Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: militarymuscle69 on March 20, 2007, 06:04:12 AM
-
Suprised I haven't seen anyone talk about the fact that 30,000+ war SUPPORTERS showed up as opposed to 10,000+ ANTI WAR fools.
-
Suprised I haven't seen anyone talk about the fact that 30,000+ war SUPPORTERS showed up as opposed to 10,000+ ANTI WAR fools.
too bad EVERY POLL TAKEN IN THE LAST 3 YEARS shows the opposite.
Also, who put on this rally?
-
too bad EVERY POLL TAKEN IN THE LAST 3 YEARS shows the opposite.
Also, who put on this rally?
It was 2 rallies. One Anti with Cindy Sheehan and Mrs. Clinton leading the charge. The other I'm not sure who organized it, but the hope was to have a anti rally like the Vietnam rallies with hundreds of thousands of people. This si still the first time I can remember such a turnout in favor of the war
-
It was 2 rallies. One Anti with Cindy Sheehan and Mrs. Clinton leading the charge. The other I'm not sure who organized it, but the hope was to have a anti rally like the Vietnam rallies with hundreds of thousands of people. This si still the first time I can remember such a turnout in favor of the war
I hadn't heard about them much-no.
-
I hadn't heard about them much-no.
You would have to watch FOX, I mean you can't expect main stream media to carry something like that
-
You would have to watch FOX, I mean you can't expect main stream media to carry something like that
so you're saying mainstream media isn't honest?
-
You would have to watch FOX, I mean you can't expect main stream media to carry something like that
Oh, I know-LOL! I had a bunch of stuff to do last nioght so missed! Good to hear from U!
-
so you're saying mainstream media isn't honest?
I don't think ANY media-mainstream or otherwise-is totally 100% honest really.
-
Suprised I haven't seen anyone talk about the fact that 30,000+ war SUPPORTERS showed up as opposed to 10,000+ ANTI WAR fools.
I didn't hear. The media avoids positive news about the war like the plague. You can bet that if those numbers were reversed, it would have been front page news on CNN.
-
I didn't hear. The media avoids positive news about the war like the plague. You can bet that if those numbers were reversed, it would have been front page news on CNN.
the majority of the nation is against the war. Period.
There are many polls which show this, and no polls which show otherwise. One rally is no way to measure public support. If you believe one rally shows the % of americans supporting it, but all those polls do not, you are a low grade subject who doesn't understand polling.
-
the majority of the nation is against the war. Period.
There are many polls which show this, and no polls which show otherwise. One rally is no way to measure public support. If you believe one rally shows the % of americans supporting it, but all those polls do not, you are a low grade subject who doesn't understand polling.
I actually DO beleive that-BUT, I also think that a lot of those folk are also following the trend of the moment (like anything political). They are the same folk who were so Pro-War & now they are Anti-War because it is just more acceptable to be that way at the moment.
-
The media drives public opinion. The media dictates what we talk about. I believe there is an ongoing concerted effort by outlets like CNN to report negative news, downplay or ignore positive news, and promote anti-war sentiment. It is patently obvious.
-
The media drives public opinion. The media dictates what we talk about. I believe there is an ongoing concerted effort by outlets like CNN to report negative news, downplay or ignore positive news, and promote anti-war sentiment. It is patently obvious.
Just like 2001 to 2004 were overwhelmingly pro-war reporting?
It's common knowledge that the media reports to how people feel. If 75% of Americans supported Bush and his surge, then 75% of the media would report that way.
However, since polls show only 25% of America supports the surge, only 25% of the news outlet (FOX) covers that.
-
Just like 2001 to 2004 were overwhelmingly pro-war reporting?
It's common knowledge that the media reports to how people feel. If 75% of Americans supported Bush and his surge, then 75% of the media would report that way.
However, since polls show only 25% of America supports the surge, only 25% of the news outlet (FOX) covers that.
Makes sense to me.
Who's responsible for Americans not wanting to support the war? the reality of it or the news coverage?
-
Who's responsible for Americans not wanting to support the war? the reality of it or the news coverage?
Media absolutely follows public opinion. They ignored every oddity and question following 9/11 because the vast majority of americans didn't want ot hear it.
Today, they focus on the misdeeds of the White House, and the failure of the war.
If they're wrong, tell us ;) But the fact of the matter is, every week it's another scandal from those crooks, and the war is shite. We're losing, sadly.
-
Media absolutely follows public opinion. They ignored every oddity and question following 9/11 because the vast majority of americans didn't want ot hear it.
Today, they focus on the misdeeds of the White House, and the failure of the war.
If they're wrong, tell us ;) But the fact of the matter is, every week it's another scandal from those crooks, and the war is shite. We're losing, sadly.
So in other words the media is influence by it's viewers? Not the Liberals?
-
So in other words the media is influence by it's viewers? Not the Liberals?
the 'liberal' media was EXTREMELY supportive of Bush follow 9/11. He got a free pass for reading 'my pet goat' instead of acting. The completely dropped the reports of missiles, explosions, and other oddities with the 9/11 events. The press also never mentioned the US/Taliban oil pipeline negotiations which failed right before 9/11 - HUGE in the war decision, right?
The media was, if anything, far-right after 911, when the population was far-right. Your neotaints here forget that. THey say "most of media is far left" but won't admit just how nice the repubs had things until 2004, when guess what, people tired of the war and almost put Kerry into office.
-
The media was, if anything, far-right after 911, when the population was far-right. Your neotaints here forget that. THey say "most of media is far left" but won't admit just how nice the repubs had things until 2004, when guess what, people tired of the war and almost put Kerry into office.
Also through the help of glorified country western stars cons were spreading like wildfire.
-
the majority of the nation is against the war. Period.
There are many polls which show this, and no polls which show otherwise. One rally is no way to measure public support. If you believe one rally shows the % of americans supporting it, but all those polls do not, you are a low grade subject who doesn't understand polling.
You don't understand polling, and if having 30,000 feet on the ground, as opposed to 10,000 isn't just as accurate as a poll....LOL why even try to talk to such a Hater
-
You don't understand polling, and if having 30,000 feet on the ground, as opposed to 10,000 isn't just as accurate as a poll....LOL why even try to talk to such a Hater
I do understand polling. I'm an MBA who took some advanced stats and logistics courses.
Again, I invite you to tell us why the polls are inaccurate, scientifically. I don't want to hear "my friend said that...". Please back up your statement.
-
I do understand polling. I'm an MBA who took some advanced stats and logistics courses.
Again, I invite you to tell us why the polls are inaccurate, scientifically. I don't want to hear "my friend said that...". Please back up your statement.
wow MBA!!! I stand corrected. Basically middle americans don't participate in Polls, so they are left polling the coasts which is more liberal.
-
most war supporters don't support the war but the troops fighting the war...at least..that's what the polls suggest....
i wouldn't say they are supporting war per se...just the boys fighting it...
-
wow MBA!!! I stand corrected. Basically middle americans don't participate in Polls, so they are left polling the coasts which is more liberal.
WOW, that is a huge statement which will discredit every major polling firm in America!
Before I call Zogby and tell them to close their doors, can you back up your claim?
(They usually go out of their way to poll groups of people from various demogrpahic groups in order to be assured they have an accurate sample within a specific %.)
Also, can you explain why these "liberal coast" residents were so Pro-Bush and Pro-War in 2001-2, but are not now. Not sure you can argue this one...
-
Suprised I haven't seen anyone talk about the fact that 30,000+ war SUPPORTERS showed up as opposed to 10,000+ ANTI WAR fools.
I can't help but laugh at this one. You're dodging bullets to defend a lie you were sold by a smooth recruiter. You sure you see the fool in the room? ;)
-
The media avoids positive news about the war like the plague.
Saddam was forcibly removed from office. A lot of people viewed that as a positive thing. This obviously got a lot of media coverage.
Of course, being an American, I would rather have seen him voted out of office in a fair election, but what the hell do I know about democracy? ::)
-
WOW, that is a huge statement which will discredit every major polling firm in America!
Before I call Zogby and tell them to close their doors, can you back up your claim?
(They usually go out of their way to poll groups of people from various demogrpahic groups in order to be assured they have an accurate sample within a specific %.)
Also, can you explain why these "liberal coast" residents were so Pro-Bush and Pro-War in 2001-2, but are not now. Not sure you can argue this one...
Here are many reasons why polls can be misleading
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/mlvasu/ps471/D14.htm
Like I said yesterday coastal libs want every war to be like the first gulf war, over in 30 days. They don't have the stomach or balls to see something through. When the going gets tough they fold. That is why they were for it then and not now.
-
I can't help but laugh at this one. You're dodging bullets to defend a lie you were sold by a smooth recruiter. You sure you see the fool in the room? ;)
not to mention I was in the military LONG before 9/11, and I wasn't recruited. I went to the AF office and joined without talking to a recruiter beforehand. Call it American pride, something you wouldn't understand
-
Polls are also inaccurate because most people don't think to deeply about the issues underlying the question -- they just react, usually emotionally.
Example: Do you favor interrogation by torture? Most say no. Do you favor taking whatever steps are necessary to get information that could be used to save American lives? Most say yes. Same question, different phrasing.
-
So in other words the media is influence by it's viewers? Not the Liberals?
The media tells us what to talk about in many instances. For example, do you recall when child abductions were all the rage? Every Amber Alert issued anywhere in the country was headline news. Not anymore. Why not?
I'll go out on a limb and say you probably haven't heard about this story: http://starbulletin.com/2007/03/20/news/story02.html Poor kid. Why not? Because the national media doesn't think it's important.
I believe that if the media reported all of the good news in Iraq the way they highlight the bad news, public opinion would be affected. How many Iraqis did our medical personnel treat yesterday? CNN won't tell you. Instead, today's headline was about Iraqi kids living with "fear of death."
-
Here are many reasons why polls can be misleading
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/mlvasu/ps471/D14.htm
This is great info MM. Thanks for posting this.
-
Please tell us in your own words, mm69, why every major poll is dominated by "coastal libs"
-
Please tell us in your own words, mm69, why every major poll is dominated by "coastal libs"
Umm, already did. Middle american farmers and what not don't have time or interest to participate in polls
-
PLEASE SHOW US YOUR EVIDENCE THAT ZOGBY AND OTHER POLLS USE 'COASTAL LEFTISTS' FOR THEIR POLLS
Evidence. Not some 1984 data about one instance of student pollsters not getting time of day from a farmer.
-
PLEASE SHOW US YOUR EVIDENCE THAT ZOGBY AND OTHER POLLS USE 'COASTAL LEFTISTS' FOR THEIR POLLS
Evidence. Not some 1984 data about one instance of student pollsters not getting time of day from a farmer.
lol, someone is losing thier cool!!! I love it.
-
What is Hilarious is I have shown (like usual) great info on why polls could be inaccurate, I even gave a example question that shows how different results could be obtained from the same subject and what do you come back with?? "use your own words".....LOL what a loser, like you only use your own words. What is even more hilarious, is the proof is in the pudding..If they had conducted a survey in DC last weekend consisting of 40,000 people and asked the question do you support the war...The results would have been 66% support it!!! LOL how can you deny that 240!!!!! Oh I know how, it doesn't support your claims so it must be inaccurate!!!! I love it!!!!
-
What is Hilarious is I have shown (like usual) great info on why polls could be inaccurate, I even gave a example question that shows how different results could be obtained from the same subject and what do you come back with?? "use your own words".....LOL what a loser, like you only use your own words. What is even more hilarious, is the proof is in the pudding..If they had conducted a survey in DC last weekend consisting of 40,000 people and asked the question do you support the war...The results would have been 66% support it!!! LOL how can you deny that 240!!!!! Oh I know how, it doesn't support your claims so it must be inaccurate!!!! I love it!!!!
The link you provided is great info. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/mlvasu/ps471/D14.htm
Polls can definitely be manipulated and they're not always accurate. Just look at the 2004 election. Some of the exit polls were dead wrong.
-
The link you provided is great info. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/mlvasu/ps471/D14.htm
Polls can definitely be manipulated and they're not always accurate. Just look at the 2004 election. Some of the exit polls were dead wrong.
Thanks BB, we all know that he is so blinded by hatred that his common sense has flown out the window.
-
The link you provided is great info. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/mlvasu/ps471/D14.htm
Polls can definitely be manipulated and they're not always accurate. Just look at the 2004 election. Some of the exit polls were dead wrong.
Oh before he gets a chance...."The 2004 exit polls weren't wrong, it was a conspiracy to reelect Bush no matter what the votes were, Diebold"
-
Oh before he gets a chance...."The 2004 exit polls weren't wrong, it was a conspiracy to reelect Bush no matter what the votes were, Diebold"
Oh thanks MM. You ruined my Pavlov's Dog experiment. :D
-
Oh thanks MM. You ruined my Pavlov's Dog experiment. :D
LOL!!!
-
bb and mm,
there is a 1 in 50,000 chance that Kerry lost ohio.
there is a 1 in 20,000 chance that kerry lost florida.
If you want to believe that bush won both of those lotteries in 2004, you do that.
The rest of us, with a brain, know that the Diebold CEO's promise to "deliver the election to bush" played into it.
-
you know what is great?
no matter how thickheaded and ignorant some of you are, the majority of americans are waking up ;)
Bush went form 70s to 20s in the approval dept. That isn't flawed polling. That's half the nation waking up. Crap on polls all you want - half the nation has left bush, and there is no denying that.
-
bb and mm,
there is a 1 in 50,000 chance that Kerry lost ohio.
there is a 1 in 20,000 chance that kerry lost florida.
If you want to believe that bush won both of those lotteries in 2004, you do that.
The rest of us, with a brain, know that the Diebold CEO's promise to "deliver the election to bush" played into it.
I know 240, I know...It really has to suck going through life thinking everything is a conspiracy
-
I know 240, I know...It really has to suck going through life thinking everything is a conspiracy
just tell us you believe Bush won fair and square, and that he was lucky enough twice that day.
Just tell us.
You won't ;)
-
just tell us you believe Bush won fair and square, and that he was lucky enough twice that day.
Just tell us.
You won't ;)
Yeah he won fair and square. I don't believe 1 iota that Diebold rigged the machines
-
;D
Plot summary for
Conspiracy Theory (1997)
Jerry Fletcher is a man in love with a woman he observes from afar. She works for the government. Fletcher is an outspoken critic of that government. He has conspiracy theories for everything, from aliens to political assassinations. But soon, one of his theories finds itself to be accurate. But which one? Some dangerous people want him dead and the only person he trusts is that woman he loves but does not know.
Mel Gibson is a New York taxi driver, who has a strange habit. He makes complicated scenarios of conspiracies and publishes them in a newsletter sent out to five recipients. He keeps doing that, until something unbelievable happens: One of his "conspiracy theories" turns out to be real, and so he finds himself chased by the man hiding behind the whole thing.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118883/plotsummary
-
;D
Plot summary for
Conspiracy Theory (1997)
Jerry Fletcher is a man in love with a woman he observes from afar. She works for the government. Fletcher is an outspoken critic of that government. He has conspiracy theories for everything, from aliens to political assassinations. But soon, one of his theories finds itself to be accurate. But which one? Some dangerous people want him dead and the only person he trusts is that woman he loves but does not know.
Mel Gibson is a New York taxi driver, who has a strange habit. He makes complicated scenarios of conspiracies and publishes them in a newsletter sent out to five recipients. He keeps doing that, until something unbelievable happens: One of his "conspiracy theories" turns out to be real, and so he finds himself chased by the man hiding behind the whole thing.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118883/plotsummary
Funny...
-
Yeah he won fair and square. I don't believe 1 iota that Diebold rigged the machines
I agree, MM & think that just rehashing...
-
Yeah he won fair and square. I don't believe 1 iota that Diebold rigged the machines
Okay.
Then why do you believe the repubs have sued for 2 years now to prevent a count of the paper ballot backups in Ohio?
One count would show conclusively if the e-machine outcome was accurate. But the republicans have fought it from minute one.
-
Okay.
Then why do you believe the repubs have sued for 2 years now to prevent a count of the paper ballot backups in Ohio?
One count would show conclusively if the e-machine outcome was accurate. But the republicans have fought it from minute one.
conspiracy theory #?....I need to keep count how many you have.
-
conspiracy theory #?....I need to keep count how many you have.
it's not a conspiracy theory. The democrats have sued to get those records unsealed. unfortuntaely, Bush's apointees keep throwing out the case in Ohio. hey, wait a minute, this Gonzalez mess is starting to make sense now... ;)
-
it's not a conspiracy theory. The democrats have sued to get those records unsealed. unfortuntaely, Bush's apointees keep throwing out the case in Ohio. hey, wait a minute, this Gonzalez mess is starting to make sense now... ;)
Another claim by 240 that will never be proven
-
Of course, being an American, I would rather have seen him voted out of office in a fair election, but what the hell do I know about democracy? ::)
How would you have had a fair election in a Sadaam regime without resorting to force?
Sadaam's idea of a fair election to have two levers:
Pull lever 1 to vote for Sadaam
Pull lever 2 to have your head chopped off
-
Another claim by 240 that will never be proven
no, you can find it on google if you want to. the lawsuits have been going on for years.
god i am glad you're serving our fine nation.
-
no, you can find it on google if you want to. the lawsuits have been going on for years.
god i am glad you're serving our fine nation.
exactly, I can google it all fucking day but it is all still an accusation!! LMAO, such a sorry person
-
How would you have had a fair election in a Sadaam regime without resorting to force?
Sadaam's idea of a fair election to have two levers:
Pull lever 1 to vote for Sadaam
Pull lever 2 to have your head chopped off
His election system was a real GAS! ;D
It was Dictatorship and he was the DICK. No election needed.
-
exactly, I can google it all fucking day but it is all still an accusation!! LMAO, such a sorry person
actually, opposing lawsuits in the Ohio justice system aren't an accusation. They're a fact. HTH.
-
actually, opposing lawsuits in the Ohio justice system aren't an accusation. They're a fact. HTH.
Until a verdict is handed down saying the election was rigged (I'm not holding my breath) you have no ground to stand on.
-
Until a verdict is handed down saying the election was rigged (I'm not holding my breath) you have no ground to stand on.
mm, why do YOU think the republican party refuses to allow those ballots to be counted? Surely that 1 in 50,000 chance was legit.
You know what is funny here - you're not an idiot. You know there is a 1 in 50k chance that the Ohio election was not rigged. And you know there is a 1 in 20k chance the FL election wasn't rigged. You know it smells fishy, but you don't have the balls to say it. You'd rather stay loyal to a cheater. Fine american there.
-
mm, why do YOU think the republican party refuses to allow those ballots to be counted? Surely that 1 in 50,000 chance was legit.
You know what is funny here - you're not an idiot. You know there is a 1 in 50k chance that the Ohio election was not rigged. And you know there is a 1 in 20k chance the FL election wasn't rigged. You know it smells fishy, but you don't have the balls to say it. You'd rather stay loyal to a cheater. Fine american there.
Why do you try and put thoughts in my head. If the Dems (especially Kerry) really thought it was rigged you don't think we would hear about it every day?
-
bb and mm,
there is a 1 in 50,000 chance that Kerry lost ohio.
there is a 1 in 20,000 chance that kerry lost florida.
If you want to believe that bush won both of those lotteries in 2004, you do that.
The rest of us, with a brain, know that the Diebold CEO's promise to "deliver the election to bush" played into it.
While I do believe that the 2004 election was fixed (most Americans don't realize that it only takes a couple of corrupt officials in a few COUNTIES to swing a presidential election), the fact of the matter is that the democratic strategists allowed their ticket to be significantly weakened by what SHOULD have been a non-issue - gay marriage. By allowing the gays to get their ongoing 15 minutes, they cost them at least the White House.
So, I can't put that race's outcome solely on Bush's thieving buddies...the Dems have to own a lot of it themselves.
-
While I do believe that the 2004 election was fixed (most Americans don't realize that it only takes a couple of corrupt officials in a few COUNTIES to swing a presidential election), the fact of the matter is that the democratic strategists allowed their ticket to be significantly weakened by what SHOULD have been a non-issue - gay marriage. By allowing the gays to get their ongoing 15 minutes, they cost them at least the White House.
So, I can't put that race's outcome solely on Bush's thieving buddies...the Dems have to own a lot of it themselves.
I don't know why people keep on these things. It will NEVER be proved if 9/11 was an inside job, it will NEVER be proved that the election was fixed, it will NEVER be proven that bush lied etc.....
-
I don't know why people keep on these things. It will NEVER be proved if 9/11 was an inside job, it will NEVER be proved that the election was fixed, it will NEVER be proven that bush lied etc.....
You sound like a man who cares more about getting away with it, than finding the truth.
-
you all see that video footage of that dude spitting on a disabled soldier?
-
Just like 2001 to 2004 were overwhelmingly pro-war reporting?
It's common knowledge that the media reports to how people feel. If 75% of Americans supported Bush and his surge, then 75% of the media would report that way.
However, since polls show only 25% of America supports the surge, only 25% of the news outlet (FOX) covers that.
Yep, it sure is common knowledge....
-
Polls can definitely be manipulated and they're not always accurate. Just look at the 2004 election. Some of the exit polls were dead wrong.
The exit polls were accurate. The manipulation was not of the polls, but of the electronic voting machines.
If that weren't the case, why would the Republicans be fighting the verification of that data with the paper trails?
-
If that weren't the case, why would the Republicans be fighting the verification of that data with the paper trails?
they won't answer that.
they won't tell us why the repubs fight the count, since they KNOW they won.
i think most people suspect the 1/50,000 an 1/20,000 odds won't repeat themselves and we'll realize the wrong guy took the white house in 04.
-
The exit polls were accurate. The manipulation was not of the polls, but of the electronic voting machines.
If that weren't the case, why would the Republicans be fighting the verification of that data with the paper trails?
I don't know anything about it. What "verification of data" are you talking about and how are Republicans fighting it?
-
I don't know anything about it. What "verification of data" are you talking about and how are Republicans fighting it?
You know what is funny?
You've mocked people for the last year, whenever they've mentioned the 2004 voting irregularities.
And you admit that you don't know anything about it.
I have to wonder what ELSE you've mocked, without basis.
-
What "verification of data" are you talking about and how are Republicans fighting it?
There are paper ballot backups, printed with each vote and saved. They were saved, and dems sued to have them counted, to ensure the electronic voting was accurate. Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing - this is what the paper ballots were designed to do - provide a means of verifying the eVoting worked. Toss in the power down, and weird Diebold issues, and yea, there was a chance for tampering. So, let's be sure, count the backups, and give the winner the presidency. Right? Wrong.
Well, republicans sued to keep them from being counted. Dems sued to have them counted. They'e been tied up in court since then. They were almost destroyed last year - the dems had some last minute injunction. I must admit - and I am ashamed - when I first learned about the circumstances, I laughed. I knew we (the repubs) had cheated, and I didn't care because my man Bush got in. I have a feeling there's a wee bit of that going on. What you see below are giant swings, more than enough to justify the simple counting of the paper backups.
-
So Jag is asking why losers of an election are suing to overturn an election and the winners are litigating to preserve the fact they won? LOL. WHO CARES? ::)
-
I don't know anything about it. What "verification of data" are you talking about and how are Republicans fighting it?
Beach, ...let me paint a little picture for you.
Let us assume you are of Norwegian stock, and have blond hair & blue eyes, ...as do both your parents.
Your wife, also is a fair complected Norwegian with blonde hair & blue eyes, ...as were both her parents.
In fact, as far back as you have been tracking your geneology, both your & your wifes ancestors have all been fair complected, blond haired & blue eyed.
Then one day, this Black guy named Diebold moves next door. Your wife is very friendly with him, ...and he seems to always be over at your place all the time, ...even when you're away at work, ...but your wife claims it's all very innocent.
9 months later, your wife gives birth to a Black baby, who she claims is YOUR child.
Being the sentimental type, ...you saved his umbillical cord, as well as his foreskin when you had him mutilated.
You also notice that the little guy's winky is 4" longer (even while flaccid) than yours is when you are fully erect.
You suspect foul play, and decide to have a DNA test run to determine the true paternity of the child,
...however, your wife goes to court to prevent those DNA tests from taking place. Why would she do this, if the child is really yours? Wouldn't she simply support and encourage these tests, so you could have definitive proof once and for all, and get closure?
In this scenario, you & your wife's ancestors represent the exit polls which have for generations produced consistently accurate predictions. The new neighbour next door represents the electronic voting machines. You represent the American voters demanding accountability, your wife is the Republican party that doesn't want the truth to come out, the baby is the election results, and the DNA test is the backup paper trail that indicates whether a little adultery has taken place.
Is it starting to make sense to you now? :D
-
So Jag is asking why losers of an election are suing to overturn an election and the winners are litigating to preserve the fact they won? LOL. WHO CARES? ::)
Who cares? Anyone who wants the American election system to work.
You're laughing at people who want to ensure the votes were counted.
You say a lot of things which are hurtful to American values, BB.
-
he won't comment because he doesn't understand the analogy, jag.
-
I'd think every guy would understand the ramifications of having to payout to support someone else's bastard.
-
Beach, ...let me paint a little picture for you.
Let us assume you are of Norwegian stock, and have blond hair & blue eyes, ...as do both your parents.
Your wife, also is a fair complected Norwegian with blonde hair & blue eyes, ...as were both her parents.
In fact, as far back as you have been tracking your geneology, both your & your wifes ancestors have all been fair complected, blond haired & blue eyed.
Then one day, this Black guy named Diebold moves next door. Your wife is very friendly with him, ...and he seems to always be over at your place all the time, ...even when you're away at work, ...but your wife claims it's all very innocent.
9 months later, your wife gives birth to a Black baby, who she claims is YOUR child.
Being the sentimental type, ...you saved his umbillical cord, as well as his foreskin when you had him mutilated.
You also notice that the little guy's winky is 4" longer (even while flaccid) than yours is when you are fully erect.
You suspect foul play, and decide to have a DNA test run to determine the true paternity of the child,
...however, your wife goes to court to prevent those DNA tests from taking place. Why would she do this, if the child is really yours? Wouldn't she simply support and encourage these tests, so you could have definitive proof once and for all, and get closure?
In this scenario, you & your wife's ancestors represent the exit polls which have for generations produced consistently accurate predictions. The new neighbour next door represents the electronic voting machines. You represent the American voters demanding accountability, your wife is the Republican party that doesn't want the truth to come out, the baby is the election results, and the DNA test is the backup paper trail that indicates whether a little adultery has taken place.
Is it starting to make sense to you now? :D
Okay. So if white man with white wife has black baby, odds are the father isn't white. Glad we settled that. :)
I was asking about the specifics of this alleged lawsuit. You don't have to give me a link or anything (although I'll read it if you do) and I'm not going to look (because I don't care enough), but these are wild allegations.
-
So Jag is asking why losers of an election are suing to overturn an election and the winners are litigating to preserve the fact they won? LOL. WHO CARES? ::)
In poker, this would be known as a "tell". No one is suing to overturn an election. The suit is to prevent the verification of the numbers spit out by the machines. For him to say the suit is about overturning the election merely indicates he himself doesn't believe those numbers to be valid, and doesn't want any verification because he knows it would show GWB didn't win at all.
I will say one thing for Bush, his handlers managed to steal him an election ...TWICE!
I just find it hilarious that this goes on right under the noses of many Americans, yet some of these same fools will scream about creating and spreading Democracy in Iraq and in the rest of the world... like they even know what that is. Bwahahaha!
One day guys like Beach are going to have to answer to their grandkids when they look them straight in the eyes and demand to know "Grandpa... what the fvck were you thinking when you let this shit go on?"
-
In poker, this would be known as a "tell". No one is suing to overturn an election. The suit is to prevent the verification of the numbers spit out by the machines. For him to say the suit is about overturning the election merely indicates he himself doesn't believe those numbers to be valid, and doesn't want any verification because he knows it would show GWB didn't win at all.
I will say one thing for Bush, his handlers managed to steal him an election ...TWICE!
I just find it hilarious that this goes on right under the noses of many Americans, yet some of these same fools will scream about creating and spreading Democracy in Iraq and in the rest of the world... like they even know what that is. Bwahahaha!
One day guys like Beach are going to have to answer to their grandkids when they look them straight in the eyes and demand to know "Grandpa... what the fvck were you thinking when you let this shit go on?"
Wake me when credible people in this country start talking about it. Until then: SNORE!!! :)
-
Wake me when credible people in this country start talking about it. Until then: SNORE!!! :)
You know what's funny?
Jag, a Canadian, cares more about the integrity of the American voting process than beach Bum, and American.
-
You know what's funny?
Jag, a Canadian, cares more about the integrity of the American voting process than beach Bum, and American.
It's more like Jag is just as nutty as you. ::)
-
It's more like Jag is just as nutty as you. ::)
Yep. Doesn't change the fact you care more about your man getting in the white house, than in the integrity of the American voting process.