PUBS: Romney or bust

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
imo...there is no other candidate who has a chance of beating obama. romney has a chance. i think it is a 50/50 chance. but put up any other pub candidate and obama wins hands down.

if not, why not.
 
We don't need Democrat Lite. A hard turn to the left requires a hard turn to the right. Stop letting the liberals choose our candidate for us. Cain is the one.
 
Yurt said:
imo...there is no other candidate who has a chance of beating obama. romney has a chance. i think it is a 50/50 chance. but put up any other pub candidate and obama wins hands down.

if not, why not.
Click to expand...

Well then why not just vote for Obama? I don't see a difference between the two, other than on is slightly less white and one is a Mormon.
 
Ohh the uneducated. It will not be too early come super Tuesday. Romney wins easily if the economy is growing less than 2 percent. Greater than 3 percent Obama huge
 
This thread is a perfect example of why this place is so hard to take for very long. The discussion actually started out ok, was on topic. Then post #7 DY has to use a nonseq and ask Top (Dude) about his national ranking in wrestling. WHY? Why can't people stick to the topic and stop using insults and bullshit to shut down debate. To his credit, STY ignores #7 and continues to talk about THE SUBJECT. DY comes back on subject for one post, and then devolves into Top teabagging Sandusky. Top has enough, retorts, and thus this thread begins to really go to shit. Why can't people stick to the topic and NOT insult, flame, and basically be rude assholes? WTF?
 
Socrtease said:
This thread is a perfect example of why this place is so hard to take for very long. The discussion actually started out ok, was on topic. Then post #7 DY has to use a nonseq and ask Top (Dude) about his national ranking in wrestling. WHY? Why can't people stick to the topic and stop using insults and bullshit to shut down debate. To his credit, STY ignores #7 and continues to talk about THE SUBJECT. DY comes back on subject for one post, and then devolves into Top teabagging Sandusky. Top has enough, retorts, and thus this thread begins to really go to shit. Why can't people stick to the topic and NOT insult, flame, and basically be rude assholes? WTF?
Click to expand...

Baby sitting never changes Soc.
 
Socrtease said:
This thread is a perfect example of why this place is so hard to take for very long. The discussion actually started out ok, was on topic. Then post #7 DY has to use a nonseq and ask Top (Dude) about his national ranking in wrestling. WHY? Why can't people stick to the topic and stop using insults and bullshit to shut down debate. To his credit, STY ignores #7 and continues to talk about THE SUBJECT. DY comes back on subject for one post, and then devolves into Top teabagging Sandusky. Top has enough, retorts, and thus this thread begins to really go to shit. Why can't people stick to the topic and NOT insult, flame, and basically be rude assholes? WTF?
Click to expand...
TopShit never debates. Do your fucking job and ban his sorry gay ass.
 
DamnYankee said:
TopShit never debates. Do your fucking job and ban his sorry gay ass.
Click to expand...

If they banned everyone who doesn't debate, there would about 3 of us left. And you would have been gone long ago.



I think we should have a new rule requiring posts be about the topic, at least in some way.
 
WinterBorn said:
If they banned everyone who doesn't debate, there would about 3 of us left. And you would have been gone long ago.



I think we should have a new rule requiring posts be about the topic, at least in some way.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing. Thinking about a way a supermajority could vote to remove a poster from a thread if his posts were consistently not on topic. But that would just turn into groups of people voting to remove someone because they didn't like them. Ignore really is the only way to avoid that type of poster. But I think that too many people thrive on the back and forth bullshit when someone, anyone starts the insultfest.
 
Socrtease said:
I was thinking the same thing. Thinking about a way a supermajority could vote to remove a poster from a thread if his posts were consistently not on topic. But that would just turn into groups of people voting to remove someone because they didn't like them. Ignore really is the only way to avoid that type of poster. But I think that too many people thrive on the back and forth bullshit when someone, anyone starts the insultfest.
Click to expand...

I think a rule could be created to keep posts on topic. It wouldn't have to be too strict, so as to allow the nature flow of a topic into some different areas. But it could certainly do away with the flaming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top