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/smartphone-and-internet-addiction.htm

They may be able to help you.

[MADem]

12. And you double DOWN on it! How adorable!

I could come up with a word for YOU, too.

Oh, I don't use a smartphone normally, though--so you'll have to try again.

Too clever by half you are!!

Are you PROUD of yourself?

Do you think it makes you cool to lob 'mental illness' slurs at people on the internet?

Would you call yourself representative of your candidate's supporters?

I certainly hope not, because you really ARE making your candidate look horrible!!

Human101948
10. Yes, 130,000 posts is obsessive...
View profile
http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/smartphone-and-internet-addiction.htm

They may be able to help you.

[Human101948]

14. If you took the time to read before obsessively posting you would see...

that the link I provided covers internet addiction as well. You just have to take that first step on the journey to recovery.

[MADem]

15. And then you back off with a faux justification!!

Naaah--you are just being ugly. "You have OCD, you're addicted! You-you-you!!!"

You're paying out enough rope to hang yourself. Do go on!

I notice how you avoid answering my questions--are you a typical supporter of your candidate? Or do you think they'd disavow you, with your ugly, nasty comments?

Human101948
14. If you took the time to read before obsessively posting you would see...
View profile
that the link I provided covers internet addiction as well. You just have to take that first step on the journey to recovery.

[OilemFirchen]

17. You've averaged 13.6 posts a day for the last three months.

And 9 hides.

What's all this about obsessiveness?

[Human101948]

26. Yes, and to match Madem I will have to post foranother 8,666 days (24 years)

And that's if I increase my output.

[passiveporcupine]

19. Do you think only Hillary supporters have an internet addiction?

You really are being nasty by using this as a method of attacking your opponent.

Quit while you are behind...please!

BTW, I'm OCD and have an internet addiction (although that is not my only OCD trait), but you post more per day than I do on average. Although for the past 90 days my post rate is higher than average.

There is nothing wrong with it unless it interrupts your life or affects others around you.

[oasis]

16. MADem, you keep on postin' and I'll keep on truckin'.

[MADem]

18. Sounds good to me! nt

[pantsonfire]

22. Yeah, keep it up ya'll! K&R

[pantsonfire]

9. Skinner has 61,000 and he started the site...n/t

[passiveporcupine]

20. YOu really going to go there too?

[pantsonfire]

21. Well, I already did, so you have the answer to your rhetotrical question. n/t

[passiveporcupine]

27. Does that make you cool or something? nt

[pantsonfire]

28. What?

[Human101948]

23. I think he is pointing out that Skinner does this as a job...

and yet has fewer posts than the lady/gentleman above.

[passiveporcupine]

29. He posts less per day than I do as well

Does that mean I should be ridiculed?

[Human101948]

30. Not as long as you support Bernie...

Your posts are educational, wise and perspicacious.

[passiveporcupine]

31. You forgot your sarcasm tag

At least I'm hoping you did.

[Go Vols]

11. K&R

[DanTex]

24. Clickety click!

[pantsonfire]

25. Too bad you don't know how to clickety click fast enough...n/t

[quantumjunkie]

32. +1

[CajunBlazer]

33. Clickety click! Clickety click! Clickety click!

I wonder how many people were involved in making Sanders #1 and for how long.

I'll bet that a least 100 zealous Sanders supporters put in many hours.

Now the strange thing is that they actually thought they were accomplishing something.

[pantsonfire]

34. The Chinese helped out a lot.....n/t