Reply With Quote
Yes, I did. Barack Obama's middle name has no relevance to what you just wrote.
Fine, you're prejudiced, not a racist.
Yes, I did. Barack Obama's middle name has no relevance to what you just wrote.
That was be design. Worked too.
He did."Rush said vote for Obama."
Well I read an article that said there was 8 million new voters in a state with 8 million registered voters...what would you have concluded from that article?
"16 million registered voters in Pennsylvania"
Don't get arroagant just because you read the most recent article.
Sigh...it was the le of the article that was relevant.
"Pravda"
All in less than one day.
You aren't near as smart as you think you are here...
Beno has ballsThe record speaks for itself here.
I think you need to read it again.
So are you...you're prejudiced against McCain and Palin.
Idiot.
Did you read it again btw? Third times the charm.
You lie by design.
Except he didn't.He did.
I'm arrogant because I can read and I don't have to lie "by design."Well I read an article that said there was 8 million new voters in a state with 8 million registered voters...what would you have concluded from that article?
Don't get arroagant just because you read the most recent article.
Except it was directly contradicted by the article. Lying by design again.Sigh...it was the le of the article that was relevant.
Your problem is you think I care about my internets reputation as you do. I'm simply right on these little points of fact, and it really pisses you off. So much that you are compelled to lie and try to change the subject to basketball.You aren't near as smart as you think you are here...
It's been so much fun watching you melt down over and over again.
I don't agree with their policies. Anything else is irrelevant. I don't vote based on ephemeral stuff.
I'll just state it a third time for charm: Barack Obama's middle name had nothing to do with your little screed.
What's sad is that whottt and ChumpDumper will end their feud five seconds after a Rockets fan posts a Scola update.
All I know is that McCain is going to lose this race if she doesn't win it for him.
More great polling for Obama but who's surprised? Only bad number is in MN where SUSA shows McCain with a lead in MN.
However, if we take into consideration the Whottt effect, McCain is actually leading in every one of these polls by +20.
I'll be interested to see what your polls do over the next couple of days.
More great polling for Obama but who's surprised? Only bad number is in MN where SUSA shows McCain with a lead in MN.
However, if we take into consideration the Whottt effect, McCain is actually leading in every one of these polls by +20.
You really think Palin's performance is going to put McCain over the top now?
Why? You've yet to give them credit. All of a sudden if they show a McCain shift you'll give them credit?
You're right. That's why I called them "your" polls...
And, no, I won't give them credit. Zogby has discredited polling in perpetuity.
K
So just to be sure you're not interested then, right?
So you are interested in the polls that have been discredited in perpetuity.
I think you ran out of sides of your mouth to talk out of and it's now coming straight out your ass.
Palin's performance was a home run. She knocked it out of the park....for Sarah Palin.
Now she can spend the next 4 years polishing her message, developing her platform, and getting the needed experience/knowledge to make a run at it in 2012.
McCain is toast.
So, if Palin was debating last night, who was watching over Russia?
Last edited by ElNono; 10-03-2008 at 11:22 PM.
Apparently you don't either.
More great polling for Obama but who's surprised? Only bad number is in MN where SUSA shows McCain with a lead in MN.
However, if we take into consideration the Whottt effect, McCain is actually leading in every one of these polls by +20.
Dammit how is he behind now in Minnesota....
Sorry I want a landslide....
McCain's been spending a ton of money there so thats how. Thats fine though, cause he basically needs to do that very thing in about 4 other states (PA,VA,CO,IN) and he can't do it everywhere. Time to start watching the senate and house seats. I'm not too sure I want the dems with 60 seats in congress - in fact I'm almost sure I don't - so hopefully the GOP can get their act together in SOME manner.
In that case yep...I wanted to see how knowledgable the person I was arguing with was on that particular subject, especially since I was at a disadvantage...I do that particular move all the time when I don't automatically hold the upperhand in an argument Chump. It's one of the ways I know if someone knows what the they are talking about. In this case I was arguing cons utional law with a lawyer...and needed to know if I was being bull ted.
Yeah he did.Except he didn't.
It was the headline of the article...that was not my headline, that was the headline of the article.I'm arrogant because I can read and I don't have to lie "by design."
Except it was directly contradicted by the article. Lying by design again.
They did the exact same thing...which is why I said "simple terminology" when I posted the article and used that article as an example.
I have no problem Chump, except for the inordinate number of idiots I find myself arguing with...
Your problem is you think I care about my internets reputation as you do. I'm simply right on these little points of fact, and it really pisses you off. So much that you are compelled to lie and try to change the subject to basketball.
It's been so much fun watching you melt down over and over again.
You're right about Cheney, wrong about Rush, and you competely whiff on the purpose behind that article. That wasn't my headline...that was theirs.
So you want to equate your and Palin's distortion of the facts to that of Pravda.
Brilliant.
Don't let me stop you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
