socialist Posted July 2, 2012 Report Posted July 2, 2012 New CNN poll has Romney up 8 points in 15 battleground states. Regardless, I don't think polls mean much until after the conventions, and especially after the first debate. polls are for losers, wildrose anyone. again you post nothing of substance shady. obama wins easily in november. that is how it WILL go down . Quote Thankful to have become a free thinker.
Shady Posted July 2, 2012 Report Posted July 2, 2012 polls are for losers Not sure what you're talking about. again you post nothing of substance shady. Of course it's substance. Read the poll. But like I said, I don't think polls mean much until after the conventions, and especially the first debate. obama wins easily in november. that is how it WILL go down. Define easily. The election will be 2-3 points either way. That's not easy for anyone. Now, in 2008, he won easily. Quote
punked Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 One poll out of 20 makes an outlier not a trend any first year stats student could tell you that. Quote
Shady Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 One poll out of 20 makes an outlier not a trend any first year stats student could tell you that. I agree. That's why I specifically said that I don't believe polls matter much until after the conventions, and the first debate. Geez. Quote
BubberMiley Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 I agree. That's why I specifically said that I don't believe polls matter much until after the conventions, and the first debate. Geez. You think an outlier is a poll done long before the election, don't you? Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Shady Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 You think an outlier is a poll done long before the election, don't you? No, not at all. It's an outlier among some of the other polls done recently. But again, I'm not sure how many times I have to say this. I'm not a big fan of putting much significance in any polls this early. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 By successes, I mean he was able to get what he wanted. Even after 2006, with Democrats controlling the house and senate. George Bush was going by a long standing US policy of regime change in Iraq. George was just the guy in office when this policy was given some action. Without the towers coming down, Bush would have been a lame duck for sure. It was policy that was the driving force, not George Bush. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 No, not at all. It's an outlier among some of the other polls done recently. But again, I'm not sure how many times I have to say this. I'm not a big fan of putting much significance in any polls this early. Shall we revisit those polls that you spewed out in other threads regarding Obama at about this time frame before an election?? Quote
Shady Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 Shall we revisit those polls that you spewed out in other threads regarding Obama at about this time frame before an election?? What for? Is posting polls now a forum violation? And I don't spew polls, the media does. I just post them from time to time. I'm not sure why you're so sensitive about it. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 What for? Is posting polls now a forum violation? Yes that is about obtuse as you can get. You know full well that I am not talking about forum rules, just stating a fact about your obsession for polling numbers when Obama was running for election. And I don't spew polls, the media does. I just post them from time to time. I'm not sure why you're so sensitive about it. The media does not spew polls on MLW. Posters like you do. Quote
Shady Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 Yes that is about obtuse as you can get. You know full well that I am not talking about forum rules, just stating a fact about your obsession for polling numbers when Obama was running for election. Of course I post polls, and will continue to do so. Even more so as the election gets closer. Are you purposely being obtuse? The media does not spew polls on MLW. Posters like you do. Yep, I post polls, other people post polls, what's your point? Quote
BubberMiley Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 Polls are very important if they show Romney ahead; they are unimportant if they show Obama ahead. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Shady Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 Polls are very important if they show Romney ahead; they are unimportant if they show Obama ahead. No, in this case, even though this poll is favorable, I still stated that it doesn't necessarily mean much. Quote
BubberMiley Posted July 3, 2012 Report Posted July 3, 2012 (edited) No, in this case, even though this poll is favorable, I still stated that it doesn't necessarily mean much. I wasn't talking to you. I was only stating a fact. Edited July 3, 2012 by BubberMiley Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
chjony Posted July 10, 2012 Report Posted July 10, 2012 Romney has it in the bag for the GOP, this the 2012 race. Let the Superbowl of politics begin! Personally I think Romney is one of the better Republican candidates in a very long time. IMO probably the best since at least Reagan (McCain wasn't so bad, but Palin just ruined him obviously). Should be a good battle. Post your thoughts, news, etc. here. Here's a simple survey that will line you up with the Presidential Candidate you have the most in common with. I ended up with my top two of 95% Ron Paul and 95% Gary Johnson with like 76% with Romney (lol wut?) only 9% with Obama (This one surprised me more than the Romney which was still a shocker.) Post your results. Also, some of the sections are expandable so don't forget to look at like Foreign Issues and answer the extra questions. My results= http://www.isidewith.com/results/11215062 Quote
Pliny Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) Here's a simple survey that will line you up with the Presidential Candidate you have the most in common with. I ended up with my top two of 95% Ron Paul and 95% Gary Johnson with like 76% with Romney (lol wut?) only 9% with Obama (This one surprised me more than the Romney which was still a shocker.) Post your results. Also, some of the sections are expandable so don't forget to look at like Foreign Issues and answer the extra questions. My results= http://www.isidewith.com/results/11215062 Here's my results. http://www.isidewith.com/results/11614888 98% Ron Paul 97% Gary Johnson 68% Virgil Goode (whoever that is) 64% Romney 7% Obama and 54% American Voters Edited July 13, 2012 by Pliny Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Pliny Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 It doesn't matter who the candidate is since people are voting on a fundamental issue. What was the fundamental issue in 1860? Contrary to popular indoctrination it wasn't the emancipation of slaves. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
-TSS- Posted July 14, 2012 Report Posted July 14, 2012 Obama is not going to get all the delegates behind him in the Democratic-convention. The voters in one county in West-Virginia considered an incarcerated felon running for the party-nomination a better choice than the incumbent president. Quote
Shady Posted July 14, 2012 Report Posted July 14, 2012 The current economic illiterate-in-chief actually said that Romney isn't qualified to think about the economy as a whole. This from the guy that's never had a job in the private sector in his life, and in terms of the economy, couldn't find his a$$ from a hole in the ground. Obama: Romney Not Very "Qualified To Think About The Economy As A WholeRCP Quote
Pliny Posted July 14, 2012 Report Posted July 14, 2012 The current economic illiterate-in-chief actually said that Romney isn't qualified to think about the economy as a whole. This from the guy that's never had a job in the private sector in his life, and in terms of the economy, couldn't find his a$$ from a hole in the ground. True. It seems the more socialist a politician the less he knows about economics.....and some claim he isn't a socialist...as though being a socialist means the politician has to immediately institute the total state and become dictator. Socialism is an evolutionary "progressive" process towards Despotism. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
BubberMiley Posted July 14, 2012 Report Posted July 14, 2012 Socialism is an evolutionary "progressive" process towards Despotism. That is, an arbitrary label used by conservatives to characterize people they disagree with. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
bleeding heart Posted July 14, 2012 Report Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) That is, an arbitrary label used by conservatives to characterize people they disagree with. Oh, yes. You'll note that Pliny plays the "conservatives do it too," card....which is quickly banished from his thoughts once the specifics of the Evil (those to the left of...himself) need to be eviscerated. Edited July 14, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Pliny Posted July 15, 2012 Report Posted July 15, 2012 That is, an arbitrary label used by conservatives to characterize people they disagree with. Funny I should be saying that. I am not politically what is known as a conservative. "Classical liberal" would be more correct but since liberalism has been morphed into "progressivism" and adopted most of the socialist dogma count me out of the neo-liberalism. If you have any means to differentiate between what I am politically and what I am socially I will say I do hold conservative social values. Is that an understandable thing or is it just confusing? Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Pliny Posted July 15, 2012 Report Posted July 15, 2012 Oh, yes. You'll note that Pliny plays the "conservatives do it too," card....which is quickly banished from his thoughts once the specifics of the Evil (those to the left of...himself) need to be eviscerated. Since the whole left side of the political spectrum has been infiltrated by socialists and socialist concepts of the welfare state, I find myself by default on the right side of the spectrum but not entirely at ease with the warfare state it is inclined to favour. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
bleeding heart Posted July 15, 2012 Report Posted July 15, 2012 Since the whole left side of the political spectrum has been infiltrated by socialists and socialist concepts of the welfare state, I find myself by default on the right side of the spectrum but not entirely at ease with the warfare state it is inclined to favour. "Infiltrated," even! One might counter with a popular conservative platitude--"personal responsibility"--and insist that the socialists can't be blamed for what their self-described enemies commit to. That, in brief, conservative is what conservative does. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.