Turns out people in different countries and regions say the date differently as well. I find it funny how everyone always assumes their experience is the universal one.

September Fifteenth and Fifteenth of September are both commonly used depending where you are in the world.

I think it's unreasonable to take the literal meaning od 'anytime, anywhere'. Like, if he was attending a funeral and the senator turned up and challenged him there, would that still be appropriate? How about if he was visiting a kindergarten? While he's helping an old woman cross the road? Performing first aid on an injured person?

There are still times that are appropriate and not appropriate. You could say that the challenge itself was childish and I would agree. But the anytime, anywhere condition doesn't make it unconditionally ok for the senator to pick this time and place.

The choice of time and place is irrelevant when the instigating party said, and I quote, "anytime, anywhere", and then when their challenge was accepted, stood up, ready to engage in said challenge.

In response to people saying that the Senator acted inappropriately. But perhaps I misinterpreted. Are you saying they both acted inappropriately? In which case I agree, but I'd still say tweeting a challenge is less inappropriate than actually accepting that challenge at that time and place.

He's saying it's out of context.

Also, even without taking into account context and assuming your statement was the whole truth. He shouldnt be discounted just for a single opinion on the positive aspects of a country's government, that you disagree with. If that's the worst gotcha you can come up with for a politician, they must be the cleanest politician in the world.

Honestly I agree. I just don't think that excuses the Senator from actually accepting the challenge at that time and place (or arguably any time and place, but especially that one). Two wrongs don't make a right...

If you murder someone, have you broken the law? Yes (most likely) . Are you going to jail? Well only if they catch you, and prove it in court.

People above are saying they believe he's ineligible because of what he did. They're not saying that all necessary procedures to actually decide and declare him ineligible has been completed. I.e, he should be ineligible based on what he's done, but he hasn't yet been made ineligible in practice.

What he means is that anyone can get clean files on GOG and then distribute those I think. No DRM or anything to clean up, so no need to rely on anyone to repackage it etc.