User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 73

  1. #11
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBeatGoesOn View Post
    Romney FTW.
    More like FTL. Between his religious affiliation and lack of redeeming qualities, he's more a joke than a candidate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Errr... Bush would have lost without Perot. He dug his approval rating into the ground, and Clinton was a great campaigner.
    Actually, Bush would have won the popular vote by a sizable margin, even though Clinton would have won the election, much like Shrub won in 2000.

    Huckabee actually said that Obama was his counterpart across the isle.
    That they were basically running on the same platform, in their own ways.
    Actually, they're radically different in every respect. However, they are also radically different in the right respects for people on their sides of the spectrum. They're the change candidates that actually have something new and different.

    I don't think the GOP elite have been so confused in a long time.
    Nor the democrats, who were completely blindsided by Obama. They're old and decrepit, having lost touch with reality, and the people are showing them just how poorly they understand. The problem is that both sides are run by really rich people that know absolutely nothing about real life for most of us.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  2. #12
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
    For some reason the stupid democrats think the Shrub win was bogus, but they forget that Clinton won with an even lower percentage of the popular vote...
    That's what happens when you have... three... candidates. Clinton won with 6% more than Bush in this election, a huge margin by American standards.

  3. #13
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    That's what happens when you have... three... candidates. Clinton won with 6% more than Bush in this election, a huge margin by American standards.
    Actually, that's not true at all. You're showing your ignorance about US elections.

    Usually the winner is by a notable margin. They have only been close to even in recent years and if you look back a couple decades you'll see that it's rare for a race to be all that close. 1968 was the last super-close race, with the 1976 one being pretty close as well. 1980 and 1984 were back to business as usual with strong wins.

    This many close elections does not bode well for the persistence of the US as a single country...

    Curiously, 2000 may have been lost due to Nader just as 1992 was lost due to Perot, especially with such a close race.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  4. #14
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
    Actually, that's not true at all. You're showing your ignorance about US elections.

    Usually the winner is by a notable margin. They have only been close to even in recent years and if you look back a couple decades you'll see that it's rare for a race to be all that close. 1968 was the last super-close race, with the 1976 one being pretty close as well. 1980 and 1984 were back to business as usual with strong wins.

    This many close elections does not bode well for the persistence of the US as a single country...

    Curiously, 2000 may have been lost due to Nader just as 1992 was lost due to Perot, especially with such a close race.
    Sorry, not rare at all. High variances are what is "rare", as in only 2 out of the 10 periods you are talking about. 6% is slightly below average, if you include them in your time period, although half of the elections were lower. Exclude the two huge ones (24% and 18%, noting that the other 8 are below 10%) and it's well above average.

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html has the info you need.

  5. #15
    It's always something... PuddleRiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    2,924

    Default

    Hillary wins.

    Who knew - polls were totally off.
    "In the depth of winter, I finally learned that within me there lay one invincible summer."
    ~~~~
    A Christian's life may be the only Bible some people ever read.
    ~~~~
    "The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them" Maya Angelou.
    ~~~~
    I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ" Gandhi
    ~~~~

  6. #16
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    Looks like Clinton may eat it soon.
    Looks like we are moving into overtime.

    Quote Originally Posted by AllAboutSoul View Post
    Hillary wins.
    Who knew - polls were totally off.
    Like that's never happened before in the last four years.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #17
    unscannable Tigerlily's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    TIGR
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    5,935

    Default

    Not liking my choices so far.
    Time is a delicate mistress.

  8. #18
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,124

    Default

    New Hampshire rarely matters in the primaries- they tend to pick a candidate that lost in Iowa and will lose in South Carolina- this is just my observation from obsessive watching of elections and polls from the past 10 years or so though!

    Of course, I don't really like ANY candidate this year :sad: the Republican slate seems especially weak, though it is predicted that whoever they choose will lose anyways thanks to current popularity polls of the current administration! This means that it's a likely chance that whoever the Reps put up (if they lose) will pretty much have a rather dead political career after this (looking at the last few election losers)- maybe congress or a party chairmanship, but presidential aspirations should be off the table I'm guessing.

    McCain has shot himself in the foot way too many times in recent years to be a viable candidate in the national elections, Guiliani is NOT a strong candidate on any issue, having no foreign policy experience or experience running something larger than a city (sure NYC is large, but the politics are COMPLETELY different than national politics) plus- I don't think that the whole cheating on his wife thing will go over too well with some people! Mitt Romney is probably the Republican's best choice despite being a weak candidate as well because he has the family values appeal and has not made any incredibly stupid mistakes yet politically.

    The Democratic front runners might strike the wrong chord with some conservative voters though- there are still plenty of racist and sexist people in the country- whether they will openly admit it or not. This may come into play with either Clinton or Obama, because election results will often show what a poll won't. I don't beleive that either candidate is really as experienced as I'd like either. I'm interested in who will be the VP choice actually!

    so there you go- that's my readings on the whole thing! I'm predicting that there's a nice chance of having the first election between a bi-racial man and a mormon! My grandfather will be MAD!
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  9. #19
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    We could also end up with a couple of northeasterners for the rednecks to hate, if things go that direction.

  10. #20
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    The only people that elect women to prominent offices are conservatives, which is what will kill Hillary. Just look at past and present female world leaders: Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, Angela Merkel, Kim Campbell... They were/are all conservatives, most radical. We would be showing that the US is a bunch of idiots if we elected the world's first leftist/socialist female leader.

    Obama has a chance because he's the youth option, but we may get blindsided sometime before November because I don't know that, aside from him, any democrats could win aside from the "other party" effect due to hate of Shrub (almost invariably baseless, but the american people, especially democrats, are stupid as a rule).

    Even taking her seriously as a potential candidate is enough to look like complete idiots to the rest of the world.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

Similar Threads

  1. 2016 primary and caucus predictions thread
    By SearchingforPeace in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 687
    Last Post: 07-24-2016, 10:05 PM
  2. 'Ambiverts' - relative strength of primary and secondary function
    By annnie in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-31-2010, 07:41 PM
  3. About primary and secondary functions in combination
    By Kita in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-26-2010, 02:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO