4

11/6/2008 11:32:49 AM

Quote :

"all i see is "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE...MY VIEWS ON POLITICS ARE CORRECT AND HAVE NO LOOPHOLES. YOURS DOES LET ME TELL YOU ....RABBLE" reply "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE...MY VIEWS ON POLITICS ARE CORRECT AND HAVE NO LOOPHOLES. YOURS DOES LET ME TELL YOU WHY....RABBLE" fucking face it people. all party's politics have loopholes. you will never get around that. thinking your party doesn't is complete ignorance. and apparently some people have this "problem" it's mostly a matter of what you find most important and you stick to that. and we all dont have the same convictions. deal with it."

Quote :

"Reagan had it right, no pun intended. The GOP needs to go back to being socially-conservative AND fiscally-conservative to regain support. One without the other has proven to be an epic fail of political will and widespread support. Everyone should understand that humans are naturally imperfect beings. Therefore, all human ventures will inherently have elements of imperfection as well. This should go without saying. Consequently, the decisions that people make on election-day should take into account this universal truth, and your choices should be based upon intelligent evaluation of the issues, the policies and the vision of the party that you selected. All people will continue to disagree with each other on the context of each political party’s platforms until the end of time, but I think that we can all agree on one point. A uniformed vote is only slightly better than no vote at all. When you cast your vote, remember the Americans that laid down their lives so that you could live in a free country and voice your opinion. Try to consider the time that you spend researching your candidate as a way of paying tribute to their sacrifice, and never forget that your vote does matter and your diligence in making your decision is reflective of being a patriotic American."

both qft

11/6/2008 11:34:08 AM

Poor Ron Paul.

11/6/2008 2:59:40 PM

i voted chris cole for senate

11/6/2008 3:01:54 PM

Misinformed people itt

11/6/2008 3:02:21 PM

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE...MY VIEWS ON POLITICS ARE CORRECT AND HAVE NO LOOPHOLES. YOURS DOES LET ME TELL YOU ....RABBLE

11/6/2008 3:02:58 PM

WINNAR

11/6/2008 3:03:47 PM

I don't even get this rabble reference.

11/6/2008 3:03:52 PM

walk around in circles walk around in circles walk around in...

Joice... will yall grab some lunch w/ me sat?

11/6/2008 3:04:43 PM

i know its ridiculous!

and of course! maybe the new ruckus?


[Edited on November 6, 2008 at 3:08 PM. Reason : fhg]

11/6/2008 3:05:21 PM

Quote :

"I don't even get this rabble reference."

South Park - it's what their angry mobs shout.

11/6/2008 3:13:20 PM

sweet i'll beat yall down in some twwivia.

(they have buzztime... i love that game)

11/6/2008 3:14:18 PM

I guess everyone has a right to their own opinion. We should never try to convince anyone that they're wrong, or that they have developed an incorrect conclusion based on the facts, or try to lead them to what we think is right. Because this is America. In America everyone has the right to have their opinion no matter how idiotic or fucked up it may be. And we should give equal credence and standing to each opinion, no matter how batshit insane, no matter how bizarre, and no matter how ridiculous it may seem.

I hope if you ever run into any situation from now on where you disagree with a person, you never, ever try to talk them out of it.

Because, damn it, this is America.

11/6/2008 3:14:47 PM

There really is an entire spectrum of ways to run the country each has pros and cons ... each benefits a different industry/class of people.

your idea is not right...

nor is it wrong.

11/6/2008 3:16:23 PM

When you respond to an argument with jokes or dismissals, though, you look like a fucking retard who can't hold their own.

I'm looking at you.

11/6/2008 3:19:24 PM

It's not who you voted for that matters, it's the reasons why you voted a certain way that truly matters. If at anytime a person feels like voting a certain way soley based upon what other people have already decided, it would then be time to drop everything, put on blinders, and re-evaluate the candidates from scratch.

11/6/2008 3:30:48 PM

if you wanna get into an irl debate sometimes i'll shred you like cheese man if there is one thing i know its engineering but politics are up there and i can argue every point of view from libertarian to dem...

still can't tell you what is best to keep forever (none probably) but right now the govt is too fat and needs to be slimmed down and the repubs aren't doing it so the libertarians need to...

IMHO..

11/6/2008 3:31:43 PM

Quote :

"It's not who you voted for that matters, it's the reasons why you voted a certain way that truly matters. If at anytime a person feels like voting a certain way soley based upon what other people have already decided, it would then be time to drop everything, put on blinders, and re-evaluate the candidates from scratch."

True, and I got a lot of flack for my Nader "Write-in" vote in 2004. It was truly throwing a vote away, since he wasn't on the ballot at all. People were saying the same things I am saying now, that I was throwing my vote away, and that it was a vote for Bush, and whatnot. I wanted to support a third-party candidate, and I did it with my vote.

However, during that election, there was absolutely no chance that Kerry was going to win North Carolina. This election was different. In this election, there was a chance (and it ended up happening) that Obama was going to win North Carolina. It was more important, in this election, to put aside our support for third party candidates, hold our noses, and vote Democratic. Obama needed all the electoral votes he could get, and the result of our third party support (McCain winning) would have been a far, far worse outcome.

11/6/2008 3:37:24 PM

why do you assume all third party votes would have gone to Obama otherwise?

11/6/2008 3:40:04 PM

Fair enough. This is also assuming that most third party members would have voted Obama (which is actually a good assumption so I'm not gonna argue with you too much on that! )

But be vewwwy, vewwwy careful in assuming anything

(ok i tried to type like elmer fudd and i failed miserably)

[Edited on November 6, 2008 at 3:41 PM. Reason : ^you beat me to it lol]

11/6/2008 3:41:07 PM

Quote :

"why do you assume all third party votes would have gone to Obama otherwise?"

I don't. However, I am sure that everyone I personally know would have voted for Obama had Barr not been on the ballot.

11/6/2008 3:49:13 PM

Quote :

"Vote, voter wasted"

[Edited on November 6, 2008 at 4:04 PM. Reason : .]

11/6/2008 4:03:59 PM

Quote :

"However, during that election, there was absolutely no chance that Kerry was going to win North Carolina. This election was different. In this election, there was a chance (and it ended up happening) that Obama was going to win North Carolina. It was more important, in this election, to put aside our support for third party candidates, hold our noses, and vote Democratic. Obama needed all the electoral votes he could get, and the result of our third party support (McCain winning) would have been a far, far worse outcome."

So you were either a defeatist in 2004 or a sellout in 2008. Which is it?

You know me personally, and I'm telling you this: had Barr not been on the ballot, I would have left some bubbles blank.

11/6/2008 4:41:15 PM

North Carolina didn't even matter in this election, so chalk up Gronke under the "sellout" category.

11/6/2008 4:46:10 PM

^^ I'm glad to hear that Phil. I wish more people would vote based on conviction and not hype/non-conformity.

[Edited on November 6, 2008 at 4:51 PM. Reason : -]

11/6/2008 4:48:49 PM

Quote :

"So you were either a defeatist in 2004 or a sellout in 2008. Which is it?"

I think I fully explained myself.

Quote :

"North Carolina didn't even matter in this election, so chalk up Gronke under the "sellout" category."

I'm sure the extended media coverage due to the battleground status, the historical fact that it hadn't gone Democratic in 35 years, and the amount of money that the DNC is going to pour into this state in upcoming elections all doesn't matter.

11/6/2008 4:54:11 PM

Quote :

"This is also assuming that most third party members would have voted Obama (which is actually a good assumption so I'm not gonna argue with you too much on that!"

maybe 3rd party as a whole, but there is no way that most Libertarian voters would've otherwise voted for Obama.

11/6/2008 5:51:55 PM

Quote :

"and the amount of money that the DNC is going to pour into this state in upcoming elections"

i detested the fact that NC was a battleground

i got tired of hearing all the commercials, all the phone calls, etc.

put the Dole/Hagan race on top of that and it was pure-tee unbearable

i am glad it is over, regardless of the outcome of 11/4 and I am not looking forward to 2012, because it has a high likelihood of happening again.

11/6/2008 5:55:57 PM

^^you dont think so?
i would have guessed that they would have considering the social aspect of his platform.


but that would be assuming

11/6/2008 5:58:01 PM

well you are more retarded that i thought

11/6/2008 6:06:31 PM

well, i mean, i don't have any statistics to back it up--it's just my conjecture--but I think there are a lot more right-leaning Libertarians (Ron Paul types) than left-leaning Libertarians (Bill Maher types) to begin with among the party faithful, and I think there are also more libertarian-leaning Republicans dissatisfied with the GOP than there are libertarian-leaning Democrats dissatisfied with the Democratic Party.

You wouldn't know if from the recent history, but there is a pretty significant libertarian (and a few more from its cousin, Constitutionalist) wing within the GOP. I mean, this is the party that nominated Barry Goldwater (think raging hawk version of Ron Paul) for President. Ronald Reagan, the party icon, had, at least early in his career, a considerable libertarian streak (although some of that became lip service later on).

11/6/2008 6:08:39 PM

god bill maher sucks

11/6/2008 6:10:20 PM

he can be an absolute nerve-grating prick, or he can be thoughtful and gracious even in dissent (see his interview with Mike Huckabee back during the primaries).

but yeah, most of the time he's a nerve-grating prick. all the venom of george carlin, but not nearly as funny.

11/6/2008 6:12:40 PM

i believe libertarianism inherited some of the old Yankee Republican beliefs. which is why I lean Libertarian.

11/6/2008 6:15:14 PM

wait a minute

i'm pretty sure i've seen you fairly routinely argue the exact opposite of libertarian tenets. which one of us is mistaken?

11/6/2008 6:26:46 PM

aha, it's pretty well known that chembob doesn't know what in the hell he's talking about. EVER.

He just argues to argue

11/6/2008 6:28:50 PM

i really wanted to post this picture in terpball's MOVE BUSH thread...

but i didn't want to start that shit again...so i'll just post it here....and maybe in the day one thread...


this was in front of the White House the other night

11/6/2008 6:29:46 PM

Like I said I want to support Jindal whether its 2012 or 2016!!! that being said Barrack has already made questionable hires regarding the white house when it comes to his promise of bipartisinship... it has already started.

11/6/2008 6:39:51 PM

Jindal is more of exactly what the GOP doesn't need.

11/6/2008 6:53:25 PM

Quote :

"wait a minute i'm pretty sure i've seen you fairly routinely argue the exact opposite of libertarian tenets. which one of us is mistaken?"

i do? i don't recall expounding on my political beliefs that often. but keep in mind this is rather recent that i've fleshed out some of my libertarian leaning beliefs.

11/6/2008 7:19:35 PM

^^ best chance to beat obama. Would outdebate Obama in a second, I could go on for days for what this guy has going for him. He will be on a ticket and will win whether its 2012, 16,20, 24 considering he is only 36.

11/6/2008 8:05:44 PM

^ perhaps he should have run this time around.

and I too, voted Librarian. Munger > *

11/6/2008 8:28:20 PM

^^and Obama would be like, "dude, why don't you tell us about that time you witnessed an exorcism. Oh, that's right, you probably don't want to talk about that because IT'S FUCKING INSANE."

11/6/2008 8:43:57 PM

Or we could get into one of those conversations about associations on both sides? Now wouldn't that be fun? And isn't that what obama wanted to steer clear from in this election? How about we talk about experience, policies, and everything else that is important...and like I said to this date the guy is 11 years younger and more experienced. Lets see if the chosen one can do a good job for the next 4 years, because if he can't and with the people he is already choosing, it could be a quick term.

11/6/2008 8:57:01 PM

^ a quick term? it's at least 4 years. quit your whining and deal with it. lol.

11/6/2008 9:00:30 PM

^^so...Obama knows people possessed by demons too?

I really, really, really hope the GOP does not run this guy for president in 4 years. It would be like saying, "you know that shit we've been doing that hasn't been working and the majority of the people don't seem to like anymore? Let's do it harder!"

11/6/2008 9:08:00 PM

What? Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Possessed by a demon? What?

11/6/2008 9:42:33 PM

Well then you will be getting your wish because Jindal is the #1 candidate on this date. he has a lot of support and the grassroots campaign is about to get crazy.

11/6/2008 10:00:23 PM

Bobby Jindal is a trainwreck waiting to happen. He signed a bill to castrate sex offenders, he believes intelligent design should be taught in schools, and he once participated in a real-live exorcism.

Yep, I'm sure he's a great choice in 2012 .

(Wait, why am I trying to talk people out of picking him?)

You know what, Jindal is a great pick for 2012! Go for it, GOP!

11/6/2008 10:00:34 PM

to be fair, he is the governor of Louisiana.

11/6/2008 10:05:33 PM