I hope that Romney loses and loses BIG!

[a777pilot]

Romney wins with 320 Electoral College votes.

 

[Atreus21]

I think a lot of people confuse "neither party is perfect" with "they're both exactly as bad". Think about it, how likely does it sound that the Democratic and Republican parties are IDENTICALLY bad? Is it really less reasonable to say one of the two is better? In the vast majority of cases where you're presented with two options, it is indeed possible to pick one as being better. I don't see why politics should be any different.

Yes, but our party is better than yours.

 

[nehalem256]

So find me a national democratic leader who believes peanut butter and Jelly sandwiches are an example of racism. This is the kind of dumbfuckery the Republican party is good at.

I do not have one of those off the top of my head

But please consider this quote from Hillary Clinton (former Senator, almost President, and current Secretary of State)

Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

According to her if you get your head blown off your wife(or mother) is the primary victim :hmm:

 

[jackstar7]

That isn't a lie. Do some research. REAL research. Not media, not news. But yoru own research. Both parties are just as bad. I will agree republican's candidate is a madman. But that doesnt necessarily make the party or even himself a worse party. Because The devil himself can look suave and smile to the face of his prey.

But thank you guys for proving my point on people being blinded to one side.

Oh oh oh. I need to do "real" research.

I'm clearly the ignorant one here. And I'm sure cybr will be along to pull my quote there and "agree".

I understand and thank you for imparting your insight of... wait... shit... you didn't say anything. You're actually just sticking to your point and backing it up with nothing.

This right here... it's me being critical of what you're positing because you've backed it up with nothing. I'm skeptical and it's justified.

Now, go find the equivalent of a state Democratic Party platform that wants to remove critical thinking.

 

[diesbudt]

I do not have one of those off the top of my head

But please consider this quote from Hillary Clinton (former Senator, almost President, and current Secretary of State)


http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

According to her if you get your head blown off your wife(or mother) is the primary victim :hmm:

To be fair, you can't really be a victim anymore if your dead.

 

[dank69]

That isn't a lie. Do some research. REAL research. Not media, not news. But yoru own research. Both parties are just as bad. I will agree republican's candidate is a madman. But that doesnt necessarily make the party or even himself a worse party. Because The devil himself can look suave and smile to the face of his prey.

But thank you guys for proving my point on people being blinded to one side.

You are fucking retarded. Look at the people who ran against Romney for the nomination. He was their BEST choice. The Republican Party as it stands today is a total fucking joke to all but the most blindly partisan and mentally challenged.

 

[jackstar7]

But please consider this quote from Hillary Clinton (former Senator, almost President, and current Secretary of State)


http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

According to her if you get your head blown off your wife(or mother) is the primary victim :hmm:

I've given it some consideration.

Now, what was your point?

 

[waggy]

I dont want him to win but I dont want him to lose big, either.
I want Obama to just barely win that way people know he isnt as loved as he was 4 years ago.

/this

i don't think Romney will win. I do suspect it will be close though.

 

[DominionSeraph]

But because, and only because, this forum would EXPLODE with a lot of amusing posts for months to come after the election to give me entertainment.

You'd see far more out of the conservatards if Obama wins.
The main argument against Romney is that his real feelings are unknown, not that he's the embodiment of the liberal antichrist. He was the governor of Massachusetts FFS -- that's practically the mayor of San Francisco as far as social conservatism goes. We're really not afraid that he's going to up and declare Southern Baptism as the national religion.

Romney's really a "meh" candidate. He's shown that he can't even handle campaigning, so if elected we expect that he'll flub it, but who cares? After Obama's success, the economy's on its way up and Romney ain't gonna stop it. The office of the President is pretty well checked on other fronts, so if he's effectively a lame duck after a couple of months of hilarious incompetence, the country will still get by just fine without him.

 

[nehalem256]

I've given it some consideration.

Now, what was your point?

That Democrats are just as crazy as Republicans.

 

[diesbudt]

Oh oh oh. I need to do "real" research.

I'm clearly the ignorant one here. And I'm sure cybr will be along to pull my quote there and "agree".

I understand and thank you for imparting your insight of... wait... shit... you didn't say anything. You're actually just sticking to your point and backing it up with nothing.

This right here... it's me being critical of what you're positing because you've backed it up with nothing. I'm skeptical and it's justified.

Now, go find the equivalent of a state Democratic Party platform that wants to remove critical thinking.

Well you just proved that you have 0 understanding on debates. (Bolded). No I will flip-flop my point and agree with you because that is what we do in debates amirite?

And I will not waste my time giving evidence to someone who isn't willing to look into it with their own eyes.

As they say "Those who believe, there will always be enough evidence and those that don't will not."

And I never said that at this precise moment, Obama isn't a better candidate than Romney. (Romney is crazy) What I am saying though is both parties are just as evil. Only caring about their own policies, lying all the way to the bank, and not the citizens of this country.

 

[Rainsford]

Yes, but our party is better than yours.

Heh, well I didn't say we all have to AGREE on which party is the better choice And we can always change our minds.

 

[diesbudt]

You'd see far more out of the conservatards if Obama wins.
The main argument against Romney is that his real feelings are unknown, not that he's the embodiment of the liberal antichrist. He was the governor of Massachusetts FFS -- that's practically the mayor of San Francisco as far as social conservatism goes. We're really not afraid that he's going to up and declare Southern Baptism as the national religion.

Romney's really a "meh" candidate. He's shown that he can't even handle campaigning, so if elected we expect that he'll flub it, but who cares? After Obama's success, the economy's on its way up and Romney ain't gonna stop it. The office of the President is pretty well checked on other fronts, so if he's effectively a lame duck after a couple of months of hilarious incompetence, the country will still get by just fine without him.

Not exactly true. Obama is already president. First week may have a few posts that are amusing. But nothing really has changed since 4 years ago with Obama still in office. So we will see the same old same old.

With Romeny, that will bring a huge shift/change to government (for better or worse) that will bring this forum into a frenzy for a while, especially from the few posters that, in a crazy sense, believe in their party to no fault.

 

[kage69]

Fine. Stay blinded. I am not saying the republican CURRENT candidate is not bat crazy. However Obama has spoke/posted just as many lies if not more because of him being in the light, as the actual president, longer than Romney.

It is people like you who should not be taken seriously keeping your mind closed to only 1 side.

The REALLY crazy ones are Phokus or however you spell it and cyber. They defend EVERY action their party does as if God did it itself, and spin it in such a light that if you dont just slightly research it you would agree. I wanna see those 2 debate for real. Webcam show go.

...says the hatemonger with his head stuck in the sand. Jesus, what is it with you guys and the 4th grade level "Nuh uh! You are!" projections?


You've already invalidated yourself by parroting a complete lie, adjusting your position along with the goalposts isn't magically restoring any of your credibility, sorry.

More observation, less partisan hyperbole please. Your viewpoint towards the topic and those disagreeing with your partisan attempt at objectivity is simply not supported by the facts. Either deal with it or expect to be dismissed as yet another shill, your call.

 

[Rainsford]

Romney wins with 320 Electoral College votes.

That seems fairly unlikely at this point. Polls and more importantly, careful analysis of the polls, suggests Romney is likely to lose. And even if he does win, it doesn't seem very likely it would be by that kind of electoral margin. Based on the polls right now, the fivethirtyeight blog (which is usually pretty good) projects him winning an average of 225 electoral votes. Obviously a lot can happen between now and election day, but that's a pretty big gap between 225 and 320.

 

[diesbudt]

...says the hatemonger with his head stuck in the sand. Jesus, what is it with you guys and the 4th grade level "Nuh uh! You are!" projections?


You've already invalidated yourself by parroting a complete lie, adjusting your position along with the goalposts isn't magically restoring any of your credibility, sorry.

More observation, less partisan hyperbole please. Your viewpoint towards the topic and those disagreeing with your partisan attempt at objectivity is simply not supported by the facts. Either deal with it or expect to be dismissed as yet another shill, your call.

A) That isn't 4th grade, that is pure and simple words using no fancy adjectives, or abverbs to get a point across.

B) Invalidated myself by parroting a lie that you have not proven false in any way shape or form? And knowing it is a waste of time to try and prove something to someone who is so dead set in their beliefs is futile.

C) Partisan Hyperbole? Lets see... I have commented I think Obama is a better candidate, but also that the parties are equally evil to defend a blinded post about democrats are "so much better". Which means I jsut supported both parties. Yes I am very partisan.

D) You have given no supporting facts against me. So there is "no support by the facts" and I am not talking of just this very moment of Romney V Obama. I am talking the span of 50+ years of Democrats and Republicans who have been in office. Both parties are always looking for themselves over the citizens of the country.

And btw calling me a hatemonger when A) I don't hate people and B) then saying i am in 4th grade... geez what is up with that???

 

[diesbudt]

That seems fairly unlikely at this point. Polls and more importantly, careful analysis of the polls, suggests Romney is likely to lose. And even if he does win, it doesn't seem very likely it would be by that kind of electoral margin. Based on the polls right now, the fivethirtyeight blog (which is usually pretty good) projects him winning an average of 225 electoral votes. Obviously a lot can happen between now and election day, but that's a pretty big gap between 225 and 320.

Of course Romney will have an intense uphill battle, and it is more likely Obama will win.

But he has been posting that silly 320 votes for Romney for the last 3ish weeks.

 

[emperus]

I do not have one of those off the top of my head

But please consider this quote from Hillary Clinton (former Senator, almost President, and current Secretary of State)


http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

According to her if you get your head blown off your wife(or mother) is the primary victim :hmm:

Ok. Considered.. Now, what are you trying to say? But honestly, it is a losing argument for you.

 

[DominionSeraph]

With Romeny, that will bring a huge shift/change to government (for better or worse) that will bring this forum into a frenzy for a while, especially from the few posters that, in a crazy sense, believe in their party to no fault.

Nah, with Romney you're mostly going to see the conservatard shills repeat Fox News for four years. At least with Obama they've gone full retard.
You're just not going to see the same thing out of liberals if Romney is elected. We're not allowed to go full retard. We can't even do half. It's in the atheist Bible. "Thou shalt not be as dumb as a fucking Fundie."

 

[jackstar7]

That Democrats are just as crazy as Republicans.

Afraid I cannot reach that conclusion. You'll have to show your work in this compare and contrast exercise.

 

[jackstar7]

Well you just proved that you have 0 understanding on debates. (Bolded). No I will flip-flop my point and agree with you because that is what we do in debates amirite?

And I will not waste my time giving evidence to someone who isn't willing to look into it with their own eyes.

As they say "Those who believe, there will always be enough evidence and those that don't will not."

And I never said that at this precise moment, Obama isn't a better candidate than Romney. (Romney is crazy) What I am saying though is both parties are just as evil. Only caring about their own policies, lying all the way to the bank, and not the citizens of this country.

I believe you're saying you don't know how to debate. It's not about taking my side, it's about checking out my POV to see how it compares to yours.

Also, debates generally involve presenting evidence of your position.

And I'm still challenging you to show how both parties are "evil".

 

[feralkid]

Seriously. These idiots couldn't contrast and compare if their lives depended on it.

Indeed...

Hey let's all vote for the False Equivalency Party!

 

[PokerGuy]

If he wins another term, and doesn't keep his promises (including adding all those jobs), what will be the next action?

When he inevitably fails again, I'm sure the dimlibs will continue whining about the republicans obstructing. Standard operating procedure: when you fail, blame someone else.

 

[thraashman]

When he inevitably fails again, I'm sure the dimlibs will continue whining about the republicans obstructing. Standard operating procedure: when you fail, blame someone else.

So you're claiming that the Republicans haven't filibustered at a rate greater than that of any previous Senate minority in the history of this country? You're claiming that they didn't vote down the President's jobs bill proposal that has been considered the most comprehensive jbos bill put forth? You're claiming that Boehner didn't walk out of the debt reduction talks last year?

Because if you're making any of those claims you're either misinformed or lying.

 

[Matt1970]

So you're claiming that the Republicans haven't filibustered at a rate greater than that of any previous Senate minority in the history of this country? You're claiming that they didn't vote down the President's jobs bill proposal that has been considered the most comprehensive jbos bill put forth? You're claiming that Boehner didn't walk out of the debt reduction talks last year?

Because if you're making any of those claims you're either misinformed or lying.

Isn't this the same Senate that hasn't passed a budget in 3 years?