Kiss of death for Fred Thompson from PMSNBC Tim Russert

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

sedjester wrote:

Neutralanalysis or not I still stand by my opinion that:

a vote for Ron Paul == a vote for Rudy Giuliani

To me it sounded like you were saying in order to beat Giuliani we need to vote for somebody else besides Ron Paul. If you didn't mean that then I apologize for putting bad flour in your mouth.

Well, I'll tell ya....when reading someone else's writing it is a good recipe to:

1) read all the words, and,

2) not add any new ones.

If you don't do this you will produce a half-baked conclusion...

sedjester · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

Can you explain to me how I read your posts wrong? Which words did I 'not' read and which words did I 'add'?

Doug Huffman · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

This is similar to what happened a few years ago with the popular online message board Free Republic. At that time Hannity ripped the "Freepers" and they fired back not only on their own website but on Sean's as well. This is the message tha was palce online then.

Much of why I 'left' the FR and what I don't like about RP fans. If you sell a personality, as is done in American demotic[sic] politics, and the candidate turns out to have feet of clay then the fans get to smell their ordure - and try to convince the rest of us of their honesty and dedication.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed whre they will, with wits and guns and the truth. LAB/NRA/GOP KMA$$

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

sedjester wrote:

Can you explain to me how I read your posts wrong? Which words did I 'not' read and which words did I 'add'?

Only you can do that. And only if you carefully review your perceptions. You will very likely not be able to do that because it involves finding a mistake. Yours.

The fact is that I did not "suggest" or "advocate" you to vote any way.

I simply posited, and supported, a relationship:

a vote for Ron Paul = a vote for Rudy Giuliani

I don't see anybody arguing against said posited relationship. Not even you.

Reality is a bitch.

The process of thinking it through was good for me, because I realized another rather ironic result: The posited relationship is actually the worst possible one to exist for Ron Paul supporters.

And possibly for the Republican party as well...

dng · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

Only you can do that. And only if you carefully review your perceptions. You will very likely not be able to do that because it involves finding a mistake. Yours.

The fact is that I did not "suggest" or "advocate" you to vote any way.

I simply posited, and supported, a relationship:

a vote for Ron Paul = a vote for Rudy Giuliani

I don't see anybody arguing against said posited relationship. Not even you.

Reality is a bitch.

The process of thinking it through was good for me, because I realized another rather ironic result: The posited relationship is actually the worst possible one to exist for Ron Paul supporters.

And possibly for the Republican party as well...

Let it go. Americans will vote for who they want, and I'm not going to worry about "well, if I vote for Candidate A, it will pull from B,C, and D, and therefore help E."Who knows if that thinking is true or not. Vote for what you believe, and leave it at that. Let's stop the strategy games, and just back the candidate you believe in. We have had election after election of staying in line because we are worried the worst candidate on "our" side or "their" side will be elected. I'm done with that mentality. I don't want another run-of-the-mill president; liberal or conservative.

sedjester · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

sedjester wrote:

Can you explain to me how I read your posts wrong? Which words did I 'not' read and which words did I 'add'?

Click to expand...

Only you can do that. And only if you carefully review your perceptions. You will very likely not be able to do that because it involves finding a mistake. Yours.

The fact is that I did not "suggest" or "advocate" you to vote any way.

I simply posited, and supported, a relationship:

a vote for Ron Paul = a vote for Rudy Giuliani

I don't see anybody arguing against said posited relationship. Not even you.

Reality is a bitch.

The process of thinking it through was good for me, because I realized another rather ironic result: The posited relationship is actually the worst possible one to exist for Ron Paul supporters.

And possibly for the Republican party as well...

Actually if you look at my post previous to the one you quoted you will see that I wrote:

a vote for Ron Paul =\= a vote for Rudy Giuliani

To recap.... a vote for Ron Paul IS NOT a vote for Rudy Giuliani
The slash in the equals sign typically negates it.... not sure how it ended up missing in your post of my quote.

Now my understanding of your posting is that you aren't telling people to vote one way or the other. But your holding the position that "if" somebody votes for RP they are giving the election to RG. Am I wrong?

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

dngreer wrote:

HankT wrote:

Only you can do that. And only if you carefully review your perceptions. You will very likely not be able to do that because it involves finding a mistake. Yours.

The fact is that I did not "suggest" or "advocate" you to vote any way.

I simply posited, and supported, a relationship:

a vote for Ron Paul = a vote for Rudy Giuliani

I don't see anybody arguing against said posited relationship. Not even you.

Reality is a bitch.

The process of thinking it through was good for me, because I realized another rather ironic result: The posited relationship is actually the worst possible one to exist for Ron Paul supporters.

And possibly for the Republican party as well...

Click to expand...

Let it go. Americans will vote for who they want, and I'm not going to worry about "well, if I vote for Candidate A, it will pull from B,C, and D, and therefore help E." Vote for what you believe, and leave it at that. How knows if that is true or not. But let's stop the strategy games, and just back the candidate you believe in. We have had election after election of staying in line because we are worried the worst candidate on "our" side or "their" side will be elected. I'm done with that mentality. I don't want another run-of-the-mill president; liberal or conservative.

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

Ifthat too complicated for you, I can assure you that the strategic stuff will be even more so.

Strategy is what happens after you do an analysis. After you set a goal and objectives.

But, really, as you say...probably better for you not to worry about such things. Keep it simplistic and it'll be easier.

sedjester · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

From an earlier post HankT said:

If you support Giuliani, and you really want him to win....max out ontributing to him and then double up by sending an equal amount to Paul.

That isn't strategy?

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

sedjester wrote:

HankT wrote:

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

Click to expand...

From an earlier post HankT said:

If you support Giuliani, and you really want him to win....max out ontributing to him and then double up by sending an equal amount to Paul.

Click to expand...

That isn't strategy?

Tactic.

dng · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

Ifthat too complicated for you, I can assure you that the strategic stuff will be even more so.

Strategy is what happens after you do an analysis. After you set a goal and objectives.

But, really, as you say...probably better for you not to worry about such things. Keep it simplistic and it'll be easier.

You "live" on here just to try to get a rise out of people, don't you? It's actually quite sad. You just got down ripping another member for not reading your post carefully. But nowhere did I say I couldn't understand.You inferred that I do not have the mental capacity for understanding a basic strategy, or as you put it "analysis of a couple of important variables". It's not about not being able to understand; what I said was that I am tired of all of it. Let's get back to the basics; stand for what you believe, and don't change because you are worried it will hurt someone else's cause.

sedjester · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

dngreer wrote:

Let's get back to the basics; stand for what you believe, and don't change because you are worried it will hurt someone else's cause.

+1000
/agree

dng · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

sedjester wrote:

HankT wrote:

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

Click to expand...

From an earlier post HankT said:

If you support Giuliani, and you really want him to win....max out ontributing to him and then double up by sending an equal amount to Paul.

Click to expand...

That isn't strategy?

Click to expand...

Tactic.

Sedjester, don't try to play his/her word games. It's pointless, and a little like changing a diaper on ababy that hasdiarrhea: You can't "win" the "game", there's always a new mess, and you have to deal with non-stop crap.

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

dngreer wrote:

HankT wrote:

There's no strategy in what I posted. You are mistaken. It's just analysis of a couple of important variables.

Ifthat too complicated for you, I can assure you that the strategic stuff will be even more so.

Strategy is what happens after you do an analysis. After you set a goal and objectives.

But, really, as you say...probably better for you not to worry about such things. Keep it simplistic and it'll be easier.

Click to expand...

You "live" on here just to try to get a rise out of people, don't you? It's actually quite sad. You just got down ripping another member for not reading your post carefully. But nowhere did I say I couldn't understand.You inferred that I do not have the mental capacity for understanding a basic strategy, or as you put it "analysis of a couple of important variables". It's not about not being able to understand; what I said was that I am tired of all of it. Let's get back to the basics; stand for what you believe, and don't change because you are worried it will hurt someone else's cause.

I stand for good analysis. And basing thinking and action on as accurate a comprehension of reality as is possible. I do not stand for simplism.

Simplism, that warmandaccessiblefriend, is what has gotten us into the messes that we now are in. And it ain't gonna get us out of them.

dng · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

I stand for good analysis. And basing thinking and action on as accurate a comprehension of reality as is possible. I do not stand for simplism.

Simplism, that warmandaccessiblefriend, is what has gotten us into the messes that we now are in. And it ain't gonna get us out of them.

All I can say is that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I could say what I believe 10 more times, all in different ways. But it wouldn't change anything. So rather than waste people's time with insults, we'll have to just disagree.

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

dngreer wrote:

HankT wrote:

I stand for good analysis. And basing thinking and action on as accurate a comprehension of reality as is possible. I do not stand for simplism.

Simplism, that warmandaccessiblefriend, is what has gotten us into the messes that we now are in. And it ain't gonna get us out of them.

Click to expand...

All I can say is that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I could say what I believe 10 more times, all in different ways. But it wouldn't change anything. So rather than waste people's time with insults, we'll have to just disagree.

Sure you can. But is has to be water. Not piss.

dng · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

:quirky

sccrref · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

HankT wrote:

sedjester wrote:

Neutralanalysis or not I still stand by my opinion that:

a vote for Ron Paul == a vote for Rudy Giuliani

To me it sounded like you were saying in order to beat Giuliani we need to vote for somebody else besides Ron Paul. If you didn't mean that then I apologize for putting bad flour in your mouth.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll tell ya....when reading someone else's writing it is a good recipe to:

1) read all the words, and,

2) not add any new ones.

If you don't do this you will produce a half-baked conclusion...

What if it is half baked to begin with before any of the additions or deletions? :lol

oes that make it not baked at all?

HankT · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

sedjester wrote:

HankT wrote:

sedjester wrote:

Can you explain to me how I read your posts wrong? Which words did I 'not' read and which words did I 'add'?

Click to expand...

Only you can do that. And only if you carefully review your perceptions. You will very likely not be able to do that because it involves finding a mistake. Yours.

The fact is that I did not "suggest" or "advocate" you to vote any way.

I simply posited, and supported, a relationship:

a vote for Ron Paul = a vote for Rudy Giuliani

I don't see anybody arguing against said posited relationship. Not even you.

Reality is a bitch.

The process of thinking it through was good for me, because I realized another rather ironic result: The posited relationship is actually the worst possible one to exist for Ron Paul supporters.

And possibly for the Republican party as well...

Click to expand...

Actually if you look at my post previous to the one you quoted you will see that I wrote:

a vote for Ron Paul == a vote for Rudy Giuliani

Click to expand...

To recap.... a vote for Ron Paul IS NOT a vote for Rudy Giuliani
The slash in the equals sign typically negates it.... not sure how it ended up missing in your post of my quote.

Now my understanding of your posting is that you aren't telling people to vote one way or the other. But your holding the position that "if" somebody votes for RP they are giving the election to RG. Am I wrong?

That's almost correctamundo. But not quite.

First, let's get the me "telling people to vote one way or the other." I didn't and probably won't. (Unlike dngreer.)

I did not say anything about "giving the election" to Giuliani. I'm simply positing that in the aggregate, a Ron Paul vote takes a vote away from all of the other candidates (including Giuliani, of course).

But that since Giuliani is the farthest away from Paul's base/voters, that a Paul vote would have to really come from the hide of Romney, Thompson, Huckabee, and what's their names. So, overall...in the aggregate...voting for Paul will reduce the chances of the strong contenders against the G-man.

Will that dynamic, if it is true, be enough to result in "giving the election" to Giuliani? Hell if I know. I'll have to think about that.

What do you think?

BTW, don't forget to vote for....<just kidding>

ETA: The auto editor zapped the slash in my quoting of your post. I didn'ttake it out. That editor is so, um, helpful. :uhoh: But, I certainly knew what youmeant.

Cue-Ball · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

Does this forum software offer a way to block a user's posts? I've seen it on other forums and it sure would come in handy here.

sedjester · Nov 6, 2007

imported post

I can't say for sure what will happen. But I do know one thing for sure. I support Ron Paul and will give my vote to him.

Kiss of death for Fred Thompson from PMSNBC Tim Russert

State Researcher

Regular Member

Banned

State Researcher

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

State Researcher

State Researcher

State Researcher

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

Regular Member

Regular Member