goalposts a moving. you said "You began this discussion speaking about the role of corporations in this election." All I'm asking is for you to show me where I did this. And I'm the one who fails to comprehend how a message board works? Quote button is really easy. I really think you're confused at who you're replying to. All you have to do is say you made a mistake. I don't need you attributing shit I didn't say to me and then using it as a bizarre strawman, thanks, so stop making things up.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
United States Election: Nov 6, 2012 |OT| - Barack Obama Re-elected
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
goalposts a moving. you said "You began this discussion speaking about the role of corporations in this election." All I'm asking is for you to show me where I did this. And I'm the one who fails to comprehend how a message board works? Quote button is really easy. I really think you're confused at who you're replying to. All you have to do is say you made a mistake. I don't need you attributing shit I didn't say to me and then using it as a bizarre strawman, thanks, so stop making things up.
I'm looking forward to Roseanne's inauguration too.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Why Romney might win: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...he_state-national_poll_divergence_115979.html
3rd parties shall rise come tuesday. Jill Stein as president, Gary Johnson as vice president, Ron Paul as secretary of defense. Virgil Goode as secretary of state, Rocky Anderson as secretary of awesome names.
on a less hopeful note, I think the greens might have a shot of 1 percent or slightly more, def won't reach the 5 percent goal. Obama would have to officially change his party identification to Republican two days before the election for that to happen.
on a less hopeful note, I think the greens might have a shot of 1 percent or slightly more, def won't reach the 5 percent goal. Obama would have to officially change his party identification to Republican two days before the election for that to happen.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Yes. I originally made a comment about the "last post" stuff, but I decided I'd rather just let everything play out and react accordingly.
hasn't that national poll gap largely disappeared since polling resumed?
see: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ministration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
speculawyer
Member
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Delusibeta
Banned
As I said, Romney supporters in disguise.
Sure. I misquoted you at first. But at the same time, the point I made was an example when replying to you about the role of our civil liberties. Citizens was an example to the point you were making on wire tapping.
Let's look at what I wrote:
It was a fucking example. Regardless of mistaking you for the other utopian in a later post (something you did later on that has little to no relevance on the content of this post), it still stands as a legitimate point that you then spent an entire page discussing instead of any of the actual discussions that were occurring between posters. There are zero leaps in logic to see how Citizens fits in to this entire fold of the power of the SCOTUS and civil liberties, what we were discussing.
Karma Kramer
Banned
lol c'mon, why would I waste my time here if I was a Romney supporter?
it might have been a possibility a week ago, but not as much anymore.
i think it would be hotly contested only if obama won by one state or something. if he had a 303 ev win, then there's less you can fight about.
It was such a non sequitur though man. i'm there talking about a specific issue, and you come out with "want to get rid of citizens", then proceed to berate me about it, when i never said a word about it. its like if i was talking about how romney would be bad on abortion and someone brought up "oh yeah? but he'd be bad on drug legalization"! different points.
yes, on certain civil liberties issues, some (but not all) of the democrat appointed justices have traditionally been better in their decisions. we can have that discussion without making things up or putting words in my mouth by conflating me with what other people might be saying. i have this funny thing about people not making up arguments on my behalf when i'm perfectly unreasonable enough with my own opinions.
There obviously would be a huge meltdown but they legally can't contest anything about it.
gutter_trash
Banned
Bush v Gore 2000 LOL
In this hypothetical scenario where we're trying Bush for war crimes, do you really think it would have been Bush alone that would be (or should be) tried? If you go for Bush, you'd better not stop there, there'd be a whole boatload of Republican operatives you'd have to go after, and that's why they'd begin to circle the wagons in defense. You really think their well-oiled propaganda machine wouldn't go into overdrive if you started to deliberately try to take out a large portion of their establishment? Their low information constituency would be brought to bear in defense faster than you can say Chic-Fil-A.I don't buy this notion at all. A lot of people don't even realize Bush can't freely travel the world because he has committed War Crimes. When the facts present themselves in a case, only the lunatics would have continued to support the lunatic. Fuck the lunatics.
polyh3dron
Banned
A new Barack Obama
It's not a non sequitur. You were not berated by Citizens in that particular post. Citizens is THE most famous case in terms of the power of the Roberts court and how the court can be used to limit the powers of people and the role of the courts in terms of civil liberties. It's the poster child. The fact that you can't comprehend this yet continuously harp on the fact that it's some sort of leap in logic is mind boggling.
I made one mistake in terms of something that I thought you said. Not only have you wasted an entire page on this bullshit, but you've now accused me of "putting words in your mouth," which is a dishonest description of an honest mistake that had no effect on the merits of what I posted. What I said still stands, regardless of later mistaking you for the other poster who has the exact same opinion as you, types just like you, and lacks any identifiable avatar.
Big fucking deal. End of story.
That case was a lot more complicated than that.
I guess it was a big fucking deal to admit your were wrong. If you want to make me an avatar I'll happily wear it so you won't be confused. I don't appreciate the smear of "types just like you", which i assume refers to karma, who i happen to not agree with politically, even though i enjoy some of his posts.
I'm more concerned about the various gay marriage amendments than the presidential election at this point. That said, swing staters please go vote
i might have missed it, but other than that california specific thread, has anyone made a thread or posted a link to where we can find aggregated useful information on the ballot initiatives and how they are polling right now?
gutter_trash
Banned
with the way Gov Rick Scott is fixing Florida, better prey that other States don't suppress votes like he's doing
You both don't capitalize your Is.
You've pointed out a spelling mistake I made that seemed to bait me as unintelligent until I pointed to a slight disability. You've accused me, I think three times, of posting "non sequiturs" (which seems to be your internet buzz word of the day). After clarifying on a particular point, you conveniently never responded to the idea of "are all people who vote of Romney or Obama apathetic", instead moving on to an honest mistake that occurred after a legitimate point that I made because you were too dense to understand the idea of an example and the poster child of the dangers of the Roberts court.
So, you know what? I'm done with this shit.
The gay marriage ballots. I'm not sure how they're polling at the latest.
Washington: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Referendum_74_(2012)
Minnesota: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Amendment_1_(2012)
Maryland: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_Question_6_(2012)
Maine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_Question_1,_2012
Washington: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Referendum_74_(2012)
Minnesota: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Amendment_1_(2012)
Maryland: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_Question_6_(2012)
Maine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_Question_1,_2012
awesome, thank you.
I'm more concerned about the various gay marriage amendments than the presidential election at this point. That said, swing staters please go vote
They're all looking good to pass, but MD hasn't been polled enough to be confident.
Bel Marduk
Banned
I'd like to know how. He wins PA? MI? WI? OH?
Karma Kramer
Banned
Ohio
StopMakingSense
Member
If what I've heard is true about their obsession with the auto industry and how wrong he is in his advertising about it, I really don't see that happening.
EDIT: Yeah, I think he really must have blown his whole foot off there.
Bel Marduk
Banned
Nearly every poll conducted in Ohio ALL YEAR shows an Obama lead. I think you might be very disappointed Tuesday night.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Very accurate political statistician. His predictions for the 2008 election were nearly perfect and his 2010 election predictions were very good.
but he's wrong because he's effeminate. or something
Oh, ta!
ConfusingJazz
Member
He follows polling statistics rather then the media driven or talking point by the national party stories that most political pundits chase after to get an audience.
SteveWinwood
Member
dont even know why we listen to those damn skewed polls
Nate Silver is that fat kid in Moneyball except he's doing it for political media.
And the New York Times is Brad Pitt.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
82 - 11 R
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
It's a good thing I'm not terribly invested in either candidate. I can enjoy the elation of one side and the utter despair of the other with popcorn in hand.
Dude Abides
Banned
Great! Then the contradictions will be heightened, the ensuing bread riots will shake the masses from their somnolence, and the glorious revolution will establish a dictatorship of The People led by the vanguard of Ron Paul and Ralph Nader.
If Romney is elected, we'd have a new President every day for the next four years.
- Status