angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 You keep trying to label people to fit your stereotypes to let you easily dismiss people with your libertarian playbook. To bad, I can not tell you one thing about rachel whoever, I do not watch tv. thats cool. whether you watch maddow or not, i'm here to tell you, your views are exactly the same as hers. Tell me one country even close to the size of the US that has successfully implemented your bullshit theories and we will have a discussion, but until that happens or you admit, you do not know everything and can possibly be wrong, you are full of shit. The reason there has NEVER been a country that in the history of mankind has implemented your bullshit theories, is because it does not work for anyone except for the wealthy. If is is the best way forward for this world, why has it never been used before?????? this country 'successfully implemented my bullshit theories' when it was created. what on earth are you talking about? open a history book for a second. so, it can be seen your entire post is wrong and based on faulty logic, because my 'bullshit theories' were the basis of this country. if anything, your pro gov propaganda is in fact what is faulty. it has been continually discredited. socialism and regulation has been the biggest failure in mankind. but the basic premise seems to be... the berlin wall fell, the soviet system collapsed, its a failure, so lets try it in the US. sounds like the greatest path to take for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Wrong, because your way failed when it was only implemented a little bit before at the turn of the 20th century. The New Deal was a result of that bullshit. You say that our country was founded on it, but you are wrong, it was founded on Freedom and Liberty, which are words you use to pull the uninformed in and you do not tell them about all the austrian bullshit that goes along with your theories that will sell this country out to the highest payer. On the surface, your liberty lines seem very reasonable, but so does the con man when he is trying to sell you something you do not want to buy. It is not until you get past the nonsense, that you see the truth. Too bad for me, that most Americans do not dig for the truth and are easily conned. By the way, I really liked how you do not have an answer to my question, but we both know the truth. Not one single country has successfully implemented your bullshit. Not one, and that is because it does not work. You can cite whoever you want to back up your theories, but without mathematical equations to back it up, it will stay a theory. Everything in this world, down to the atoms in a single grain of sand has a mathematical system to back it up (the hard part is filling in the variables). Why does your system not?? Is it that special, it does not need numbers? I think you all like that it doesn't involve anything that you can prove, so you can always say you are right because it has never been put in place to see. hypocritical conmen, every last one of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Wrong, because your way failed when it was only implemented a little bit before at the turn of the 20th century. The New Deal was a result of that bullshit. You say that our country was founded on it, but you are wrong, it was founded on Freedom and Liberty, which are words you use to pull the uninformed in and you do not tell them about all the austrian bullshit that goes along with your theories that will sell this country out to the highest payer. On the surface, your liberty lines seem very reasonable, but so does the con man when he is trying to sell you something you do not want to buy. It is not until you get past the nonsense, that you see the truth. Too bad for me, that most Americans do not dig for the truth and are easily conned. By the way, I really liked how you do not have an answer to my question, but we both know the truth. Not one single country has successfully implemented your bullshit. Not one, and that is because it does not work. You can cite whoever you want to back up your theories, but without mathematical equations to back it up, it will stay a theory. Everything in this world, down to the atoms in a single grain of sand has a mathematical system to back it up (the hard part is filling in the variables). Why does your system not?? Is it that special, it does not need numbers? I think you all like that it doesn't involve anything that you can prove, so you can always say you are right because it has never been put in place to see. hypocritical conmen, every last one of you. hahahaha. me: my ideology was the same ideology that founded america. you: your policies or ideology was never instituted, anywhere, and never will be. you are an anti american piece of shit hmmm, mathematical equations. if i trade an item for another item, both parties benefit in the ex ante sense. lay this out for me in an mathematical equation and please, please, tell me why on earth you need a mathematical equation to explain that if someone gives you 15K for your car your are selling for 15K, that you are satisfied with this transaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Nice way of not replying. Do you have anything at all??? BTW, our country was not founded on your bullshit theories and you know it, regardless of whether or not you will admit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If you really think austrain economics is as easy to explain as your example, you are truly blinded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 not replying to what? what do you want me to say that i havent said to you a million times before? what is my ideology? that i believe in freedom for all, special privileges for none. believe everyone has the right to life liberty and property and that these are inalienable rights that cannot be taken away. i believe government is best which governs least. i believe when governments infringe on natural rights, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish said government. this country was founded on these very same principles. it was founded by resistance to oppression. resistance to oppressive mercantilism, taxation, martial law, and various other civil liberties violations. in fact, probably the best depiction of my overall philosophy can be found in the declaration of secession, aka declaration of independence. read it here: http://www.constitution.org/usdeclar.htm its obvious you never have before. this philosophy of classical liberalism is the same philosophy that governed the country atleast until 1861 and largely until the progressive era and its statism. believe it or not, americans were largely free until this time. regulations and rules were limited largely to those protect property rights. taxes were not direct on the american people. we had a quasi militia type defense system. the constitution was largely followed (for what thats worth). the very things i argue for WAS america at one time. there was no welfare state nor much else of anything that wasnt enumerated in the constitution its self. as far as a study of human actions, aka austrian economics, as i've told you many times before, its not a system. its a study of economics. it cannot be 'instituted.' it merely explains how markets work. nothing more, nothing less. it is not tied to politics whatsoever. but, you tend to keep arguments circular, ignore truth and reason and go back to your olbermann talking points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If you really think austrain economics is as easy to explain as your example, you are truly blinded. look, if you cant come up with an equation to explain that you are happy when someone gives you 15K for your car you are selling for 15K or you cant see a need to even do so, therefore proving my point... just say so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Just like a typical conman. State something that everyone can agree to and do not tell them about the other bullshit that is attached. If you do not understand what I am implying, I will break it down for you, but I think you understand everything I am saying, but you just do not like it. No one has a problem with the freedom or liberty aspect of your bullshit, what they have a problem with is the economic side of things. To say that they are not attached to politics or they are not a system, is a outfaced lie. You just have to look at RP to see that they are all combined. To elect someone who is a libertarian, like RP, is to elect someone who believes in your economic bullshit. Also, to say that America started to go down in 1861 because of the progressive movement is you just denying facts again. The facts are that from then until the enforcement of the sherman act, you conmen were implementing libertarianism in the US. The result was monopolistic gouging, slavery and racial oppression, starvation among the elderly, a quarter of the population was out of work, five thousand banks failed, destroying the savings of 9 million families, wall street was discredited by insider trading and collusion with banks at the expense of investors, farmers were breaking out into open revolt, miners and jobless city workers were rioting. (BTW, I did copy some of those examples, so fuck you) After Roosevelt, our country went into one of its greatest periods. Now you are advocating for this country to return to one of its worst periods of social injustice. Keep trying to twist the argument into one for/against liberty when I am not arguing that with you. You do this alot when you are losing. Too bad, that these tactics are straight from the libertarianism play books and are easily spotted. I have no problem with the freedom and liberty side of your movement, except for RPs anti-abortion hypocrisy. BTW, you still have not named one country or have explained that the whole austrian economics bullshit that goes hand and hand with libertarianism is not founded on anything other then some guys saying "I think this will work". So, keep trying to change the subject to something that no one is actually arguing about. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 look, if you cant come up with an equation to explain that you are happy when someone gives you 15K for your car you are selling for 15K or you cant see a need to even do so, therefore proving my point... just say so. You obviously do not have anything of substance to back up any of the bullshit you talk about. Keep trying to simplify things, because that is all you understand. :lol: :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 BTW, you not able to show where your bullshit theories have ever been successful, are just a sign that you lost. Good job voting for someone that is going to lose. How does it feel being on the losing team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 No one has a problem with the freedom or liberty aspect of your bullshit, what they have a problem with is the economic side of things. To say that they are not attached to politics or they are not a system, is a outfaced lie. You just have to look at RP to see that they are all combined. To elect someone who is a libertarian, like RP, is to elect someone who believes in your economic bullshit. AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS IS A VALUE FREE SCIENCE. as i stated previously, you can understand austrian economics and be a totalitarian. for instance, you can understand that central bank manipulation of credit creates the business cycle. now, on a political level, if you dont want the business cycle, you advocate eliminating the central bank. if you want the business cycle, you want the central bank. libertarian and being a student of austrian economics are not the same. [quot]Also, to say that America started to go down in 1861 because of the progressive movement is you just denying facts again. The facts are that from then until the enforcement of the sherman act, you conmen were implementing libertarianism in the US. The result was monopolistic gouging, slavery and racial oppression, starvation among the elderly, a quarter of the population was out of work, five thousand banks failed, destroying the savings of 9 million families, wall street was discredited by insider trading and collusion with banks at the expense of investors, farmers were breaking out into open revolt, miners and jobless city workers were rioting. (BTW, I did copy some of those examples, so fuck you) hmmm... so wait. you are saying that a philosophy that states one is not entitled to infringe on the rights of others the same ideology that condones and supports slavery? and thanks for another round of copying and pasting. at least you are admitting to your plagiarizing this time around. but wait... i forgot, you do not look to any outside sources to come to your conclusions. :lol: After Roosevelt, our country went into one of its greatest periods. Now you are advocating for this country to return to one of its worst periods of social injustice. social injustice. ah, what a great soviet term. our country entered into a time of relative prosperity after roosevelt and after the end of ww2 because america turned largely to a free market approach as the new deal, which prolonged the depression was officially ended and the war time domestic measures were largely repealed. I have no problem with the freedom and liberty side of your movement, except for RPs anti-abortion hypocrisy. freedom and liberty are a package. you cannot support the 'freedom and liberty' side of the 'movement' while supporting oppressing economic liberty. liberty is a package. liberty is nothing but the freedom to do whatever you want, so long as you do not initiate force against another human or their property. RP is a federal politician. as such he must support the constitution. the constitution does not mention abortion, so it is a state issue as he has continually stated before. he has no position on it as far as the federal government is concerned. BTW, you still have not named one country or have explained that the whole austrian economics bullshit that goes hand and hand with libertarianism is not founded on anything other then some guys saying "I think this will work". So, keep trying to change the subject to something that no one is actually arguing about. austrian economics does not 'go hand in hand' with libertarianism. this is just false on its face. austrian economics is merely a school of economic thought. there is also public choice, chicago, neo classical, etc. austrian economics, once again for the 1000th time is not a system, it is merely a school of thought that studies human action. libertarianism is the only theory that addresses political issues namely, you dont mess with me, i wont mess with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 You obviously do not have anything of substance to back up any of the bullshit you talk about. Keep trying to simplify things, because that is all you understand. :lol: :lol: :lol: you are just getting funny now. your arguments are entirely circular and offer nothing new nor do they progress. you keep trying to tell me i need an equation to understand human action. you cannot produce one nor want to produce one to state various facts related to human action. can you also produce an equation that tells me the sky is blue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 BTW, you not able to show where your bullshit theories have ever been successful, are just a sign that you lost. Good job voting for someone that is going to lose. How does it feel being on the losing team? how does it feel to have voted for obama who is the most statist president to date who has resided over the largest government in the history of the world? the 'your team' mentality on this exactly illustrates why you are a tyrant and why your policies are those that should be resisted. you believe imposing your will on others, i dont. im willing to let you live in your soviet splendor, and you refuse to do the same for me. one cannot have a rational discussion with someone who is willing to have you jailed if you resist their idea of how society should function Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 See, this is what you do. When you do not want to address something you do not like, you bring up points that have no bearing on what we are talking about, so that you can address a topic you are comfortable with. You do realize that you do not actually address anything I have said and you are only spouting rhetoric?? Maybe you do not see it. Not once did you address anything except to say that libertarianism is not the same as austrian economics. I am here to tell you that it is the same thing. To make it easy to understand, I will explain it to you with this example. There are many different kinds of the color blue, but ultimately they are all fucking blue, regardless of the different shades they are. Austrain economics is not a school of thought as you keep saying. All you are trying to do with this argument is change the argument. Keep trying to change the subject, you still have not shown us one time where your theories have been successful. In fact you tried to state nonsense about before 1861, but that was based on denying facts about history and have been proven to have actually failed. Funny thing about facts, they do not change, no matter how many lies you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 how does it feel to have voted for obama who is the most statist president to date who has resided over the largest government in the history of the world? the 'your team' mentality on this exactly illustrates why you are a tyrant and why your policies are those that should be resisted. you believe imposing your will on others, i dont. im willing to let you live in your soviet splendor, and you refuse to do the same for me. one cannot have a rational discussion with someone who is willing to have you jailed if you resist their idea of how society should function More assumptions based on your misguided viewpoints. Show me one time where someone is jailed for resisting an idea of how society should function?? Show me one time where I have stated that we should force everyone to live exactly the same way?? You make assumptions and go to an extreme situation to try to support them. And you call me un-rational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 you are just getting funny now. your arguments are entirely circular and offer nothing new nor do they progress. you keep trying to tell me i need an equation to understand human action. you cannot produce one nor want to produce one to state various facts related to human action. can you also produce an equation that tells me the sky is blue? Here is why the sky is blue motherfucker: Some numbers that AOD can not understand:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: By the way AOD, I really am into how you keep trying to redefine our argument. too bad, when it all comes down to it, your theories are bullshit and do not work. You are unable to prove otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 More assumptions based on your misguided viewpoints. Show me one time where someone is jailed for resisting an idea of how society should function?? Show me one time where I have stated that we should force everyone to live exactly the same way?? You make assumptions and go to an extreme situation to try to support them. And you call me un-rational. its not an assumption. for instance, if you pass a law that says i cannot own a certain firearm, what is the consequence if i break this law? just slap me on the wrist? or do i ultimately end up in jail? if someone wants to cut my grass and i pay him 5$ an hour and he willingly does it, this is an illegal transaction according to you, since you support the minimum wage. what is my penalty for breaking this law? i get fined. if i refuse to pay the fine, a warrant is issued for my arrest. if i sufficiently defend myself from this very law that you say does not affect me one iota, the LEO's claim the right to SHOOT me for resisting being put into a cage. what if the guy i paid the 5$ an hour to doesnt file a 1040 form? what happens to him if i refuses to pay the fines, back taxes, extortion fees and levies? he winds up like irwin schiff. if you say one must pay for your kids school, pay for someone elses housing or food, are you trying to tell me with a straight face that this is NOT telling someone how to live? your policies shape how society functions. everything you advocate runs the lives of other people. but i dont blame you specifically because you dont realize what your views entail. you do not understand that all your policies necessarily involve violence against non conformists. perhaps you should dwell a bit on this and think really hard on this....before your next one line response restating the exact thing i just replied to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Here is why the sky is blue motherfucker: Some numbers that AOD can not understand:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: By the way AOD, I really am into how you keep trying to redefine our argument. too bad, when it all comes down to it, your theories are bullshit and do not work. You are unable to prove otherwise. hey, if you need read all that just to look outside and see that the sky is blue, that is your loss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 ^ more extreme examples. How does any of that address what we are talking about. Keep trying to change the argument, sooner or later you might win, hahahaha. BTW, I do love how you just tried to change it to support your anti-tax bullshit. What else do you have? I am still waiting to see where your bullshit has been successfully implemented. You sure can not answer a question to save your life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 hey, if you need read all that just to look outside and see that the sky is blue, that is your loss The sad part is that you can not understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 ^ more extreme examples. How does any of that address what we are talking about. Keep trying to change the argument, sooner or later you might win, hahahaha. BTW, I do love how you just tried to change it to support your anti-tax bullshit. What else do you have? I am still waiting to see where your bullshit has been successfully implemented. You sure can not answer a question to save your life. so the entire basis of your 'i never said i want you in a cage...' is based on the fact that you personally arent the one doing it? but its totally fine to elect politicians who write laws that you favor that then throw non conformists into jail? got ya. sorry dude, you are way to redundant. you talk in to many circles, im assuming because you need google various points and find rebuttals written by others. and when you dont have time for that, you just dont have anything meaningful to say. you continually miss the forest for the trees and do not even understand that on the most basic level your policies necessarily are enforced by violence against those that refuse to comply. i just put you on ignore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 There you go again, refusing to answer any valid questions. You blatantly are trying to change the subject. Not once can you show us where your theories have been successful, not once. Fuck you and your ignore, we both know you will keep watching. BTW, to imply that there are laws that will put you in jail for thinking something else is nonsense. You can not even show us what those laws are. You are full of rhetoric bullshit and are unable to realistically support it, without trying to change the argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zig Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Since returning to my own country and finding it turning in to a ridiculous nanny state where politicians and lobby groups want to save us from everything (seriously, the Health Professional Association is trying to have happy hour banned. They are banning happiness....), I can certainly see the value in the argument of over-regulation and allowing people to live their own lives. After living in China for way too long I can also see the value of competition and the benefits of a strong market based economy where rationality is the decider. That being said Ron Paul is a fruit loop and left to his own devices he would destroy the USA with his ideas on foreign policy alone. Even 65% of the living standards that the US enjoys requires the US to be interconnected with the rest of the world in economic behaviour alone. Were economic activity exists so must military power or some one gonna come along and take your economic from you. It is painfully clear to me that RP simply doesn't understand the threats in the world and how geopolitics works. The argument 'if we just left people alone they'd leave us alone' is so naive it's astounding. If that were the case there would be no war in history, everyone would just be leaving each other alone. History quite clearly shows that there are many reasons for aggression, irrationality, mistrust, fear, resource security, greed, prestige/ego, etc. A leader is responsible for protecting the nation. For a leader to think that isolationism or even passive engagement is a form of defense is to open your nation to massive risk and to be irresponsible. I think Ron Paul the Messiah would be an irresponsible president based on his foreign policy alone. I don't think Ron Paul doesn't comprehend the threats in the world, I just think he views it from the perspective of blow-back in that we are at least partly responsible for the threats that have been generated in the world and the hatred that is fermented against us. His answers to these problems are to change the way we operate by shifting our foreign policy dramatically. You're correct when you say that the US is now dependent on an interconnected world economically, but I don't think RP's policies would weaken our foreign trade and commerce with the rest of the world. I also don't believe that RP is naive enough to think that if we pulled our troops from around the world that we would be safe from the existing threats left behind either. However, taking steps towards peace with these threats is suitable to my preference and declaring war on the proper threats that persist, constitutionally, and legally, is something that isn't necessarily off the table for a RP presidency I would hope. Continuing to be engaged in illegal wars, and stationed around the world though isn't helping the cause for peace that's for certain in my opinion. Leaders are responsible for making tough decisions that can open doorways to new opportunities, paths, and future experiences as well as protecting the nation. We need protection in this nation from enemies foreign and domestic, and right now we need a leader who has the knowledge and wisdom to make the right decisions as to what is actually protecting the American people from these very real threats. Our opinions will always differ on what is and isn't protecting us, but I don't think it's fair to call RP's foreign policy isolationism. Isolationism is North Korea, and RP is far from advocating what North Korea currently is as a state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zig Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 jon stewart had a good bit on how fox news wouldn't even mention his name after the iowa straw pull or whatever. worth watching. yea i saw that... pretty hilarious here's the link if you missed it.. http://youtu.be/QO93P6uz9t8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zig Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 ROFL that video is outrageous hahahahaa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 It was funny, but it just shows you that straw poll is meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zig Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I don't disagree with you the straw poll doesn't mean much but the media bias is so obvious... Jon Stewart really hit the nail on the head with that one man, props to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I don't think Ron Paul doesn't comprehend the threats in the world, I just think he views it from the perspective of blow-back in that we are at least partly responsible for the threats that have been generated in the world and the hatred that is fermented against us. His answers to these problems are to change the way we operate by shifting our foreign policy dramatically. You're correct when you say that the US is now dependent on an interconnected world economically, but I don't think RP's policies would weaken our foreign trade and commerce with the rest of the world. I also don't believe that RP is naive enough to think that if we pulled our troops from around the world that we would be safe from the existing threats left behind either. However, taking steps towards peace with these threats is suitable to my preference and declaring war on the proper threats that persist, constitutionally, and legally, is something that isn't necessarily off the table for a RP presidency I would hope. Continuing to be engaged in illegal wars, and stationed around the world though isn't helping the cause for peace that's for certain in my opinion. Leaders are responsible for making tough decisions that can open doorways to new opportunities, paths, and future experiences as well as protecting the nation. We need protection in this nation from enemies foreign and domestic, and right now we need a leader who has the knowledge and wisdom to make the right decisions as to what is actually protecting the American people from these very real threats. Our opinions will always differ on what is and isn't protecting us, but I don't think it's fair to call RP's foreign policy isolationism. Isolationism is North Korea, and RP is far from advocating what North Korea currently is as a state. What do you think would happen if France during our revolutionary war had the same foreign policy as Ron Paul does now? I am willing to guess that there was some French, that were against supporting us back then. Would there be an America? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zig Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 What do you think would happen if France during our revolutionary war had the same foreign policy as Ron Paul does now? I am willing to guess that there was some French, that were against supporting us back then. Would there be an America? It's a good point but it seems like you're insinuating that any of the military intervention we've been involved in over the past decade can be compared to what the French did for us during the Revolution. I would have to disagree with that insinuation, and it also insinuates that RP's foreign policy would become the everlasting FP of the nation forever. I think at this moment in history it would be beneficial for us to be non-interventionist, to pull our troops, to redefine the role of government and to take a step back to analyze our position in the world and start repairing what got out of hand. This doesn't mean that we would be a non-interventionist nation for the remainder of our existence, I think that's impossible for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I don't disagree with you the straw poll doesn't mean much but the media bias is so obvious... Jon Stewart really hit the nail on the head with that one man, props to him. That is why you have to look into things yourself. That poll is so statistically unimportant, it amazes me, anyone, including the media pays attention to it. Take a look at how few people actually vote in it and compare them to the amount of people eligible to vote. Then add in how it is EXPECTED to bus in your supporters to vote. I just do not get the point of the Ames poll, other then for the media to have something to talk about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.