Brother_Tempus posted:

---

My take on the caucus

Romney, Santorum, and Paul took the same amount of delegates .. so this is a 3 way tie. Anyone who says Romney one is showing the ignorance of the political system the lamestream media is hopping for.

Paul doubled his total from 2008 while Romney got less than what he received in 2008.

Iowa delegates are not bound to the person they are assigned to represent and it looks like Dr. Paul's people stayed around and got the necessay county delegate seats

Source : http://www.businessinsider.com/ron-paul-winner-iowa-caucuses-strategy-201201


NH is now a 2 man race between Romney and Paul

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

How about this. If Ron Paul gets the nomination I will never post here again.

---

Fozzie_Bear posted:

---

I was reading that a substantial portion of the people signed on for Ron Paul right now are registered independent and thats not going to help him when only registered republicans can sign on for him in the primary

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

How about this. If Ron Paul gets the nomination I will never post here again.

---

i never bet with fools who have shown themselves to be liars

---

Fozzie_Bear posted:

---

I was reading that a substantial portion of the people signed on for Ron Paul right now are registered independent and thats not going to help him when only registered republicans can sign on for him in the primary

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

How about this. If Ron Paul gets the nomination I will never post here again.

---

i never bet with fools who have shown themselves to be liars

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

No real need to fight back, BT is proving to everyone right now that he is nothing but a troll, if he actually believed any of this garbage he would gladly do this. He isnt stupid, he knows Paul stands less of a chance of getting elected than I do.

---

Walker_ID posted:

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

No real need to fight back, BT is proving to everyone right now that he is nothing but a troll, if he actually believed any of this garbage he would gladly do this. He isnt stupid, he knows Paul stands less of a chance of getting elected than I do.

---

you have faulty logic or just trolling.....either way i'm eating tacos at 9:30 am so i am happy either way

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

How about this. If Ron Paul gets the nomination I will never post here again. If Ron Paul doesnt get the nomination you will never post here again.


Ron Paul stands little to no chance to win because his numbers even within the GOP are really horrid, if he cant even get support from within the GOP he wont win. I realize in BT's case this is just trolling, but anyone that realistically thinks Ron Paul stands any chance at all is drinking too much kool-aid.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Ron Paul is the only shot the GOP has at winning the general election. The GOP fails to recognize that Ron Paul supporters are not going to support any other candidate but I think they are fine with that as Obama is practically a Republican himself. Plus, the only shot the GOP has at independent and moderate voters is Ron Paul. The rest of the candidates will get the Republican base only.

I do think it's in the best interest of the US for the Republicans to win this election because if we have another 4 years of Obama, there is going to be a lot more momentum to swing HARD right and who knows what kind of crazy the GOP will put up in 2016.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Ron Paul is the only shot the GOP has at winning the general election. The GOP fails to recognize that Ron Paul supporters are not going to support any other candidate but I think they are fine with that as Obama is practically a Republican himself. Plus, the only shot the GOP has at independent and moderate voters is Ron Paul. The rest of the candidates will get the Republican base only.

I do think it's in the best interest of the US for the Republicans to win this election because if we have another 4 years of Obama, there is going to be a lot more momentum to swing HARD right and who knows what kind of crazy the GOP will put up in 2016.

---

Except that Paul is doing extremely poorly with rank and file republicans. He does really well with the independants and his supporters are extremely vocal but rank and file GOP voters do not like him at all, and wont vote for him. Without that support he stands zero chance. He'd get killed in an actual general election.

I agree with the Romney stuff though, like I said, there is zero difference between Romney and Obama

---

AgzntOrange2 posted:

---

The mega rich think they can do anything due to their green-backs.

---

Motar98 posted:

---

how did palin do

---

Mangler_SC posted:

---

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Romney obviously probably is way out front right now, mostly because he is the only person anyone living in reality thinks can beat Obama, although he and Obama are essentiallly the same person so I dont know why it matters.

Santorum will run out of steam because he cant carry a non-bible thumping state.

Ron Paul is DOA after Iowa, his negative numbers in the GOP are way too high. He really needed momentum from Iowa and failed to get it. May run as an independant though to ensure an Obama victory.

Perry, apparently Combat Mage was his only supporter, went back to Texas to "reassess him campaign" and quit before he wastes any more money.

Michele Bachman isnt as smart as Perry, she will continue to waste money (for now). Shes toast though.

Gingrich, I think the next set of primary states are critical for him, he has to show well in South Carolina.

Huntsman, should have at least showed his face in Iowa.

---

JD_HOGG posted:

---

I will vote for Romney because so many don't want him. I love seeing people get mad about politics.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

JD_HOGG posted:

---

I will vote for Romney because so many don't want him. I love seeing people get mad about politics.

---

But Romney won't win the general election so it really hurts Republicans to vote for him, but like has been said, Obama and Romney are close enough to the same that it doesn't matter.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

JD_HOGG posted:

---

I will vote for Romney because so many don't want him. I love seeing people get mad about politics.

---

But Romney won't win the general election so it really hurts Republicans to vote for him, but like has been said, Obama and Romney are close enough to the same that it doesn't matter.

---

its also been shown that Paul wont, but you still support him so its really no different.

---

combat_mage_sc posted:

---

Romney is another big gubment tyrant. I'd be reluctant to vote for him if he got the nom.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Paul adds a dynamic to the election that hasn't been seen in decades. Romney is just a regular GOP candidate who will continued the same failed policies as both the Obama and Bush administrations. There's no doubt in my mind that Paul would draw a significant number of Liberals and Moderates who are jaded by Obama's assault on our civil liberties.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Ron Paul is DOA after Iowa

---

faefrost posted:

---

if Ron Paul could not eek out something stronger than a meager and weak third place finish in a caucus he will be in single digits in an actual Primary state where it is harder to concentrate his hardened supporters.

---

Ptilk posted:

---

Mittens will get the nomination and will lose in the general election. Just like the Illuminati (AKA rich guys who care about politics) decided back in 2008.

---

Element_X posted:

---

I love it when Ron Paul people say they will teach this country a lesson by staying home on election day if hes not the Republican nominee. Just goes to show what a bunch of spoiled irrational babies most of them are. I predict no matter who the nominee is, he will be undermined by the Ron Paul people and lose in the general election to Obama.

Unless Ron Paul is the nominee, then Obama will just destroy him in a landslide anyway.

---

faefrost posted:

---

Right now Romney is sitting in the Reagan seat. He may not be the ideal choice of most of his party, but he is most certainly 1000x better than what is sitting in the White House at the time. It won't matter if Conservatives think he isn't conservative enough. It won't matter if he is a Mormon and thus scares a portion of his base. So long as they can keep Ron Paul from running independent and acting as a spoiler Romney would be a fairly easy Republican win. Just so long as he doesn't have 3 living wives or 1 dead hooker somewhere in his closet.

if Ron Paul could not eek out something stronger than a meager and weak third place finish in a caucus he will be in single digits in an actual Primary state where it is harder to concentrate his hardened supporters.

Santorum pulled out a surprise in Iowa, but it took everything he had to do it, and there is very little chance of him doing it again. Yeah he is a strong "social issues" candidate. But you can only take that so far this year. I think his support was more a "go home byotch" to Bachmann than it was a show of support. Once again he will not do well in a general primary. He just doesn't have a sufficient machine in enough states.

Bachmann is done. She should never have been there to begin with. Every word out of her mouth was whiny amateur hour. she has no executive leadership experience and no clue. She proved herself a complete and foolish narcissist and probably set back women in politics for at least several election cycles.

Perry is done. He has already retreated to Texas.

Huntsman was never ever in the game, ever.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Element_X posted:

---

I love it when Ron Paul people say they will teach this country a lesson by staying home on election day if hes not the Republican nominee. Just goes to show what a bunch of spoiled irrational babies most of them are. I predict no matter who the nominee is, he will be undermined by the Ron Paul people and lose in the general election to Obama.

Unless Ron Paul is the nominee, then Obama will just destroy him in a landslide anyway.

---

What? How does that make Ron Paul supporters "spoiled irrational babies"? People are sick of the status quo and that's all Romney is. It may or may not be a representative sample but most Paul supporters I've seen online said they will vote third party or write in Ron Paul if he isn't on the ticket. It's the only way to get your voice taken seriously IMO. You have to show that you will stick to your guns if the Republican Party wants to continue nominating terrible candidates, one after the other. Neo-conservatives have been in power in the Republican party for over 20 years now, and it obviously isn't working, why continue the trend?

---

Element_X posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Element_X posted:

---

I love it when Ron Paul people say they will teach this country a lesson by staying home on election day if hes not the Republican nominee. Just goes to show what a bunch of spoiled irrational babies most of them are. I predict no matter who the nominee is, he will be undermined by the Ron Paul people and lose in the general election to Obama.

Unless Ron Paul is the nominee, then Obama will just destroy him in a landslide anyway.

---

What? How does that make Ron Paul supporters "spoiled irrational babies"? People are sick of the status quo and that's all Romney is. It may or may not be a representative sample but most Paul supporters I've seen online said they will vote third party or write in Ron Paul if he isn't on the ticket. It's the only way to get your voice taken seriously IMO. You have to show that you will stick to your guns if the Republican Party wants to continue nominating terrible candidates, one after the other. Neo-conservatives have been in power in the Republican party for over 20 years now, and it obviously isn't working, why continue the trend?

---

I understand how you feel, irrational as it is. See, I dont think Dr Suess could come up with a more laughable candidate than Ron Paul. Even scarier, is that you Ron Paul fans might as well be David Koresh followers with your cult-like, tunnel-visioned devotion. I haven't seen such political devotion since Hitler.

I tell you what. If Ron Paul gets the nomination, I'll write in someone else or vote for Obama just to keep Ron Paul from getting access to the presidency and giving any confirmation to Ron Paul supporters. Not worth it.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Element_X posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

[quote=Element_X]I love it when Ron Paul people say they will teach this country a lesson by staying home on election day if hes not the Republican nominee. Just goes to show what a bunch of spoiled irrational babies most of them are. I predict no matter who the nominee is, he will be undermined by the Ron Paul people and lose in the general election to Obama.

Unless Ron Paul is the nominee, then Obama will just destroy him in a landslide anyway.

---

What? How does that make Ron Paul supporters "spoiled irrational babies"? People are sick of the status quo and that's all Romney is. It may or may not be a representative sample but most Paul supporters I've seen online said they will vote third party or write in Ron Paul if he isn't on the ticket. It's the only way to get your voice taken seriously IMO. You have to show that you will stick to your guns if the Republican Party wants to continue nominating terrible candidates, one after the other. Neo-conservatives have been in power in the Republican party for over 20 years now, and it obviously isn't working, why continue the trend?

---

I understand how you feel, irrational as it is. See, I dont think Dr Suess could come up with a more laughable candidate than Ron Paul. Even scarier, is that you Ron Paul fans might as well be David Koresh followers with your cult-like, tunnel-visioned devotion. I haven't seen such political devotion since Hitler.

I tell you what. If Ron Paul gets the nomination, I'll write in someone else or vote for Obama just to keep Ron Paul from getting access to the presidency and giving any confirmation to Ron Paul supporters. Not worth it.

---

Myn_Darklighter posted:

---

faefrost posted:

---

if Ron Paul could not eek out something stronger than a meager and weak third place finish in a caucus he will be in single digits in an actual Primary state where it is harder to concentrate his hardened supporters.

---

What is your definition of weak and meager?
Mitt Romney 30,015 24.6%
Rick Santorum 30,007 24.5%
Ron Paul 26,219 21.4%
Newt Gingrich 16,251 13.3%
Rick Perry 12,604 10.3%
Michele Bachmann 6,073 5%

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

Actually, you probably don't understand how I feel, because something remotely close to your ideal candidate has been nominated for the Presidency since 1992. The Republican model of the past 20 years... DOES NOT WORK.

And just so you know, people who make comparisons to Hitler, are generally considered the irrational ones..

---

Element_X posted:

---

I completely agree with Faefrost. My complaint is more with Ron Paul supporters (aka hale bop comet wannabe spazzoids) than Ron Paul. Ron Paul's foreign policy ideas make him unelectable in any major election. Also, the fact that he spent decades in Congress and only passed 1 piece of legislation makes him a crappy leader. BUT, and this is a big but, I hope whoever the nominee is recognizes that his fiscal ideas and portions of his platform really resonate with people, and should not be ignored. He has much to contribute in that way and I hope he is treated with respect when this is all settled. I would love to see him take a more prominent role. Maybe his chanting, eyes-rolled-into-the-back-of-their-heads, batsh*t crazy followers can find that acceptable. We can only hope.

---

Mangler_SC posted:

---

Why can't we just get Bill Clinton back again?

---

faefrost posted:

---

Mangler_SC posted:

---

Why can't we just get Bill Clinton back again?

---

Did you see the interview he did with Bill O'Reilly a week or two ago? I'm not a Bill Clinton fan, I'm very much a Reagan Republican (the real type, not the revisionist Sean Hanity type tyvm) but I gotta give the man credit where credit was due. O'Reilly asked him a ton of hard, fair and appropriate questions. Tough stuff. and on every one, at every beat Clinton responded just absolutely perfectly. It was striking at how well he came accoss, and how much he still can inspire and seem presidential. Particularly when contrasted with the entire GOP field and most notably the current occupier of the White House.

---

Element_X posted:

---

I completely agree with Faefrost. My complaint is more with Ron Paul supporters (aka hale bop comet wannabe spazzoids) than Ron Paul. Ron Paul's foreign policy ideas make him unelectable in any major election. Also, the fact that he spent decades in Congress and only passed 1 piece of legislation makes him a crappy leader. BUT, and this is a big but, I hope whoever the nominee is recognizes that his fiscal ideas and portions of his platform really resonate with people, and should not be ignored. He has much to contribute in that way and I hope he is treated with respect when this is all settled. I would love to see him take a more prominent role. Maybe his chanting, eyes-rolled-into-the-back-of-their-heads, batsh*t crazy followers can find that acceptable. We can only hope.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

With the way you keep spouting off about how Ron Paul supporters are deluded and brainwashed, it makes me wonder if you are in touch with how most of the United States and the rest of the world views the Republican Party. I know you know that a huge chunk of Romney and Santorum supporters watch Fox News. And anyone who is honest with themselves knows that the network is full of misinformation and lies, that are personally catered to a specific right-wing crowd who wants their views validated. I fail to see how the people who value civil liberties and legitimate deficit reduction are the crazy ones while those who keep arguing for social conservatism, imperialism and a gross-expansion of government (which you've GOTTEN the past 20 years) are normal.

Ron Paul hasn't gotten much legislation passed, that's true, but our Congress has been creating ridiculous legislation over the past few decades so I'm willing to overlook that.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Uhh, Ron Paul isnt exactly the bastion of truth. He also is no where near for legitimate deficit reduction. You say that Fox viewers who are for Romney and Santorum are only getting their views validated but then you go off about Ron Paul who does the exact opposite of what you claim to have as your views but because he says things that arent true they validate your views. Ironing.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

I dont support Obama. I dont support anyone. I would find your reasoning valid, except Ron Paul has done exactly the opposite of what he says he is for. I just find your reasoning for supporting him quite odd since his track record shows he holds almost none of the values that he says he does and that you seem to be for. I also find it odd that you seem to be bashing those who support Romney for things he has done in his past but says he is now against, but you let Ron Paul slide even though he's done things in his past that are the opposite of what you say you are voting for him for.

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ron Paul's rabid followers have done soooo much to hurt the guy. It's sad that his long, mostly upstanding career will end with these morons running around fellating each other simply by mentioning his name. He seems like a decent enough, pretty genuine guy (especially for a politician) but wow, his supporters have just ripped his name to shreds.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Lets see, he is against subsidies, except for oil cause you know his buddies are in oil
He is for a smaller deficit, but we all know he isnt.
He is for civil liberties, but writes riders into bills that are against civil liberties
He didnt write racist newsletters under his own name, but cant tell us who did, and has several appearances with white supremists
I could go on and on.

The oddest thing about the rabid Ron Paul supporters is that they seem to know nothing actually about Ron Paul except for what they are told to believe about Ron Paul, its really strange. No one can tell me what he has actually done, and no one seems to know anything about how he actually operates, all they can tell me is what comes out of his mouth, which doesnt at all jive with what he does in reality.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

I'm not sure why my dislike of Ron Paul's dishonesty equates to liking Obama, I don't believe I've said much either for or against him. If you care to know my opinion on specific policies you can just ask. I've said many times I didn't vote for him.

Even if I did support him I'm not sure what that has to do with no one being able to tell me what Ron Paul has done to earn my belief his words will match his deeds. And once again saying you don't like what a politician is doing, yet you don't mind what Paul has actually done even when you apparently aren't for what he has done. Also tomorrow when I'm not on my iPad we can look at some of his riders, although much like his ear marks and spending you knew nothing about, I'm fairly certain you will excuse them away as insignificant


Edit god tying more than a sentence on this thing sucks

---

faefrost posted:

---

Mangler_SC posted:

---

Why can't we just get Bill Clinton back again?

---

Did you see the interview he did with Bill O'Reilly a week or two ago? I'm not a Bill Clinton fan, I'm very much a Reagan Republican (the real type, not the revisionist Sean Hanity type tyvm) but I gotta give the man credit where credit was due. O'Reilly asked him a ton of hard, fair and appropriate questions. Tough stuff. and on every one, at every beat Clinton responded just absolutely perfectly. It was striking at how well he came accoss, and how much he still can inspire and seem presidential. Particularly when contrasted with the entire GOP field and most notably the current occupier of the White House.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Romney obviously probably is way out front right now, mostly because he is the only person anyone living in reality thinks can beat Obama, although he and Obama are essentiallly the same person so I dont know why it matters.

Santorum will run out of steam because he cant carry a non-bible thumping state.

Ron Paul is DOA after Iowa, his negative numbers in the GOP are way too high. He really needed momentum from Iowa and failed to get it. May run as an independant though to ensure an Obama victory.

Perry, apparently Combat Mage was his only supporter, went back to Texas to "reassess him campaign" and quit before he wastes any more money.

Michele Bachman isnt as smart as Perry, she will continue to waste money (for now). Shes toast though.

Gingrich, I think the next set of primary states are critical for him, he has to show well in South Carolina.

Huntsman, should have at least showed his face in Iowa.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

I'd like to see these riders. But as for the earmarks, of course I'm going to file them away as insignificant... because they amount to nothing compared to the total expenditures.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ron Paul's rabid followers have done soooo much to hurt the guy. It's sad that his long, mostly upstanding career will end with these morons running around fellating each other simply by mentioning his name. He seems like a decent enough, pretty genuine guy (especially for a politician) but wow, his supporters have just ripped his name to shreds.

---

Coming from an Obama supporter that is downright hilarious.

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

What is wrong with you?

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ron Paul's rabid followers have done soooo much to hurt the guy. It's sad that his long, mostly upstanding career will end with these morons running around fellating each other simply by mentioning his name. He seems like a decent enough, pretty genuine guy (especially for a politician) but wow, his supporters have just ripped his name to shreds.

---

Coming from an Obama supporter that is downright hilarious.

---

Lulwut?? You're pathetic. You're just slapping that butthurt "obama supporter" label on whoever disagree with with no justification whatsoever. Me, Cutt....... somehow because we aren't fuming over the guy that makes us huge supporters. Because if we aren't creating threads to crap on him, that means we want to jerk him off.

What is wrong with you?

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

How is that pathetic? First you insult the supporters of a guy that people are flocking to because they are sick of the status quo, then you act all taken aback when I find the hypocrisy of it hilarious. I distinctly remember you, Mforce2k, along with a huge majority of the youth vote, being obsessed with Obama from 08 - 10. What the hell is wrong with you? Is your memory that short?

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

Arguing about Ron Paul is stupid because other then getting his message heard he is really accomplishing nothing. He has no chance to get elected president and no chance of even winning the primary.


I applaud the guy for at least making an effort to get his views heard but like I said that's all he can really hope to accomplish.

Anyone that would remove all our foreign bases and bring most of our troops home is crazy. First of all I love the idea but do you really think our corporate masters would allow someone to just give up on all our conquest ? The answer is no therefore he would never be allowed to be sworn into office.

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

Complain about the parties being the same
Complain politicians aren't honest
Complain about corruption.
Complain when Ron Paul comes along, speaks honestly, and would actually clean things up in government.

Cuttlery in a nutshell.

Sure will be pissed when Ron Paul wins New Hampshire.

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

Arguing about Ron Paul is stupid because other then getting his message heard he is really accomplishing nothing. He has no chance to get elected president and no chance of even winning the primary.


I applaud the guy for at least making an effort to get his views heard but like I said that's all he can really hope to accomplish.

Anyone that would remove all our foreign bases and bring most of our troops home is crazy. First of all I love the idea but do you really think our corporate masters would allow someone to just give up on all our conquest ? The answer is no therefore he would never be allowed to be sworn into office.

---

Since 4 years ago, Ron Paul's support has only grown. Parroting that he can't be president won't make it true, you're just repeating what the media tells you to believe. You sound like a devoted Fox News viewer honestly.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

Complain about the parties being the same
Complain politicians aren't honest
Complain about corruption.
Complain when Ron Paul comes along, speaks honestly, and would actually clean things up in government.

Cuttlery in a nutshell.

Sure will be pissed when Ron Paul wins New Hampshire.

---

Already proven that Ron Paul definately isnt honest, and wouldnt clean up washington.

However would you care to place a friendly wager on the New Hampshire prediction?

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

Arguing about Ron Paul is stupid because other then getting his message heard he is really accomplishing nothing. He has no chance to get elected president and no chance of even winning the primary.


I applaud the guy for at least making an effort to get his views heard but like I said that's all he can really hope to accomplish.

Anyone that would remove all our foreign bases and bring most of our troops home is crazy. First of all I love the idea but do you really think our corporate masters would allow someone to just give up on all our conquest ? The answer is no therefore he would never be allowed to be sworn into office.

---

Since 4 years ago, Ron Paul's support has only grown. Parroting that he can't be president won't make it true, you're just repeating what the media tells you to believe. You sound like a devoted Fox News viewer honestly.

---

even if he got the votes the establishments that truly run this country would just fix the results saying he lost.

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

BritonGuy posted:

---

[quote=suntzukali2]Arguing about Ron Paul is stupid because other then getting his message heard he is really accomplishing nothing. He has no chance to get elected president and no chance of even winning the primary.


I applaud the guy for at least making an effort to get his views heard but like I said that's all he can really hope to accomplish.

Anyone that would remove all our foreign bases and bring most of our troops home is crazy. First of all I love the idea but do you really think our corporate masters would allow someone to just give up on all our conquest ? The answer is no therefore he would never be allowed to be sworn into office.

---

Since 4 years ago, Ron Paul's support has only grown. Parroting that he can't be president won't make it true, you're just repeating what the media tells you to believe. You sound like a devoted Fox News viewer honestly.

---

even if he got the votes the establishments that truly run this country would just fix the results saying he lost.

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

How is that pathetic? First you insult the supporters of a guy that people are flocking to because they are sick of the status quo, then you act all taken aback when I find the hypocrisy of it hilarious. I distinctly remember you, Mforce2k, along with a huge majority of the youth vote, being obsessed with Obama from 08 - 10. What the hell is wrong with you? Is your memory that short?

---

suntzukali2 posted:

---

I do just like I know all your doing is attention seeking and trolling

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

What you're doing is taking my efforts to call out the partisan hackery bull**** this board suffers from. The most vocal political people on this hate the guy, so they only post things to slam him. Just because they seem to scurry away whenever he does something good and I choose to go "oh hey, look what this Guy did. Where is everyone?" Is far from an obsession.

My personal feelings are that he has done an ok job. Not sure I would vote for him in 2012 but I sure don't see anyone better out there.

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

How is that pathetic? First you insult the supporters of a guy that people are flocking to because they are sick of the status quo, then you act all taken aback when I find the hypocrisy of it hilarious. I distinctly remember you, Mforce2k, along with a huge majority of the youth vote, being obsessed with Obama from 08 - 10. What the hell is wrong with you? Is your memory that short?

---

It is pathetic because you're improperly personalizing it. I have no idea how you are picking me out of a crowd. I am in no way shape or form obsessed with the guy. All I have done since he was elected was post the occasional article or participate in a discussion, sometimes for him and sometimes against him. Hey, he is the President. He is kind of discussionworthy. But I have openly railed him on certain policies, like the pipeline and his inability to simply label certain events terrorism.

What you're doing is taking my efforts to call out the partisan hackery bull**** this board suffers from. The most vocal political people on this board hate the guy, so they only post things to slam him. Just because they seem to scurry away whenever he does something good and I choose to go "oh hey, look what this Guy did. Where is everyone?" Is far from an obsession. Being anti troll doesn't equate to pro anything else.


My personal feelings are that he has done an ok job. Not sure I would vote for him in 2012 but I sure don't see anyone better out there.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

How is that pathetic? First you insult the supporters of a guy that people are flocking to because they are sick of the status quo, then you act all taken aback when I find the hypocrisy of it hilarious. I distinctly remember you, Mforce2k, along with a huge majority of the youth vote, being obsessed with Obama from 08 - 10. What the hell is wrong with you? Is your memory that short?

---

But again you find nothing wrong with your own hypocrisy of who you are supporting even though he has proven he is nothing he says he is...

Again, Ironing.

---

Cuttlery posted:

---

Ron Paul said the other day that the sky is purple and made of skittles, thats why we know Global warming is a lie. God Bless Skittles!

---

notmforce2k posted:

---

Ex-remlocke posted:

---

How is that pathetic? First you insult the supporters of a guy that people are flocking to because they are sick of the status quo, then you act all taken aback when I find the hypocrisy of it hilarious. I distinctly remember you, Mforce2k, along with a huge majority of the youth vote, being obsessed with Obama from 08 - 10. What the hell is wrong with you? Is your memory that short?

---

It is pathetic because you're improperly personalizing it. I have no idea how you are picking me out of a crowd. I am in no way shape or form obsessed with the guy. All I have done since he was elected was post the occasional article or participate in a discussion, sometimes for him and sometimes against him. Hey, he is the President. He is kind of discussionworthy. But I have openly railed him on certain policies, like the pipeline and his inability to simply label certain events terrorism.

What you're doing is taking my efforts to call out the partisan hackery bull**** this board suffers from. The most vocal political people on this board hate the guy, so they only post things to slam him. Just because they seem to scurry away whenever he does something good and I choose to go "oh hey, look what this Guy did. Where is everyone?" Is far from an obsession. Being anti troll doesn't equate to pro anything else.


My personal feelings are that he has done an ok job. Not sure I would vote for him in 2012 but I sure don't see anyone better out there.

---

Varece posted:

---

Rho is correct.

---