Who won the elelction?

Poll ended at Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:16 pm

Goldman Sachs
0
No votes
JP Morgan Chase
0
No votes
The Federal Reserve
0
No votes
Fannie and Freddie
0
No votes
Well Fargo
0
No votes
BofA
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 0

 

Re: Who won the election?

Postby terroraustralis » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:36 pm

that is what happens when you build support on hate for the other guy.

when your group hates the opposition, supporting the opposition makes them hate you.

if a latino or black decided to support mitt romney, it would mean all his obama supporter friends would stop talking to him

same if a white guy decided to support obama, many of his friends would start ignoring and excluding him

this is what you get when you spew hatred for the opposition. this is what you get when a whole nation spews hatred for the opponent of the guy they support.

the dialogue of hate must end, if the united states is to stay united.
DONT LIKE ABORTIONS? DONT GET ONE.
DONT LIKE GUNS? DONT BUY ONE.
DONT LIKE OTHER PEOPLE HAVING EITHER OF THOSE THINGS? THATS TOO F***ING BAD.

FREEDOM IS NOT HAVING TO LIVE YOUR LIFE THE WAY SOMEONE ELSE THINKS YOU SHOULD LIVE YOUR LIFE. THE COST OF FREEDOM IS NOT BEING ABLE TO FORCE OTHERS TO LIVE THE WAY YOU THINK THEY SHOULD LIVE.

DONT LIKE THE PRICE OF FREEDOM? GET THE F*** OUT OF AMERICA, PROBLEM SOLVED!
terroraustralis
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Who won the election?

Postby fauxnews » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:59 am

Conservative SuperPacs lost, thats for sure, bloke
fauxnews
User avatar
PolitiNoob
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Who won the election?

Postby arnnatz » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:32 am

terroraustralis wrote:that is what happens when you build support on hate for the other guy.

when your group hates the opposition, supporting the opposition makes them hate you.

if a latino or black decided to support mitt romney, it would mean all his obama supporter friends would stop talking to him

same if a white guy decided to support obama, many of his friends would start ignoring and excluding him

this is what you get when you spew hatred for the opposition. this is what you get when a whole nation spews hatred for the opponent of the guy they support.

the dialogue of hate must end, if the united states is to stay united.


Both sides were spewing hate, obama just did more of it and convinced more people that romney was more evil than he was.
arnnatz
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:54 am

Re: Who won the election?

Postby crankyhead » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:40 pm

arnnatz wrote:Both sides were spewing hate, obama just did more of it and convinced more people that romney was more evil than he was.


I'm pretty sure that republican candidates in the primaries, did the lions share of the work, pointing out Romney's failures and flip flops.
"Because what good are the first amendment freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and redress of grievances, if you can't keep a magnum in the nightstand?" - Roy Zimmerman
crankyhead
User avatar
Greybeard
Greybeard
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 3:17 pm

Re: Who won the election?

Postby arnnatz » Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:08 pm

crankyhead wrote:
arnnatz wrote:Both sides were spewing hate, obama just did more of it and convinced more people that romney was more evil than he was.


I'm pretty sure that republican candidates in the primaries, did the lions share of the work, pointing out Romney's failures and flip flops.


and hilary did it to obama the first time around. fortunately for obama, he followed bush and the republicans put a weak candidate up with mccain. But go back even further. If Kerry had defeated bush, we wouldn't be having this same argument. It would be completely reversed. Kerry would have screwed it up just as bad as bush did. Remember, there was a dem congress the last two years of bush ... the same time the country started down the road to financial ruin. Bush sucked, the dems sucked harder, and obama convinced the world that it was all bush's fault and nasty nancy had nothing to do with it.
arnnatz
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:54 am

Re: Who won the election?

Postby terroraustralis » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:44 pm

arnnatz wrote:
crankyhead wrote:
arnnatz wrote:Both sides were spewing hate, obama just did more of it and convinced more people that romney was more evil than he was.


I'm pretty sure that republican candidates in the primaries, did the lions share of the work, pointing out Romney's failures and flip flops.


and hilary did it to obama the first time around. fortunately for obama, he followed bush and the republicans put a weak candidate up with mccain. But go back even further. If Kerry had defeated bush, we wouldn't be having this same argument. It would be completely reversed. Kerry would have screwed it up just as bad as bush did. Remember, there was a dem congress the last two years of bush ... the same time the country started down the road to financial ruin. Bush sucked, the dems sucked harder, and obama convinced the world that it was all bush's fault and nasty nancy had nothing to do with it.


the candidate has nothing to do with it. THE PEOPLE CHOOSE THE CANDIDATES

thats democracy.

if the candidates are bad choices, there are two explanations

1) all republicans are f***ing retarded, OR

2) some part of the democratic process is being interfered with and unfairly biased, I.E. media coverage of candidates

since you refuse to support my original assertion that explanation number 2 is the correct reason, (preferring instead to label me a "paulbot") BOTH explanations must be true.

but no, dont think, dont recognise that both sides of the media are corrupt,

you need to keep faith in fox news, because fox news is owned by an australian,

and would certainly never lie for the purposes of influencing which candidates win the primaries,

and thereby sabotaging the chances of a republican taking the whitehouse...

it shouldnt be too hard for you, you're really good at not thinking.
DONT LIKE ABORTIONS? DONT GET ONE.
DONT LIKE GUNS? DONT BUY ONE.
DONT LIKE OTHER PEOPLE HAVING EITHER OF THOSE THINGS? THATS TOO F***ING BAD.

FREEDOM IS NOT HAVING TO LIVE YOUR LIFE THE WAY SOMEONE ELSE THINKS YOU SHOULD LIVE YOUR LIFE. THE COST OF FREEDOM IS NOT BEING ABLE TO FORCE OTHERS TO LIVE THE WAY YOU THINK THEY SHOULD LIVE.

DONT LIKE THE PRICE OF FREEDOM? GET THE F*** OUT OF AMERICA, PROBLEM SOLVED!
terroraustralis
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Who won the election?

Postby JGalt » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:14 pm

Who won- the vote counters did!
Sadly, that's the way its been for quite a while!
JGalt
User avatar
PolitiSeedling
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:48 am

Re: Who won the election?

Postby WTFO » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:40 pm

PapaFox wrote:The American people won. Get over it. :chair:


Unfortunately, you've got this completely wrong.

Obama won the election but the American people clearly lost. Trickle up poverty and trickle down govt for everyone.
WTFO
User avatar
PolitiGod
 
Posts: 892
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:32 pm

Re: Who won the election?

Postby arnnatz » Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:41 am

terroraustralis wrote:
the candidate has nothing to do with it. THE PEOPLE CHOOSE THE CANDIDATES

thats democracy.


and where do the people get the information to decide who to choose? They get it from biased media and campaign ads. Fox News skews it to republicans and the rest (CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, etc) skew toward democrats. Look at chris matthews for an example of blatant liberal bias: "I felt a tingle up my leg" - "thankfully we had that storm last week"

terroraustralis wrote:if the candidates are bad choices, there are two explanations

1) all republicans are f***ing retarded, OR

2) some part of the democratic process is being interfered with and unfairly biased, I.E. media coverage of candidates

since you refuse to support my original assertion that explanation number 2 is the correct reason, (preferring instead to label me a "paulbot") BOTH explanations must be true.


where did I not support the assertion tht the democratic process is not being interfered with or unfairly biased? I've been stating it all along. But you would have to have read my posts, which you most certainly have not, to know that. It's easier to just do a cranky and put words in my mouth.

terroraustralis wrote:but no, dont think, dont recognise that both sides of the media are corrupt,


Can you point out a posting by me that says that both sides of the media aren't corrupt or total bullshit? It's one of the reasons that their numbers are starting to fall.

terroraustralis wrote:you need to keep faith in fox news, because fox news is owned by an australian,


Oooo,another liberal talking point. The fact of the matter is that I don't watch fox news, nor do I watch their liberal counterpart, NBC/MSNBC. It's easy to advance the liberal thoughts: 1) you don't like obama, you are a racist 2) You make a point, it had to have come from fox news.

terroraustralis wrote:and would certainly never lie for the purposes of influencing which candidates win the primaries,

and thereby sabotaging the chances of a republican taking the whitehouse...

it shouldnt be too hard for you, you're really good at not thinking.



I could say the same about you, your postings are mostly arrogant and filled with f-bombs (a sure sign of a lack of grasp of the english language - don't understand adverbs, just drop a couple of f-bombs to mask it)

You post like a typical liberal. The choices you posted are just crap. There is a 3rd choice: 3) All liberals are retarded (fauxnews, cranky, and you emphasize the retarded liberal view) Don't think, just act like you know everything and puff that chest out - internet bully tactics actually get you nowhere. It's easy to see thru the smoke and bullshit you post. How much internet time are they giving you in that outback prison anyways?

When w
arnnatz
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:54 am

Re: Who won the election?

Postby terroraustralis » Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:44 am

LOL. yeah

option 3)

all liberals are retarded, therefore the republican candidates are horrible, and they lose the election to obama, the first president in history to sign a bill allowing the indefinite detention and assasination of anyone SUSPECTED of working with alquaeda, without needing to charge them, or give them a trial

answer me this, HOW THE f*** DO YOU LOSE AN ELECTION WHILE REPRESENTING THE "FREEDOM" PARTY, WHEN THAT * IS YOUR OPPONENT?

SERIOUSLY.

HOW.

DO

YOU

LOSE

THAT

ELECTION
DONT LIKE ABORTIONS? DONT GET ONE.
DONT LIKE GUNS? DONT BUY ONE.
DONT LIKE OTHER PEOPLE HAVING EITHER OF THOSE THINGS? THATS TOO F***ING BAD.

FREEDOM IS NOT HAVING TO LIVE YOUR LIFE THE WAY SOMEONE ELSE THINKS YOU SHOULD LIVE YOUR LIFE. THE COST OF FREEDOM IS NOT BEING ABLE TO FORCE OTHERS TO LIVE THE WAY YOU THINK THEY SHOULD LIVE.

DONT LIKE THE PRICE OF FREEDOM? GET THE F*** OUT OF AMERICA, PROBLEM SOLVED!
terroraustralis
User avatar
PolitiMaster
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:45 pm

PreviousNext
Forum Statistics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Options

Return to PolitiChat

cron