Sentences with phrase «argument you've got»

That's where the argument gets misguided.

The need to «win» an argument gets in the way of productive resolutions, allowing animosity or avoidance of co-workers to prevail.

So the argument gets bolstered by the claim that inflation and interest rates are low, so P / E multiples ought to be higher.

Seems you get more and more desperate as your standard old (and badly flawed) arguments get taken apart.

The argument got rather loud.

Your argument gets more ridiculous the more you try to support it.

The same arguments get hurled at the «opponents» day after day, protest after protest, year after year.

From Hemant: It seems like you've both managed to make this relationship work, which is great, but I wonder what arguments get the most contentious due to your religious differences.

@Sigh: attempting to make rational arguments gets tedious when it amounts to beating your head against a brick wall — it tends to make people irritated and impolite.

As you say, I agree there is more to a striker than goals — but you have to say there is a certain irony though when you look at how little traction that argument gets on here when it is applied to OG.

The «we just don't have the data» argument gets leaned on, but if you just listen to the audience, you can tell who they are there to see.

@antiwenger That argument gets old dude.

Those arguments got even louder this week as all four number one seeds made it to the Women's Final Four.

Anyone, AOB or AKB, who writes sensibly and puts up a good argument gets my thumbs up.

When it was pointed out to him the hypocrisy of his argument he got abusive.

As the debate progresses and arguments get more heated, you hand out badges to a quarter of the room.

The retirement of Julissa Ferreras - Copeland is said to have «upended» the race for speaker, but that argument gets everything backward.

The normal argument we got was «I don't know but your insurance agreed, this is what you owe».

According to an eye witness who spoke to Ghanacreativearts.com, contributor THELMA SEDEM KUDAH, and member of the cast whose identity is being withheld, the argument got intense and the room went wild as punches where being thrown and emotions let loose.

I think this is very relevant because the biggest argument I get is: «Grok didn't eat potato starch.»

While their argument got approved to go to trial in New York, the judge did refuse to certify a nationwide class - action lawsuit, citing that there were too many differences in the laws of individual states in regard to this particular case.

The «same old, same old» argument gets crushed here, because like Part 1, Part 2 departs from formula.

The arguments get heated when Bruce suggests a radical plan: Use the energy from one of the cubes to revive the deceased Superman (Henry Cavill).

Opening - night crowds raved about Blindspotting, starring Hamilton star Daveed Diggs, a buddy flick set in San Francisco - neighbouring Oakland about two moving - van drivers — one white, one black — that teeters into spoken rhymes when arguments get heated.

Maybe we have really bland lives that never veer into the dramatic, but I can say when an argument gets heated in my house it is bigger than life at times, and I have never had any arguments worthy of theatrics like Dean has in that particular moment.

You know, the kind of escalation that happens, argument gets worse and worse, a teacher asks a child to comply, the child replies back.

(The argument got tendentious, especially when Duncan started selectively choosing state - level scores to make his case, but we needn't rehash that here.)

The argument gets even easier to debate once IIHS ratings are taken into account, with the Spark earning the relatively best score of the bunch.

Even if I agree for the sake of argument that books are precious snowflakes, it doesn't follow that Amazon is therefore obliged to sell them at all, much less sell them on equal terms to the books of Publishers who do have a contract.That this argument gets any coverage at all underscores the desperate need for improved media literacy in this country.

The arguments get into somewhat arcane detail — library consortia, cost - per - circulation figures — but the upshot is that librarians are frustrated by the hurdles they face in offering ebooks.

One big argument I get from pro bsl people is it is in their genes.

I thought he might be unhappy to see: — the adjustment (in the new paper) losing the 1998 RSS high temp shown in Zeke Hausfather's older graph, so the «cooling trend» argument gets hurt, or — the newer graph having one more recent data point than the older, so the «cooling trend» argument gets hurt, or — the newer graph showing a shorter time span and so not showing the lower temps in earlier decades, so the «cooling trend» argument gets hurt, or — the newer graph isn't directly comparable to an older graph he prefers to look at without thinking about the numbers along the side, or — I du n no.

The practice of science has built up a number of mechanisms to try and ensure that arguments get dealt with constructively, and a big part of that is through the peer - reviewed literature where i's can be dotted, t's can be crossed, and where the snark gets put aside.

And by having the «peer - review» of Nic's comments visible for all to see the arguments get a good airing too, Not hidden behind closed doors in pal - review.

Charles I don't think Fielding is a special case the no heating since 1998 argument gets trotted out by «sceptics» fairly regularly.

Klein's argument gets no better.

arguments get canned quickly.

The argument gets lost in your arrogance yet again, Gav.

You can (and have) use the argument you get «criticized by both sides» as some sort of proof you're in the middle and that's before we even get into whether «the middle» is a desirable and supportable position.

Jim D writes «I keep drumming on this issue, because 3.7 W / m2 is a number that even skeptical scientists agree with, and the arguments get muddied by feedback discussions instead of the importance and unprecedentedness of this forcing in our climate.»

I keep drumming on this issue, because 3.7 W / m2 is a number that even skeptical scientists agree with, and the arguments get muddied by feedback discussions instead of the importance and unprecedentedness of this forcing in our climate.

And that's where this argument gets really silly.

Disclaimers and caveats aside, I have to think the whole First Amendment argument gets pretty murky when you're talking about people who insist on remaining anonymous.

The argument got heated and physical contact occurred.

But they didn't sway the Supreme Court, and his side lost there 9 - 0, an outcome that was predictable to many who watched the free trade argument get pounced on and gutted by the justices in oral arguments last December.

Successful couples have learned how to repair the situation before an argument gets out of control.

Tina, I love how you point out that when arguments get heated, the couple should take an adult «time out.»

If an argument gets too heated, take a 20 - minute break, and agree to approach the topic again when you are both calm.

And when emotions are involved in any fight, boundaries get blurry and arguments get irrational.

After cooling off for a moment, you can talk to your child about how the argument got out of hand and agree to a «truce» of sorts.