GideonWise
-
Re: politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Charleston debate: The betting verdict
Sorry but your line of argument is very poor. (View Post)1 -
Re: politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Charleston debate: The betting verdict
You do not have facts. You have an opinion. It is neither correct nor incorrect. It is an opinion. But your argument is very poor because you think your opinion is a fact. That is where you have gone… (View Post)1 -
Re: politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Charleston debate: The betting verdict
The simple facts are these: 1) You have asserted that there is a well established definition of being rich. 2) But you cannot find or cite this well established definition. Ergo you should withdraw. (View Post)1 -
Re: politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Charleston debate: The betting verdict
Hopefully you can see the contradiction there. If you cannot find it quickly on google it cannot be a well established definition of being rich. (View Post)1 -
Re: politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Charleston debate: The betting verdict
Why not cite your well established definition of being rich? Given it is inherently subjective I am sceptical there is a consensus on this but let's see what you are referring to. (View Post)1