I llike porn
lmfao. Worst photo-op in the fuckin' history of photo ops.BN wrote:
http://www.annoy.com/img/postcards/ann-coulter-time_pc.jpg
here is something I found on google
***BE WARNED IT IS PORNO***
Kerry didn't win because the American people spoke, and he LOST.<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:
qftrawls2 wrote:
I tried that same argument in the Bush/Kerry election race.lowing wrote:
And what "documentaries" has she made??
Ann Coulter.. . attorney who worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, columnist, editor, author.
Al Franken.........actor, comedian, entertainer.......(Stuart Smally), author.
Micheal Moore.......movie producer, dunken doughnuts poster child.
Hmmmmmm. I guess you can judge resumes on these three as to who may be more educated in the nature of freedom and politics.
Why didnt Kerry win even though his resume was far superior to Bush's?
Ann Coulter is a tool.
Yup, so why try and use them as a weapon in a debate??Bubbalo wrote:
The questions can be biased in any measure of public opinion.lowing wrote:
Polling is probably the least likely acurate measure of public opinion becvause the questions asked can be so easily biased.
Ya might as well face it, with all the bravado name calling on here about Ann Coulter. the truth is, in a debate she would have ALL of you liberals pissing in your pants and sucking your thumbs speechless.
They would so do her
So, what, we'll just guess at what the general public think?lowing wrote:
Yup, so why try and use them as a weapon in a debate??
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.lowing wrote:
Kerry didn't win because the American people spoke, and he LOST.<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:
qftrawls2 wrote:
I tried that same argument in the Bush/Kerry election race.
Why didnt Kerry win even though his resume was far superior to Bush's?
Ann Coulter is a tool.
gee her breasts look large in this photo.<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:
http://kinkmission.com/coultererhrsth.JPG
It is not the first time that a president won an election without the popular vote. the electoral college is our system of election. The fact that you and John Kerry disagree with it is OHHHHHHH SOOOOOOOOO irrelevant. juniorrawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.lowing wrote:
Kerry didn't win because the American people spoke, and he LOST.<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:
qft
It is EXACTLY the point. LOL
Last edited by lowing (2006-06-07 18:57:20)
There are links on the page to the methodology and the questionnaire used. They also link the full report, but it's 23 pages so it's for the people that are really desperate to find holes.lowing wrote:
Now that is pretty interesting.........My only questions would be: how was the poll conducted?spastic bullet wrote:
Right about what? The guy works for Fox, no? If you don't want to read it (it's not long), just scroll down to the chart. The numbers are pretty amazing, even to a cynic like me.lowing wrote:
Being RIGHT, seems to have helped Hannity in his debates. lol
And if you were open about your methodology, nobody paying attention would take you seriously.lowing wrote:
If I polled 100 people and asked what do you like better hamburgeres or a snake bite? I could "concluded" that the majority of those polled liked hamburgers. Not an acurate poll.
They can, but on the other hand they might not be. Look at their questions and methods and decide for yourself if they are biased. They look pretty neutral to me but if you disagree, post an example and I might change my mind.lowing wrote:
Polling is probably the least likely acurate measure of public opinion becvause the questions asked can be so easily biased.
As a side note, "choose between richWhiteGuyA or richWhiteGuyB to rule you for the next four years no-questions-asked" is the most limiting choice I can think of in any poll.
And for the record..............SHOW ME WHERE JOHN KERRY WON THE ELECTION UNDER OUR ACCEPTED SYSTEM OF ELECTIONS.
No, Bush did win the popular vote. Are you thinking of Gore?rawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.
RANDOM EDUCATION TIME FOR BOYS!!rawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.lowing wrote:
Kerry didn't win because the American people spoke, and he LOST.<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:
qft
Bush - 62,040,610----50.7%--286 electoral votes
Kerry-59,028,11----48.3%---251 electoral votes
62>59----50>48----286>251
and please god give me an excuse to post about Gore again
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-06-07 19:05:16)
Oh yeah thats right. Im talking about Gore, silly me. But still Kerry was far more qualified for the position than Bush according to lowing's explanation as to why Coulter is more credible than Al Franken.spastic bullet wrote:
No, Bush did win the popular vote. Are you thinking of Gore?rawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.
PoHSTS UHBOWT GOHR UHGHEN!!
Last edited by Xietsu (2006-06-07 19:07:25)
ENCORE!! ENCORE!!Xietsu wrote:
PoHSTS UHBOWT GOHR UHGHEN!!
Fact: All the counties in dispute were controlled by the DNC
Fact: That means the polls were staffed by Democrats
Fact: The votes were counted by Democrat staffers
Fact: The "confusing" butterfly ballot was designed by a Democrat appointee
Fact: The instructions state that if you make a mistake you should obtain another ballot
Fact: The instructions state that you should NOT punch it twice
Fact: The instructions state that if you punch it twice your ballot will NOT be counted
Fact: Each recount, 3 official, 2 conducted by private agencies, widened the margin of victory for Bush
Fact: The DNC sent busloads of lawyers to comb through the absentee military ballots to ensure that as many as possible were disqualified, while arguing that ballots that were punched twice should be counted for Gore
Fact: Hippies smell funny
Fact: Manbearpig will destroy you all
I'm totally therial thith time you guyth
I would tho totally get up on that thlut
btw: the electoral college exists to ensure that a few urban centers don't dictate the course of an entire nation, the wat the House and Senate balance each other
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-06-07 19:20:00)
The pollster could have told the facts about this issue..And the indisputable fact is..We went to war 15 years ago with the worlds approval. The war never ended, a suspension of hostilities was declared when Iraq agreed to the UN resolutions which stopped the fighting. When Saddam broke the resolutions, hostilities commenced. then ask the damn questionspastic bullet wrote:
There are links on the page to the methodology and the questionnaire used. They also link the full report, but it's 23 pages so it's for the people that are really desperate to find holes.lowing wrote:
Now that is pretty interesting.........My only questions would be: how was the poll conducted?spastic bullet wrote:
Right about what? The guy works for Fox, no? If you don't want to read it (it's not long), just scroll down to the chart. The numbers are pretty amazing, even to a cynic like me.And if you were open about your methodology, nobody paying attention would take you seriously.lowing wrote:
If I polled 100 people and asked what do you like better hamburgeres or a snake bite? I could "concluded" that the majority of those polled liked hamburgers. Not an acurate poll.They can, but on the other hand they might not be. Look at their questions and methods and decide for yourself if they are biased. They look pretty neutral to me but if you disagree, post an example and I might change my mind.lowing wrote:
Polling is probably the least likely accurate measure of public opinion because the questions asked can be so easily biased.
As a side note, "choose between richWhiteGuyA or richWhiteGuyB to rule you for the next four years no-questions-asked" is the most limiting choice I can think of in any poll.
Off the top of my head I could ask the same question as " Do you think it was right or wrong to go to war against Iraq?"
I could ask...."Do you think it was right or wrong to remove a ruthless mass murdering genocidal maniac from power as to better protect America from possible attacks from WMD's" and who continually broke the UN resolutions that he agreed to?
Or, "Should America take pre-emptive measures, which could include first strikes to better protect ourselves against possible future attacks in post 9/11"??
All ask basically the same thing.
Betcha the polls numbers would be different.
Last edited by lowing (2006-06-07 19:27:44)
I couldn't remember which one was which and I didn't care to look it up.....either way my point standsspastic bullet wrote:
No, Bush did win the popular vote. Are you thinking of Gore?rawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.
So " she hates anyone who disagrees with her " sounds like a few people we know.
They love to take one sentence out of a whole book and attack some one over it.
You always have the ability ( in a free country ) to read what they actually said, in context, in their own words or you can do the lemmings thing.
What ever works for you.
They love to take one sentence out of a whole book and attack some one over it.
You always have the ability ( in a free country ) to read what they actually said, in context, in their own words or you can do the lemmings thing.
What ever works for you.
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-07 19:32:01)
And how can you say that a man who has NEVER BEEN president be far more qualified to be one, over a man who HAS BEEN PRESIDENT for 4 years??rawls2 wrote:
Oh yeah thats right. Im talking about Gore, silly me. But still Kerry was far more qualified for the position than Bush according to lowing's explanation as to why Coulter is more credible than Al Franken.spastic bullet wrote:
No, Bush did win the popular vote. Are you thinking of Gore?rawls2 wrote:
Thats not the point. And for the record Kerry won. The courts decided the outcome. Sorry, but that is not winning an election. Having the most popular votes is. Kerry had more but still lost. Educate yourself boy before you try and debate me.
Oh by the way....your smart ass comments would be much more entertaining if you learn what you are talking about before you try and educate someone else.LMAO
Last edited by lowing (2006-06-07 19:25:35)
Horseman 77, I think you have far too many opponents to make all the bullshit "someone you know" statements you do. Address with direction.
Like it somehow changes if he wasn't "qualified" beforehand? Anyways, most citizens qualify, they're just either too poor or too stupid.lowing wrote:
And how can you say that a man who has NEVER BEEN president be far more qualified to be one, over a man who HAS BEEN PRESIDENT for 4 years??rawls2 wrote:
Oh yeah thats right. Im talking about Gore, silly me. But still Kerry was far more qualified for the position than Bush according to lowing's explanation as to why Coulter is more credible than Al Franken.spastic bullet wrote:
No, Bush did win the popular vote. Are you thinking of Gore?
Oh by the way....your smart ass comments would be much more entertaining if you learn what you are talking about before you try and educate someone else.LMAO
Last edited by Xietsu (2006-06-07 19:30:24)
yes plz narrow down the field,
or don't,
or don't,
Who?
(Does anyone else hate how the forums have been calling out excessive pages when there are actually less?)
(Does anyone else hate how the forums have been calling out excessive pages when there are actually less?)
Proud to have you as an opponent. 4 Light warm ups