Just do it.

LOL! I was pointing out how you were playing the word game as if he was charged with the impeachment. You should be ashamed. Then of course you bring up Johnson. He was also found not guilty. The only reason Nixon was not impeached is he made a deal with them and stepped down, so one could say he was impeached, kinda like the way you manipulated my words to say coined LOL! Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Lexus Lover has already confirmed what everyone else already knew, and, in doing so, he pointed out who it was that was engaged in disingenuous "word play".

MTP is "playing word games"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Actually he was on the National Union Party ticket with Lincoln at the time of his election. The REP/DEM label of today is completely different than back then. Therefore your assertion has no merit. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

What's noteworthy about my "assertion" is that it is based on historical fact; not partisan delusions like some others who post in this forum.

Wiki was cited proving you wrong, now for the History Channel:

Johnson’s political career began in 1829, when he was elected alderman in Greeneville. That same year, Andrew Jackson (1767-1845), a fellow Democrat and Tennessean, became the seventh U.S. president.

When Lincoln sought re-election in 1864, he chose Johnson as his running mate ... As a Southern Unionist and “War Democrat” (the name for those Democrats who stayed loyal to Lincoln), Johnson was deemed a good fit for the ticket... (History)

You should retract this comment about IB before Wakeup gets wind of it. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

No one else in this forum is surprised to see that you misunderstood yet another post.

Still noteworthy about my "assertion" is that it is based on historical fact; not partisan delusions like some others who post in this forum.

Wiki was cited proving you wrong, History Channel was cited proving you wrong, now for White House.gov to prove you once again and forever wrong:

None of this is on topic...get back on it...

None of this is on topic...get back on it... Originally Posted by Wakeup

But it is therapeutically educational for the delusionally misinformed.

Y’all were warned...

Micheal Jordan once said “Republicans wear Nike’s too”. And he’s no conservative. He had it right. When it comes to marketing, why alienate anyone. Originally Posted by bambino

Who are they alienating? Bigot Whites who get butt-hurt easy and like to burn shit up. I doubt Nike cares.

Are "whites" just playing or do you think their mad? Which is it?

(But you are generalizing and redirecting .... unless you want to generalize about the "ninja" want-a-be's at Berkeley who are so ashamed they cover their faces and identifiable clothing ... just like the Klan ... which must mean they are Democrats also ... the "ninja" want-a-be's at Berkeley. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Nice try. This thread is called Just Do it. I don't care about Berkeley, Democrats, Republicans or Independents. What do Bigots do when they get angry? They burn stuff up. The Nike Kap deal is a slap in the face to their hatred.

Nice try. This thread is called Just Do it. I don't care about Berkeley, Democrats, Republicans or Independents. What do Bigots do when they get angry? They burn stuff up. The Nike Kap deal is a slap in the face to their hatred. Originally Posted by PrettyBoyG

.

Originally Posted by R.M.

Nike is "crushing" itself. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Topic: Nike fucking up!

Wow. Looks like someone just got badly embarrassed.


Well played, Mr. Hankering!

The day before Nike announced its deal with Kaepernick, Nike stock was at 82.2. Yesterday it closed at 82.63. So much for the negative impact of the announcement. Right now I'm sure Nike is very content with their decision.

"Nike's bet on Kaepernick has paid off, at least among millennial investors, according to data from Robinhood, a no-fee brokerage popular among younger traders. A total of 15,191 investors added Nike to their portfolios last week through Thursday, up 45% from the prior week, according to Business Insider's tracking of the data."

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...8-9-1027527698

"Despite the backlash in the wake of Nike’s endorsement deal with Colin Kaepernick, the sportswear company has seen a 31% increase in online sales, according to one outside estimate.
Nike sales grew 31% from Sunday through Tuesday over the Labor Day holiday this year compared with the previous year, according to Edison Trends."


http://time.com/5390884/nike-sales-go-up-kaepernick-ad/

The day before Nike announced its deal with Kaepernick, Nike stock was at 82.2. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Snap shots are worthless.

So back on topic. Nike is at 82.99 so now who is winning? I will tell you who is. Those that bought it in the 79 range a few days ago. LOL!
Some folks keep forgetting that Wall street is colored blind and the majority of whites are not on the racist side anymore.

So back on topic. Nike is at 82.99 so now who is winning? I will tell you who is. Those that bought it in the 79 range a few days ago. LOL!
Some folks keep forgetting that Wall street is colored blind and the majority of whites are not on the racist side anymore. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

The ebb and flow of the market within a day or even a week is based on buying and selling ... the former drives the value up and the later drives it down. It has little to do in that short time frame of the "substance," unless some catastrophic event or revelation occurs that might impact the company on a short-term basis. The "marketing" of a unemployable goof-ball football player is not such "a catastrophic event or revelation occurs that might impact the company on a short-term basis" when Nike has a large share of the market with which to absorb short-term losses.

Equipment contracts are being cancelled with Nike. Those cancellations don't have a next day impact. Orders have been filled and they've been paid.

The ebb and flow of the market within a day or even a week is based on buying and selling ... the former drives the value up and the later drives it down. It has little to do in that short time frame of the "substance," unless some catastrophic event or revelation occurs that might impact the company on a short-term basis. The "marketing" of a unemployable goof-ball football player is not such "a catastrophic event or revelation occurs that might impact the company on a short-term basis" when Nike has a large share of the market with which to absorb short-term losses.

Equipment contracts are being cancelled with Nike. Those cancellations don't have a next day impact. Orders have been filled and they've been paid. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I tried to find equipment contracts that were recently cancelled with Nike and was unable to find any. I found one where the U of Tennessee was contemplating dropping Nike but other than that, nothing.

On the other hand:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/420...ck-ad-campaign

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ni...rsy-2018-09-11