Posts made by Pervavita

i think it was the 1920’s was the last time, and the reason we don’t know is because our VP is too old IMO.
Jen is right, Rice would have ether forced the election to be about issues or at the vary least split the votes that were cast on the bassis of “i want a woman Pres” or “i want a black Pres”.

also no one can out Clinton a Clinton, the crying was a act of pure geniouss yesterday.
i find it funny that H Clinton keeps saying she has 35 years experiance and yet came out yesterday and said (paraphrasing) “I listened to you and have just found my voice.” so after 35 years of experiance she just got a clue on what she stands for.

i thought Rice would have been a good runner on the R billot, she would have both Clinton and Obama’s “advantages” as a woman and black. on top of that she has real experiance in internatonal afairs.

@Jermofoot:

@Pervavita:

i can argue that it was relavent and there are facts to back it, but i see no reason to argue it. it was simply a statment directing at when some one passed the buck to the wrong (IMO) man.

I showed how easy it was to pass the buck on someone when no facts are presented.  I knew exactly who Balung was talking about, but imitated him in jest.  But I could still make an argument for the person I mentioned.

i’m not going to reply other then to say, we were told to stop that discusion.

thats part of what i was saying is that i am moving on  :wink:

Clinton and Mccain won NH.
any one else find it odd that Clinton stool a line from Edwerds and also got teary eyed right before? i think both were just ploys to gain votes and it worked.

@ncscswitch:

@Pervavita:

accually Clinton had all the intell leading up to the 9/11 attacks, Bush just came into office right before the attacks; he may have had the intell too, but it dosn’t change that Clinton did as well. before that i don’t know as i’m not that old.

This type of speculative post regardinf 9-11 conspiracies or other such issues are EXACTLY the type of post that will result in this thread being locked and removed and preclude any future discussions on the election.

Posters may continue to discuss the candidates, and FACTS relating to their positions or past acts.  Conspiracy theories, flames, slander, libel, etc. are not acceptible whether made against Democrat, Republican, or Independent.

STAY ON TOPIC or there will be no topic!

i can argue that it was relavent and there are facts to back it, but i see no reason to argue it. it was simply a statment directing at when some one passed the buck to the wrong (IMO) man.

edit: seeing as your on, if this is considered flaming or such deleat this post in favor of keeping the thread open. it was not and still is not my intent to inflame.

i don’t want it spread out, i’m saying “IF” we keep it spread to do it in blocks, i would much rather have it all on one day so that no state with a low pop gets specal treatment well others with larger and thus more vital pops are ignored.
also add an “a” to the end if you want to shorten my user name, other wise i feel like your calling me a “perv” as in pervert  :wink:
also Perva is a word.

always saw it as “A” my self.

all non combat movement happens at the same time, so you could only move 1 tank through, unless you move other units out at the same time.

i’m not against the idea, but we have it so spread out, even with super tuesday, i think we still have states after that. also we have a spread of states up untell that time. ya they are small states, but they do effect how others will vote when they add up together. your vote should not be effected by how the majority of people before you voted, and we all know people do that.

thats what i mean, his plans and ideas don’t fit or atleast he hasn’t made the effert to let people see them fit into modern problems such as the war. from what i understand he has the opinion to pull our troops out right away and only work on a deffence strat where we react to attacks but even reacting dosn’t allow us to go on the attack if attacked. although i heard he was in support of going after Osama, he was not in support of the US going into Afganistan to drive the Taliban out. now he may have a reason for that that makes sence, but on face value it sounds crazy and makes him sound like he is as well.

@Guerrilla:

I imagine he won’t support anyone if he loses… No one holds his views…

witch is too bad as for the most part he holds the views that are closest to what the founding fathers were. his only problem is that he sounds crazy and that he hasn’t made any adouptions of ideas to make the ideas fit with the modern world and situation going on now.

@dezrtfish:

It seems to me that Iowa is like a big poll that allows many canidates to quit when they realize thier odds are slim.  The majoraty of the canidates it seems are just trying to push thier pet issue in to the spot light.  Iowa gives them the chance to do that then drop out and throw thier support toto the camp of someone who actualy has a chance of winning.

if you look at it like that, then it’s not so bad, but if you see it as the way i do then it’s broken IMO as lets say i’m a Paul supporter and he sticks it out to the end, but my state is one of the last to put it’s support out, now in my scenario lets say Paul can’t win by the time it gets to my state, even if he wins 100% of my state and all states voting at the time i do and after. so now when i go to vote my primary choice is a dead duck so i have to chose a viable caniadate. now that sounds good in the aspect of my vote will count, but that is not how it should work, my vote should go how i want and it should be able to count in the aspect of i don’t know that the guy i’m supporting dosn’t have a chance.
if Obama wins the next few states then it raises the chances that other voters will side with him over Edwerds or Clinton as well. not just that but if say it becomes prity even between Clinton and Obama then it may become evident that Edwerds supporters may not have any real say any more and then chose there secound pick when in fact Edwerds may still have enough support out there to pull it off but because he lost too much too soon he gets pushed out of the running.

i never heard much about Clinton warnning about attacks, his actions in many ways showed that he didn’t act enough, he down sized the millitary and cut millitary spending. not realy the actions of some one expecting an attack IMO. not that we can change that now, i’m just stating that all the blame can’t go on Bush for the attacks as has been seen.

yes it’s so much a states right to do it as they see fit that WY who decided to get in on the action was mostly ignored and you can’t say it wasn’t, or that it was due to a small population as Iowa dosn’t exactly have a huge pop. not only were they over looked but they also suffered a penelty in lossing half there delagets for going early so “there state would matter”. i’m not saying the federal government should step in, but i think that the parties need to find a better way along with the states. it’s stupid to have people who are viable canadents pushed out of the running because they don’t have the money to keep up the campaighn, and it’s stupid that you should have to spend so much money to get so few votes and then move on to a larger state and spend less money. it’s a broken and stupid system that should be fixed.

IMO, they should all go at the same time, or atleast in stages where a few states go, then a week latter some more go ext. Iowa has a small population and yet it gets a huge % of the campaighn money dumped into it as it’s to important to do well there as the desision made there effects other states desisions.

accually Clinton had all the intell leading up to the 9/11 attacks, Bush just came into office right before the attacks; he may have had the intell too, but it dosn’t change that Clinton did as well. before that i don’t know as i’m not that old.

thx, co opp is one of the big things i look for in a game as other wise i don’t get much play time so the game becomes a wast of money.
i will look into it for the bots, thx.

true, i personaly didn’t see a problem with ether of what you said to begin with and sure don’t see a problem with it now as how this discusion has gone so far…. it seamed the more mild part of the discusion.

it’s just chance that Democrats won the bulk of congress at the same time a surge that Democrats fought against came into play and worked.

@balungaloaf:

little do they talk about how terrible congress is.

it hasnt done 1 dang thing in a year.  fantastic if thats what you want.

funney thing is we have a ton of congress members running and doing well in the primaries (even some new members), and yet this isn’t an issue. i think it’s because the media dosn’t want it to be an issue, although we also have a few canidents not in congress that should be using this as a big deal issue.

k, just wanted to make sure you were putting them together  :wink:
accually i know what you mean, the media has droped the war as it’s doing much better now, the government and media arn’t publicly putting 2 and 2 together to show us how there is still a threat (media because they don’t want the war to look good, government because they don’t want us scared, or to close the boarder). so we are convinced because of the lack of covarage (atleast the vast majority of the sheepel) that the war is all but over, we are just waiting to bring our troops home, so onto new media pushed issues like our sinking economy and how bad our current president is doing there as you always have to find how bad he is doing, when he dose well we got to make sure we divert to some new “problem”

Records, as in voting Records are vital when you have them, if a person votes one way, but says another, that is important to know.

now i do think the economy is important and ties right into the war. the war is my personal priority, but if the economy colapses then we are going to have to pull troops back as we can’t afford to maintain the large millitary let alone over seas. so now national security is an issue as the war is not over seas but the terrorist can bring it back to us.
the boarder ties in with the war as the news has shown, there was a group of men who entered the US via Mexico that only some were cought and the rest not. these men were found out to be terorist. also we had the truck that was carrying 2 chemicals that when mixed explod, the driver and passanger disapeared, the truck wasn’t documented as carring ether matierial, and the truck was just south of the boarder heading north.

what i’m getting at on the last two issues is that we have things that are tied together even if not standing out or the media or governemnt down plays them.