Calling All Obama-ites!

[sKiTzo]

He lost it simply because the majority favored somebody else.

Look at your statement In a moment, you'll have to realize that your computationall skills are highly deficient.
"The majority favors someone else". Okay, looking at the polls....where is that majority? In the poll you started, about half of the votes are that no shenanigans played any part of the primaries. Of those, ZERO checked the box that they voted for Romney. In my poll, ZERO again for Romney. Then, to avoid admitting that Paul commands 80% (with Obama included). you filter out who is allowed to vote, which, even then, Paul still has the edge. Furthermore, in your poll, the poll was regarding an issue that had not been reported in the media, yet there were still just as many votes as the ones who voted no voter fraud, very likely because they haven't researched it. With the glaring zeroes next to Romneys name in both polls (as far as people who voted for him), I'm curious how you arrived at your statement.

 

[sKiTzo]

If we limit the poll to only those who voted in the primary, it wouldn't prove anything. QUOTE]

This proved true because just to humor you I ended up starting one like that and as expected not one person has voted.

 

[sKiTzo]

Again find me a scientific poll that will even come close to showing RP beating Romney let alone the landslide you keep claiming actually happened.

I started a poll here at DP - Refer to link below

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/132026-testing-1-2-3-a.html

Ron Paul even beats out Obama and when you take out the other candidates and leave just Obama and Romney alone, I'm sorry to say that it's Ron Paul by 100%. I had said 80% and was even exaggerating then but I never expected Romney to get zero votes. If this is an indication of anything, it's voter fraud.

 

[sKiTzo]

I started a poll here at DP - Refer to link below

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/132026-testing-1-2-3-a.htmlIf this is an indication of anything, it's voter fraud.

Or election fraud, rather, because it's not the voters doing it. It's the establishment.

 

[Quag]

I started a poll here at DP - Refer to link below

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/132026-testing-1-2-3-a.html

Ron Paul even beats out Obama and when you take out the other candidates and leave just Obama and Romney alone, I'm sorry to say that it's Ron Paul by 100%. I had said 80% and was even exaggerating then but I never expected Romney to get zero votes. If this is an indication of anything, it's voter fraud.

Again Please discover what a scientific poll is. Aside from not being random cross section of society, this poll has far too low a turnout to have any actual value. and RP is about half the 80% you claimed thus still not proving the point you were trying to make.

 

[sKiTzo]

Again Please discover what a scientific poll is.

I would say maybe 20-30 years ago, scientific polls were probably a good thing. But now, I would be leery, and have legitimate reasons for saying that. These fat billionaire bastards who want to control how you think have total control over what is news and what isn't. Not only that but I just recently discovered that (get this) it's not illegal to falsify the news. They own all the major networks and not just by coincidence - they set out to do this a long time ago when they realized how instrumental it could be in shaping public opinion to their liking. So, if they put that much effort into controlling the media, don't think they're not going to see to it that they have the companies that do sciebtific polls in their pockets as well. I don't think I would trust a scientific poll these fays.

Aside from not being random cross section of society, this poll has far too low a turnout to have any actual value

Too low a turnout, yes, but the thing that suddenly does give this poll some value, is the mere fact that we expected Paul to score low on a poll here at DP. Since nobody ever seems to be on my side in these threads , I concluded this wasn't really a breeding grounds for Paul supporters. So, the surprise factor alone has to give it a little value.

RP is about half the 80% you claimed thus still not proving the point you were trying to make.

WHOAH NELLIE!! I claimed that if the GOP had not interfered and had run a true blue primary with no shenanigans and manipulation of the votes, and it was between Romney and Paul, Paul would command at least 80% of the vote. I was wrong , however, because he commands 100% not 80. I threw Obama in there because, knowing already that Romney would get very little votes, I wanted to see how Paul would go up against Obama. BTW, I thought Romney would score very low, but I didn't expect a big fat ZERO (and you're gonna tell me no shenanigans? How did he "win" the nomination?)

 

[Quag]

I would say maybe 20-30 years ago, scientific polls were probably a good thing. But now, I would be leery, and have legitimate reasons for saying that. These fat billionaire bastards who want to control how you think have total control over what is news and what isn't. Not only that but I just recently discovered that (get this) it's not illegal to falsify the news. They own all the major networks and not just by coincidence - they set out to do this a long time ago when they realized how instrumental it could be in shaping public opinion to their liking. So, if they put that much effort into controlling the media, don't think they're not going to see to it that they have the companies that do sciebtific polls in their pockets as well. I don't think I would trust a scientific poll these fays.



Too low a turnout, yes, but the thing that suddenly does give this poll some value, is the mere fact that we expected Paul to score low on a poll here at DP. Since nobody ever seems to be on my side in these threads , I concluded this wasn't really a breeding grounds for Paul supporters. So, the surprise factor alone has to give it a little value.



WHOAH NELLIE!! I claimed that if the GOP had not interfered and had run a true blue primary with no shenanigans and manipulation of the votes, and it was between Romney and Paul, Paul would command at least 80% of the vote. I was wrong , however, because he commands 100% not 80. I threw Obama in there because, knowing already that Romney would get very little votes, I wanted to see how Paul would go up against Obama. BTW, I thought Romney would score very low, but I didn't expect a big fat ZERO (and you're gonna tell me no shenanigans? How did he "win" the nomination?)

Sigh ok scientific polls are to be ignored because you believe they are manipulated by the evil media (even though the actual polls are done by speerate entities) and non scientific internet polls should be believed because??? Serioulsy they are way way way easier to manipulate, though usually they tend ot reflect the bias of the sites takign the polls.

I never expected RP to have a bad turnout on this poll, have you checked the political forums here? there a lot of libertarians and RP supporters here. peopel aren't on your side because you make wild exxageratted claims not because they necessarily disagree with RP, they disagree with you.

See above RP would never get 80 or 100% of the vote if he could win which is so incredibly doubtful it is not worth mentioning it would more likely be 50.XX% vs 49.XX% as usually happens. There are a lot of republicans that think RP is certifiable insane, again read the political threads here, you will see that a lot of conservatives/republicans woudl never vote RP, you get a large %of the libertarian vote but thats about it.
as to how Mitt won, here is a shocker he got the most support from those votign in the primaries, plain and simple.

So lets summerize:
Internet polls are completely and utterly valueless, only scientific polls should ever be considered, even then you must look at the actual questions to really get a good idea. I never said RP would get little/no support here, again check out the election forums here. Is the 100% RP support hyperbole again or are you really doubling down?

 

[sKiTzo]

Sigh ok scientific polls are to be ignored because you believe they are manipulated by the evil media (even though the actual polls are done by speerate entities) and non scientific internet polls should be believed because??? Serioulsy they are way way way easier to manipulate, though usually they tend ot reflect the bias of the sites takign the polls.

I never expected RP to have a bad turnout on this poll, have you checked the political forums here? there a lot of libertarians and RP supporters here. peopel aren't on your side because you make wild exxageratted claims not because they necessarily disagree with RP, they disagree with you.

See above RP would never get 80 or 100% of the vote if he could win which is so incredibly doubtful it is not worth mentioning it would more likely be 50.XX% vs 49.XX% as usually happens. There are a lot of republicans that think RP is certifiable insane, again read the political threads here, you will see that a lot of conservatives/republicans woudl never vote RP, you get a large %of the libertarian vote but thats about it.
as to how Mitt won, here is a shocker he got the most support from those votign in the primaries, plain and simple.

So lets summerize:
Internet polls are completely and utterly valueless, only scientific polls should ever be considered, even then you must look at the actual questions to really get a good idea. I never said RP would get little/no support here, again check out the election forums here. Is the 100% RP support hyperbole again or are you really doubling down?

So there's alot of Romney supporters, just not one of them voted in the poll and that explains why RP got 100%. Oh, and there's alot of Paul supporters suddenly, but I haven't seen one
Judging from what the media has displayed, THEY HAVE COMPLETELY LOST ALL CREDIBILITY. Anything that has the potential to shape public opinion and can be bought and taken over, has no credibility. Scientific polls fall into that category. As I said before, A facebook poll - people click on who they vote for (and yes, if they try to vote twice, they can't) and you can see the results right there. A scientific poll you don't know what the hell they do - they just post results. Why would you trust that? Nevermind, there's no logic in anything you say.

 

[sKiTzo]

The irony of that statement is so bold, so strong, that I have to wonder about the origins of such a remark.

Did they ever find that 9 trillion that went missing? They refused to tell us where it went because they spent it on things we would not have approved of, like things they plan to use against us in the not-so-distant future, or things like lavish underground cities designed for THEIR use to hide out in when they kick off nuclear holocaust.
Back to the point. 9 trill is something like $150,000 for each man woman and child in America (now that's a "bailout"). Is anyone in jail? No Do we continue to finance this farce with borrowed money that gets swallowed up by this black hole that is the military industrial complex? The military industrial complex owns Romney. They own Obama. All the propaganda you hear about why we always have to be at war is nothing but lies. This is the cause of our financial crisis. We are financing their bid to dominate the world. This is what our soldiers are being sent to die for - not "to protect America", but to invade other countries unprovoked to further this PRIVATE agenda. Every time you mock Ron Paul, you're mocking America, as we once knew it, right out the door.

The correct thing to do after it becomes obvious they ganked us for 9 trillion dollars and have made clear their intent on getting us into a full scale nuclear war that few to none of us will survive (martial law for the survivors), is to "remove" them immediately. Having Romney or Obama in office will not remove them but only give them the same or worse unlimited power that they already have. If that is not "certifiably insane", then please tell me how RP, the only candidate that promises to put a stop to it, and thus, our only fighting chance, how do you possibly associate this HERO as "certifiably insane"? It's weird to me because everything that our government does, every action they take supports what I'm saying. It's not difficult to see. Why aren't people seeing right through this? 9 trillion dollars missing and just poof! we don't know where it is. Just that right there should convince anyone. How could it not????

 

[Quag]

So there's alot of Romney supporters, just not one of them voted in the poll and that explains why RP got 100%. Oh, and there's alot of Paul supporters suddenly, but I haven't seen one
Judging from what the media has displayed, THEY HAVE COMPLETELY LOST ALL CREDIBILITY. Anything that has the potential to shape public opinion and can be bought and taken over, has no credibility. Scientific polls fall into that category. As I said before, A facebook poll - people click on who they vote for (and yes, if they try to vote twice, they can't) and you can see the results right there. A scientific poll you don't know what the hell they do - they just post results. Why would you trust that? Nevermind, there's no logic in anything you say.

You have no understanding on polls or statistics and this is pointless.
Live in your dream wolrd where 100% of the people want RP but some nebulous orginization(s) are conspiring to keep him from becoming pres. Not sure why they couldn`t conspire to keep him from any elected office but that is your problem. Just curious do you live your entire life looking out for the secret cabal(s) that controll everything or jsut when you get near a computer?

 

[Quag]

The irony of that statement is so bold, so strong, that I have to wonder about the origins of such a remark.

Did they ever find that 9 trillion that went missing? They refused to tell us where it went because they spent it on things we would not have approved of, like things they plan to use against us in the not-so-distant future, or things like lavish underground cities designed for THEIR use to hide out in when they kick off nuclear holocaust.
Back to the point. 9 trill is something like $150,000 for each man woman and child in America (now that's a "bailout"). Is anyone in jail? No Do we continue to finance this farce with borrowed money that gets swallowed up by this black hole that is the military industrial complex? The military industrial complex owns Romney. They own Obama. All the propaganda you hear about why we always have to be at war is nothing but lies. This is the cause of our financial crisis. We are financing their bid to dominate the world. This is what our soldiers are being sent to die for - not "to protect America", but to invade other countries unprovoked to further this PRIVATE agenda. Every time you mock Ron Paul, you're mocking America, as we once knew it, right out the door.

The correct thing to do after it becomes obvious they ganked us for 9 trillion dollars and have made clear their intent on getting us into a full scale nuclear war that few to none of us will survive (martial law for the survivors), is to "remove" them immediately. Having Romney or Obama in office will not remove them but only give them the same or worse unlimited power that they already have. If that is not "certifiably insane", then please tell me how RP, the only candidate that promises to put a stop to it, and thus, our only fighting chance, how do you possibly associate this HERO as "certifiably insane"? It's weird to me because everything that our government does, every action they take supports what I'm saying. It's not difficult to see. Why aren't people seeing right through this? 9 trillion dollars missing and just poof! we don't know where it is. Just that right there should convince anyone. How could it not????

What? just what? This is the worst attempt at deflection by you yet. I have no clue what you are talking about or how this could have anything whatseover to do with the topic.

 

[sKiTzo]

What? just what? This is the worst attempt at deflection by you yet. I have no clue what you are talking about or how this could have anything whatseover to do with the topic.

You had said something about Ron Paul being "certifiably insane" and I merely compared Ron Paul to the "status-quo" to show you what certifiably insane truly means. With all of his years in congress, RP as president would know exactly who to weed out to end the corruption. This is what we need done. Nothing certifiably insane about that. When 9 TRILLION (with a T) of american taxpayer money goes missing and the feds play dumb and nobody is held accountable and we just sit there with our thumb in our ass - that makes us, them, - pretty much everybody BUT Ron Paul certifiably insane!

 

[Quag]

You had said something about Ron Paul being "certifiably insane" and I merely compared Ron Paul to the "status-quo" to show you what certifiably insane truly means. With all of his years in congress, RP as president would know exactly who to weed out to end the corruption. This is what we need done. Nothing certifiably insane about that. When 9 TRILLION (with a T) of american taxpayer money goes missing and the feds play dumb and nobody is held accountable and we just sit there with our thumb in our ass - that makes us, them, - pretty much everybody BUT Ron Paul certifiably insane!

If RP knows who is corrupt why not do somethign about it? He already is in a position to force inquiries if he has any proof.
Still this is just a red herring, You are trying to change the topic again.
Fact many republicans will never vote RP
Fact many independants will never vote RP
Fact very few Democrats would ever vote RP
Fact RP has never won an election by 80-100%
But continue to use internet polls to think you have some kind of point and dismiss anything that doesnt support your personal view of the universe as being part of the conspiracy.

 

[sKiTzo]

If RP knows who is corrupt why not do somethign about it? He already is in a position to force inquiries if he has any proof.
Still this is just a red herring, You are trying to change the topic again.
Fact many republicans will never vote RP
Fact many independants will never vote RP
Fact very few Democrats would ever vote RP
Fact RP has never won an election by 80-100%
But continue to use internet polls to think you have some kind of point and dismiss anything that doesnt support your personal view of the universe as being part of the conspiracy.

You say these are facts....but then why doesn't reality support them? For example, if your "facts" were so true, why do Ron Paul rallies draw thousands (some have drawn 10.000+) and Romney rallies are always him speaking to a group of 50-150 people. Why does Romney HIRE people to hold signs and pretend they are supporters? ( I posted a video earlier where hispanic Romney supporters were approached and were asked why they are there to support Romney - the reply was that they were getting paid!) The only reality supporting your "facts" are the media. and I've already proven that the media has engaged in deceptive reporting regarding Ron Paul. The video I posted proving this could not be refuted by ANYONE. If you'd like me to re-post it. I'd be more than happy to because I want someone to refute that the media played a huge part to make you think what you think.

 

[Quag]

You say these are facts....but then why doesn't reality support them? For example, if your "facts" were so true, why do Ron Paul rallies draw thousands (some have drawn 10.000+) and Romney rallies are always him speaking to a group of 50-150 people. Why does Romney HIRE people to hold signs and pretend they are supporters? ( I posted a video earlier where hispanic Romney supporters were approached and were asked why they are there to support Romney - the reply was that they were getting paid!) The only reality supporting your "facts" are the media. and I've already proven that the media has engaged in deceptive reporting regarding Ron Paul. The video I posted proving this could not be refuted by ANYONE. If you'd like me to re-post it. I'd be more than happy to because I want someone to refute that the media played a huge part to make you think what you think.

Reality not supporting the facts? They are facts! not conjecture or innuendo such as you are prone to use.
You are confusing level of enthusiasm for amount of people that support RP. One does not necessarily correlate to the other. What is the % of peopel who go to ANY politicla rally compared to the % that actually vote? I know you don't like statisitcs but this is your fundemental problem. You see lots of cheering RP fans and assume that means 80-100% of th epeopel support him. You use internet polls that no one could ever take seriously as having any meaning to support your fantasies, you then dismiss scientific polls based on conspiracy theories against RP.

 

[sKiTzo]

Reality not supporting the facts? They are facts! not conjecture or innuendo such as you are prone to use.
You are confusing level of enthusiasm for amount of people that support RP. One does not necessarily correlate to the other. What is the % of peopel who go to ANY politicla rally compared to the % that actually vote? I know you don't like statisitcs but this is your fundemental problem. You see lots of cheering RP fans and assume that means 80-100% of th epeopel support him. You use internet polls that no one could ever take seriously as having any meaning to support your fantasies, you then dismiss scientific polls based on conspiracy theories against RP.

The republicans have exhibited such an embarrassing display of misconduct, and the media went to bizarre lengths to dog Ron Paul. This was a unified combined effort. THAT ALONE SUPPORTS MY ARGUMENT AND EXTINGUISHES YOURS. They are not going to commit these acts of fraud unless they felt it was the only way for Romney to win. If Romney really had all the support like you say, then the republican officials could have kept their hands out of it and gone by the book, and the media could have acknowledged that Paul existed. THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED THOUGH, IS IT? This is basic processing of reality-based information gathered from what we see and hear going on around us.

 

[Quag]

The republicans have exhibited such an embarrassing display of misconduct, and the media went to bizarre lengths to dog Ron Paul. This was a unified combined effort. THAT ALONE SUPPORTS MY ARGUMENT AND EXTINGUISHES YOURS. They are not going to commit these acts of fraud unless they felt it was the only way for Romney to win. If Romney really had all the support like you say, then the republican officials could have kept their hands out of it and gone by the book, and the media could have acknowledged that Paul existed. THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED THOUGH, IS IT? This is basic processing of reality-based information gathered from what we see and hear going on around us.

Your leaps in logic are astounding. If A happens it means Z is true!

 

[SovereignElecto]

There's a reason we have "state secrets" and classified intelligence information. It ultimately keeps us safe. We've had very few attacks on our soil and very few attacks on our foreign bases specifically because of our intelligence, defense, and international alliances. There's more going on behind the scenes than we know, so when a politician makes some promise about doing a 180 in regards to defense I shrug it off.

It amazes me that people like you actually buy into these “state secrets” and all the lies. It’s actually embarrassing to me that there are so many people just like you who shrug it off and consider it ok to have a secret government running things. You basically said that as long as you are safe you don’t care how much it cost you in taxes or lies.

Truly pathetic IMHO and when the day comes that America suffers I will tell you to enjoy your cake

 

[tessaesque]

It amazes me that people like you actually buy into these “state secrets” and all the lies. It’s actually embarrassing to me that there are so many people just like you who shrug it off and consider it ok to have a secret government running things. You basically said that as long as you are safe you don’t care how much it cost you in taxes or lies.

Truly pathetic IMHO and when the day comes that America suffers I will tell you to enjoy your cake

What I find pathetic is people who naively believe that transparency is possible or practical because it has been idealized to the point of absolute nonsense.

 

[sKiTzo]

Your leaps in logic are astounding. If A happens it means Z is true!

I like yours better: If A happens it means Z is true but only if the mainstream media reported it!