The revolution continues...

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Perry404
You can't discuss it in terms of the entire military with certainty because the entire military did not donate.

...which is exactly what you and Bamacre have been trying to do, and which has been mine and LK's entire fucking point!!!!

/clap

Even knowing that hasn't stopped you jokers (Paulbots) from making ridiculous assertions like "RP has the military's support" or "RP has more military support than any other candidate"

I just wish you'd picked up on all of this with my very first reply, it would have saved us some time... but you're a bit slowwww...

Originally posted by: palehorse74
In essence, the only thing you can accurately claim is this: Of the already small percentage of troops who actively contribute to political campaigns, most of them contributed to RP.

GG.

 

[Sinsear]

Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Perry404
You can't discuss it in terms of the entire military with certainty because the entire military did not donate.

...which is exactly what you and Bamacre have been trying to do, and which has been mine and LK's entire fucking point!!!!

/clap

Even knowing that hasn't stopped you jokers (Paulbots) from making ridiculous assertions like "RP has the military's support" or "RP has more military support than any other candidate"

I just wish you'd picked up on all of this with my very first reply, it would have saved us some time... but you're a bit slowwww...

Originally posted by: palehorse74
In essence, the only thing you can accurately claim is this: Of the already small percentage of troops who actively contribute to political campaigns, most of them contributed to RP.

GG.

Nice work on the math here in this thread PH.


On another note, I was deployed during the 2004 election to Iraq. I remember when the absentee ballots came. 89 guys in our battery, ony 2 of us voted ( I was one). 1 for Kerry, 1 for Bush. It was really sad actually, that only 2 people would take the time to vote and send it back in. Hell, the postage was even free.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Sinsear



On another note, I was deployed during the 2004 election to Iraq. I remember when the absentee ballots came. 89 guys in our battery, ony 2 of us voted ( I was one). 1 for Kerry, 1 for Bush. It was really sad actually, that only 2 people would take the time to vote and send it back in. Hell, the postage was even free.

I was the same way. That is until my eyes were opened.
Wake up man. You're not going to win the war against "terrorism" any more than you can win a war against "gorilla warfare". It's a tactic not an entity.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

No, it starts with a group of men who have a stance that the majority of others agree with because they have a common problem that can be translated into a reasonable movement.

Ron Paul talks about shit that isn't even a problem and he can't even frame the real problem in anything but bullshit and conspiracy theories.

That's why your "revolution" failed. Because you don't represent anybody who is reasonable.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

No, it starts with a group of men who have a stance that the majority of others agree with because they have a common problem that can be translated into a reasonable movement.

Ron Paul talks about shit that isn't even a problem and he can't even frame the real problem in anything but bullshit and conspiracy theories.

That's why your "revolution" failed. Because you don't represent anybody who is reasonable.

You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Perry404
You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

LOL!! Where have I heard this before?!...

oh, you kids are just so darn cute... with your "interwebz" and your "revolutions"...

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

No, it starts with a group of men who have a stance that the majority of others agree with because they have a common problem that can be translated into a reasonable movement.

Ron Paul talks about shit that isn't even a problem and he can't even frame the real problem in anything but bullshit and conspiracy theories.

That's why your "revolution" failed. Because you don't represent anybody who is reasonable.

You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

I suppose if you want to be a despot, then you don't need a majority to agree and carry the revolution.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Perry404
You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

LOL!! Where have I heard this before?!...

oh, you kids are just so darn cute... with your "interwebz" and your "revolutions"...

Find me one Ron Paul supporter who reveres Ross Perot to the same degree.
I'll tell you right now that what you and many others do not understand about Ron Paul supporters is that they are as fervent, loyal & dedicated as any John Kennedy or Martin Luther King supporter.
People in the dark will continue to compare Paul with Howard Dean Ross Perot but I tell you there is no comparison. Ross Perots people went away. Howard Deans people went away. I promise you Ron Pauls supporters are not going away.
All because the truth sets you free.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Perry404
You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

LOL!! Where have I heard this before?!...

oh, you kids are just so darn cute... with your "interwebz" and your "revolutions"...

Find me one Ron Paul supporter who reveres Ross Perot to the same degree.
I'll tell you right now that what you and many others do not understand about Ron Paul supporters is that they are as fervent, loyal & dedicated as any John Kennedy or Martin Luther King supporter.
People in the dark will continue to compare Paul with Howard Dean Ross Perot but I tell you there is no comparison. Ross Perots people went away. Howard Deans people went away. I promise you Ron Pauls supporters are not going away.
All because the truth sets you free.

HOLY KOOL-AID-DRINKIN' SUICIDES BATMAN! :Q

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

No, it starts with a group of men who have a stance that the majority of others agree with because they have a common problem that can be translated into a reasonable movement.

Ron Paul talks about shit that isn't even a problem and he can't even frame the real problem in anything but bullshit and conspiracy theories.

That's why your "revolution" failed. Because you don't represent anybody who is reasonable.

One person or groups "reasonable" != anothers.

There will be a revolution, just not of the Paulbot kind.

It will be people like those shunned by the Judge in the wedding day groom shoot up and those in the country negatively affected by the commodities price run up by Corporations and Traders.

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Revolution starts with one man.

There's always a "first lemming" over the cliff ....

The only revolution from RP is him spinning on his thumb.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Perry404
You think a revolution starts with a majority?
This revolution started with one man and a year later has a few million walking in unity. In one year! Wait another four years and see where we go.

LOL!! Where have I heard this before?!...

oh, you kids are just so darn cute... with your "interwebz" and your "revolutions"...

Find me one Ron Paul supporter who reveres Ross Perot to the same degree.
I'll tell you right now that what you and many others do not understand about Ron Paul supporters is that they are as fervent, loyal & dedicated as any John Kennedy or Martin Luther King supporter.
People in the dark will continue to compare Paul with Howard Dean Ross Perot but I tell you there is no comparison. Ross Perots people went away. Howard Deans people went away. I promise you Ron Pauls supporters are not going away.
All because the truth sets you free.

A revolution has to gain traction. Ron Paul has failed so colossally in this category, it almost isn't even funny anymore.

 

[morkinva]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Perry404

Your contention. HA!
How about at least giving us some statistics as we have done.

You haven't given any real numbers that a statistician would see as significant. You've given a dollar figure and extrapolated that to mean *real* support, when, in fact, it means nothing at all.

How about you back up your assertion with something other than bullshit.

How about you provide even one tiny little fact to back up my statistics or is that too much to ask? I'm sorry but money talks and bullshit walks.

You made the assertion, your statistics are proven false, you have the burden of proof to prove your assertion, not me.

Money doesn't talk. Votes talk.

HA! This is absolutely hilarious! They are "proven" false because you say so? Lol:laugh:
What are you the clown of scientific method?

They have been proven false because they are absolutely ridiculous assertions. Only an intellectually bankrupt statistician would accept your "proof" as anything but poof spinnery intended to obfuscate reality. The reality of the situation is that Ron Paul had his zealous bots who gave a lot of money but weren't anywhere near the numbers needed for a significant vote.

They further obfuscate reality by claiming their was imbalance in the media coverage, when, in fact, nobody wants to listen to the moron because he sounds like a complete nutjob.

Dollars do not translate into supporters directly.

Do you deny the statement that I made above in regards to 10 dollars from 1 voter is not the same as 1 dollar from 10 voters?

Get with reality, if you keep denying it all you do is further marginalize your position, alienating yourself from the base of voters you should be courting. This, in fact, hurts your cause instead of helping it.

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Also, as far as me being an anti-Ron Paul guy, I donated 17.76 to his campaign 17 times, so shut the fvck up

Ron Paul thanks you, hypocritical douchebag!

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...4/ron-pauls-fundr.html

"Paul filed his campaign's required financial reports with the Federal Election Commission over the weekend and said he raised a mere $123,523 in the entire month of March."

Well now it wouldn't be very wise to continue donating tens of millions of dollars when he can't be elected this time around now would it? lol
Paul challenged even Hillary and Obama when he was still in it. None of the other republicans can claim that and they all had MSM coverage. How sad is that?

An orchestrated donation scheme designed to capture headlines hardly puts him in the same league as Hillary or Obama in regards to fundraising.

It does when that "orchestrated donation scheme" wasn't orchestrated nor schemed by Ron Paul himself, the supporters did that on THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Can Obizma or shittlery say the same?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: jpeyton
McCain should be wondering why, many weeks after he locked up the nomination, 28% of Republican PA primary voters picked Paul and Huckabee (in that order).

Nearly a third of his potential voting base are picking candidates that will not be on the ticket in the fall.

One should also ask why there were not 28% or even 10% in the previous primarys/caucuses. When there was competition for Paul, he could not deliver.

He only obtained the 28% when there was no challenges to his ideals.
Apparently 72% do not accept his messages.

Actually, 72% know its over.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Deeko
lol you Paulbots are pathetic, it's hilarious.

Troll along please.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: bamacre
Ok, this argument didn't start with Paul's military donation numbers. It started with the assertion that our troops want to come home. Now, that assertion isn't supported only with Paul's military donations, but certainly Obama's as well.

Donations DO NOT EQUAL STATISTICS. For fucks sake people.

1. If you told me that *EVERY* person in the military donated $1, then it might translate into something meaningful. However, the fact that different donation amounts can skew the figure means it cannot be used for statistical analysis. To do so goes against all tenants of statistical analysis as your data set is corrupt.

2. Unless the donation of that money can be tied *DIRECTLY* to the actual stance of getting out of Iraq, then any conclusion that the money = getting out of Iraq is also false.

If you guys want to prove something, then get actual VOTES or statistical studies with large sample sizes and measurements of significance that actually mean something. Otherwise all of your "facts" are nothing more than spin.

I love how people who obviously haven't taken one statistics class claim the contrary.


You guys are fricking jokes.

If we (Paul supporters) are "fricking jokes", alleviate your headache and exit the thread. Otherwise deal with it.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Perry404

Your contention. HA!
How about at least giving us some statistics as we have done.

You haven't given any real numbers that a statistician would see as significant. You've given a dollar figure and extrapolated that to mean *real* support, when, in fact, it means nothing at all.

How about you back up your assertion with something other than bullshit.

How about you provide even one tiny little fact to back up my statistics or is that too much to ask? I'm sorry but money talks and bullshit walks.

Do you honestly believe that the donation figures translate directly to widespread or significant support among military personnel? Seriously?

Who said that? The statistics given are for financial support which is an *indicator* of overall military support. How simple do I have to make it for you?
Would I bet my left arm that if the president were elected by military personal votes only that Ron Paul would be the president? Certainly not and I never suggested such a thing. Clearly Ron Paul has a strong support base in the military and he would not have received more donations than any other candidate if this weren't so. That's what this statistic says and we look at this statistic because we care what the military thinks.

It's not an indicator for anything. Technically, 30 people could have given that entire amount. That's why the number is bullshit, it gives no indication *AT ALL* of overall support.

No one knows the numbers of voters only dollars. Use the facts (dollars) instead of guesses (number of voters). This is reaching (even for you). Its illogical to disregard the donations of military men for candidates who want to leave Iraq just because the number of individuals is absent. We could guess all day, in fact, an argument could be made that for every soldier one dollar was donated. This scenario has just as much basis as saying 5 soldiers made all of the donations.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
It does when that "orchestrated donation scheme" wasn't orchestrated nor schemed by Ron Paul himself, the supporters did that on THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Can Obizma or shittlery say the same?

no, but I bet one of them will be referred to as Mr. or Mrs. President soon... preferably Mr.

that's gotta sting a bit, eh?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Sheesh.. Don't you guys ever quit? There is no revolution; there is a tiny, tiny minority of zealots and that's it. But keep on keepin on i guess.

Keep your eyes open and your ears to the tracks. A train may be coming.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
No one knows the numbers of voters only dollars. Use the facts (dollars) instead of guesses (number of voters). This is reaching (even for you). Its illogical to disregard the donations of military men for candidates who want to leave Iraq just because the number of individuals is absent. We could guess all day, in fact, an argument could be made that for every soldier one dollar was donated. This scenario has just as much basis as saying 5 soldiers made all of the donations.

We did that, and, according to rough estimates of total donations versus known total military strength, we came up with a MAXIMUM of 2.2% support for RP within the military -- and that's if every unique donation was just $1, thus equaling the maximum possible number of supporters.

For analytical purposes, as the average donation amount is increased in $1 increments, that percentage of total possible support goes down from 2.2 and quickly approaches almost ZERO.

once again, that's gotta sting a bit, eh?

 

[HeXploiT]

>>> There is no revolution <<< Uh-huh

This is happening across the nation.
You can't ignore us.
We aren't going away.
The Revolution begins!

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Perry404
>>> There is no revolution <<< Uh-huh

This is happening across the nation.
You can't ignore us.
We aren't going away.
The Revolution begins!

LOL! oh yes we can... we are... and we will.

Just like the chairman in that video.