LadyJazzer wrote: ROVE: "I would give Perry a (Non-Existent) Brain Transplant."
You heard it here first.
Did you eat paint chips as a kid? Another unproductive post from LJ as usual.
And what does this mean "Kate wake up!! Stop trying to spin! I am much more intelligent than you!" More intelligent? Hell, you've been telling everyone "man-crush" had something to do with homosexuality. Major fail man.
This is all going to be a moot point, and eventually we'll all (right or left supporting), get to have the last laugh because Perry has no chance in hell to win.
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: This is all going to be a moot point, and eventually we'll all (right or left supporting), get to have the last laugh because Perry has no chance in hell to win.
True, but it won't stop Viking from blathering, once there is nominee he will be busy trying to "educate" everyone here about what a "great record" Romney has and how he is morally superior and how he created nine gazillion jobs and how he is going to cut taxes to zero and how he is going to electrocute every single illegal who even THINKS about crossing the border and how he has the "liberals" scared and lots and lots of other run-on sentence gobbleydegook.
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: This is all going to be a moot point, and eventually we'll all (right or left supporting), get to have the last laugh because Perry has no chance in hell to win.
True, but it won't stop Viking from blathering, once there is nominee he will be busy trying to "educate" everyone here about what a "great record" Romney has and how he is morally superior and how he created nine gazillion jobs and how he is going to cut taxes to zero and how he is going to electrocute every single illegal who even THINKS about crossing the border and how he has the "liberals" scared and lots and lots of other run-on sentence gobbleydegook.
Stop trying to agree with me. I'm a radical conservative that would like to see the WHOLE POLITICAL CLASS removed from office and replaced with frogs.
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: This is all going to be a moot point, and eventually we'll all (right or left supporting), get to have the last laugh because Perry has no chance in hell to win.
True, but it won't stop Viking from blathering, once there is nominee he will be busy trying to "educate" everyone here about what a "great record" Romney has and how he is morally superior and how he created nine gazillion jobs and how he is going to cut taxes to zero and how he is going to electrocute every single illegal who even THINKS about crossing the border and how he has the "liberals" scared and lots and lots of other run-on sentence gobbleydegook.
Stop trying to agree with me. I'm a radical conservative that would like to see the WHOLE POLITICAL CLASS removed from office and replaced with frogs.
I pretty much agree with you but think salamanders might be better than frogs.
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: This is all going to be a moot point, and eventually we'll all (right or left supporting), get to have the last laugh because Perry has no chance in hell to win.
True, but it won't stop Viking from blathering, once there is nominee he will be busy trying to "educate" everyone here about what a "great record" Romney has and how he is morally superior and how he created nine gazillion jobs and how he is going to cut taxes to zero and how he is going to electrocute every single illegal who even THINKS about crossing the border and how he has the "liberals" scared and lots and lots of other run-on sentence gobbleydegook.
Stop trying to agree with me. I'm a radical conservative that would like to see the WHOLE POLITICAL CLASS removed from office and replaced with frogs.
I pretty much agree with you but think salamanders might be better than frogs.
Ok... you got me... I can go with salamanders. I hate when I agree with a liberal
The Viking wrote: <snip> THAT to me is uneducated and not really looking out for the long term of this country but more so voting with emotions in this media driven age where people point out the gaffes as the most glaring issues for a President. Are you kidding me?
You started this thread about how a Bachmann gaffe proves she is unfit to be President and then somehow manage to start lecturing everyone about how they are letting gaffes affect their decision on whom to vote for President?
Seriously? You just kidding us right?
Kate wake up!! Stop trying to spin! I am much more intelligent than you! And yes if you do try lies and spins on me lying about what I said, I WILL say that. I never once said Bachmanns gaffe had ANY effect on my decission about her. Please don't lie when my post is in black and white and people can read what I wrote. It just makes you look ignorant and desperate to find something to attack me on. I just pointed out the headline news. Show me where I said she was unfit to be President because of this. I hate lies when it is blatent.
I, unlike most it seems, have put down their jobs records, accomplishments, laws and bills passed, stances on taxes and government control, who would close the border fastest, social beliefs, plans put forward and personal baggage, ability to raise money, organizational skills for a campaign, for ALL the top candidates, educated myself and honestly one candidate stands out head and shoulders above the rest. Is he perfect? NO! But putting all that down, (which I reccomend everyone do and then look at the records and not the names) no one comes close to Perry. Newt is the next closest which is why I support him next. But his huge baggage, flip flopping and lack of money and organization really worry me and make him second only by default.
And again, I can never get an answer. What is most important in a candidate and why does the one anyone on here supports, have better qualifications in those areas. No one wants to list them because after looking at the most important issues other than gaffes and brain farts, they can't compare their candidates records up against Perry's without coming to the realization that they really don't know WHY they are voting for them.
Still waitng for someone to defend thier candidates and their records.......
Then kindly point out the reason you started this thread, if not to bring our attention to Bachmann's gaffe.
You can't have it both ways, Viking. A gaffe is either detrimental to a candidate or it is not. Apparently, in your eyes, if a candidate is in your favor, then a gaffe means nothing and we should focus on their record. If you are against a candidate, then a gaffe means that they are unqualified to hold office.
Kate wrote:
Then kindly point out the reason you started this thread, if not to bring our attention to Bachmann's gaffe.
You can't have it both ways, Viking. A gaffe is either detrimental to a candidate or it is not. Apparently, in your eyes, if a candidate is in your favor, then a gaffe means nothing and we should focus on their record. If you are against a candidate, then a gaffe means that they are unqualified to hold office.
Apparently if you don't support Viking's candidate... you're too stupid to vote.
Kate wrote:
Then kindly point out the reason you started this thread, if not to bring our attention to Bachmann's gaffe.
You can't have it both ways, Viking. A gaffe is either detrimental to a candidate or it is not. Apparently, in your eyes, if a candidate is in your favor, then a gaffe means nothing and we should focus on their record. If you are against a candidate, then a gaffe means that they are unqualified to hold office.
Apparently if you don't support Viking's candidate... you're too stupid to vote.
And again for all you who keep dodging the question. WHY do you support the candidate that YOU support?
Kate wrote:
Then kindly point out the reason you started this thread, if not to bring our attention to Bachmann's gaffe.
You can't have it both ways, Viking. A gaffe is either detrimental to a candidate or it is not. Apparently, in your eyes, if a candidate is in your favor, then a gaffe means nothing and we should focus on their record. If you are against a candidate, then a gaffe means that they are unqualified to hold office.
Apparently if you don't support Viking's candidate... you're too stupid to vote.
And again for all you who keep dodging the question. WHY do you support the candidate that YOU support?
And, again, why did you start this thread? Was it to point out a gaffe by a candidate that you don't support?
