Dean: I need a decision 'now'

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

What is so challenging for you to understand?

I'd ask you the same question - you still have not respond to my 3 points.

-Nobody is forcing a vote, he wants them to say who they're for before July 1st.

-Nobody is being disenfranchised who have followed the rules.

-Nobody is changing the rules, let alone changing rules to disenfranchise voters or to force a vote.

Thats the spin you're putting on the story, don't act as if you're an impartial observer in all of this and expect everyone not to notice.

So, seeing as all 3 of those have been established repeatedly, why do you continue to outright lie and say Dean is changing rules?

It seems like pure concentrated ignorance.
Post edited by Coba|t at 4/21/2008 5:56:48 PM

Originally posted by: Aria Giovanni.pZ
SS, you ask someone to explain your own goddamn thread to you!!!

hahhhhhhhhhhahahahahahahahahahahahah<1!!!!!!!!!!!11



you got no credibility, your word is as worthless as your logic.

This is why I consider you to be a complete and utter moron. You have definitely proven it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Read carefully:

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
...

So I'll tell you what, by all means, provide a sterling analysis of your own if you consider mine incorrect. Here is what I expect:

1. Explain the heading of the article.

2. Explain why Dean would like their votes NOW.

3. Explain why he wants a nominee NOW so they can start their "healing process".

4. Explain why he has changed his position from 3 weeks ago.

5. Explain why having the SDs pledge their votes NOW wont change the very essence of the rest of the primaries. After all, surely you can explain that if a nominee is chosen through SD votes how people WILL NOT be disenfranchised. ROFL, this ought to be great.

6. Explain why Dean wanting the pledged votes now doesnt break his rule of staying out of the process and consequently, break his own primary process.

Do you comprehend the underlined part above? That means he has the chance to give his own view. Whats worse is that I have to explain that to a supposedly grown man who has a wife and kids. Completely absurd.

And you have the audacity to tell anyone about what weight their words carry given that you don't even comprehend what a fallacy is either??????
/forums/showthread.asp?forumid=9&threadid=403959&page=2
So much for you talking about "logic".

Originally posted by: Coba|t

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

What is so challenging for you to understand?

I'd ask you the same question - you still have yet to respond to my 3 points.

-Nobody is forcing a vote, he wants them to say who they're for before July 1st.

-Nobody is being disenfranchised who have followed the rules.

-Nobody is changing the rules, let alone changing rules to disenfranchise voters or to force a vote.

Thats the spin you're putting on the story, don't act as if you're an impartial observer in all of this and expect everyone not to notice.

So, seeing as all 3 of those have been established repeatedly, why do you continue to outright lie and say Dean is changing rules?

It seems like pure concentrated ignorance.

Back to the lame accusation of lying?

Do you even bother to read any replies? This is the LAST time.

Originally posted by: Howard Dean
I need them to say who they're for starting now. They really do need to do that. We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time. We've got to know who our nominee is. There's no reason not to know after the last primary on June 3rd. So the superdelegates have been pretty good so far. They've trickled in, made alliances known as things have gone on. They need to keep doing that so we can get all this wrapped up in June.

Well, there went your first question, which renders the rest of your questions irrelevant. Concentrated ignorance indeed. A mirror would help you immensely.

Now kiss my ass for being a liar and trying to accuse me of something I never did.


35 point spread.

Originally posted by: SammySoc

Originally posted by: Kal-

Originally posted by: SammySoc
Hoodies and shorts? Quit being so fucking homeless.

Dude, re-read my post...

Reading comprehension ftl.

Do you not see where it says "STARTING now"?
That word you're selectively ignoring every chance you get indicates a parameter of time, which is STARTING now, and ENDING July 1st.

STARTING now, ENDING before July 1st.

Thus, the entire premise of your post, that Dean is changing the outcome of the primary process is a farce. Its conjured up by your complete ignorance of the subject, Dean wants them to START saying who they're for, and to FINISH before July 1st. Your portrayal of his statement as being an immediate call for voting before all the primaries are over is a lie, because it clearly says STARTING now, and he states the ENDING parameter as AFTER the last primary.

Dean is not changing the outcome by encouraging the SDs to say who they're for STARTING now and ENDING July 1st.

You're a drama queen.
Post edited by Coba|t at 4/21/2008 6:14:38 PM

While we're underlining and highlighting and selecting random stuff, how does this look?

Originally posted by: Howard Dean
I need them to say who they're for starting now. They really do need to do that. We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time. We've got to know who our nominee is. There's no reason not to know after the last primary on June 3rd. So the superdelegates have been pretty good so far. They've trickled in, made alliances known as things have gone on. They need to keep doing that so we can get all this wrapped up in June.

So Dean wants the superdelegates to keep on trickling in through April and some of June, but no longer than that, because there's no reason to extend this process after the last primary. Accurate summary?

Originally posted by: the wierdo
While we're underlining and highlighting and selecting random stuff, how does this look?

Originally posted by: Howard Dean
I need them to say who they're for starting now. They really do need to do that. We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time. We've got to know who our nominee is. There's no reason not to know after the last primary on June 3rd. So the superdelegates have been pretty good so far. They've trickled in, made alliances known as things have gone on. They need to keep doing that so we can get all this wrapped up in June.

So Dean wants the superdelegates to keep on trickling in through April and some of June, but no longer than that, because there's no reason to extend this process after the last primary. Accurate summary?

That would be an unbiased and accurate portrayal of the story.

Unlike the original post.

Originally posted by: Coba|t
Do you not see where it says "STARTING now"?
That word you're selectively ignoring every chance you get indicates a parameter of time, which is STARTING now, and ENDING July 1st.

STARTING now, ENDING before July 1st.

Thus, the entire premise of your post, that Dean is changing the outcome of the primary process is a farce. Its conjured up by your complete ignorance of the subject, Dean wants them to START saying who they're for, and to FINISH before July 1st. Your portrayal of his statement as being NOW is a lie, because it clearly says STARTING now, and he states the ENDING parameter as AFTER the last primary.

Dean is not changing the outcome by encouraging the SDs to say who they're for STARTING now and ENDING July 1st.

You're a drama queen.

Whatever you say asslips.

Prove your case or just STFU. If that is all you have, then back to my last point:

Kiss.
My.
Ass.
You.
Liar.




35 point spread.

Originally posted by: SammySoc

Originally posted by: Kal-

Originally posted by: SammySoc
Hoodies and shorts? Quit being so fucking homeless.

Dude, re-read my post...

Reading comprehension ftl.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Coba|t
Do you not see where it says "STARTING now"?
That word you're selectively ignoring every chance you get indicates a parameter of time, which is STARTING now, and ENDING July 1st.

STARTING now, ENDING before July 1st.

Thus, the entire premise of your post, that Dean is changing the outcome of the primary process is a farce. Its conjured up by your complete ignorance of the subject, Dean wants them to START saying who they're for, and to FINISH before July 1st. Your portrayal of his statement as being NOW is a lie, because it clearly says STARTING now, and he states the ENDING parameter as AFTER the last primary.

Dean is not changing the outcome by encouraging the SDs to say who they're for STARTING now and ENDING July 1st.

You're a drama queen.

Whatever you say asslips.

Prove your case or just STFU. If that is all you have, then back to my last point:

Kiss.
My.
Ass.
You.
Liar.

I've already proven my case, and you've got nothing better than this to say - juvenile insults and emoticons.

Originally posted by: the wierdo
While we're underlining and highlighting and selecting random stuff, how does this look?

Originally posted by: Howard Dean
I need them to say who they're for starting now. They really do need to do that. We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time. We've got to know who our nominee is. There's no reason not to know after the last primary on June 3rd. So the superdelegates have been pretty good so far. They've trickled in, made alliances known as things have gone on. They need to keep doing that so we can get all this wrapped up in June.

So Dean wants the superdelegates to keep on trickling in through April and some of June, but no longer than that, because there's no reason to extend this process after the last primary. Accurate summary?

Not as I see it. He wants this done as soon as possible. They are trickling in but he wants MORE time to focus on the General Election, so that means he wants decisions starting now.

Notice the part he clearly mentions 2 or 3 more months of active campaigning. He is saying they CAN NOT afford to lose that time. That is extremely relevant. So by having them make a decision now, they gain that time back instead of slugging it out to the very end.

That in effect changes his hands off policy of staying out of it. By doing this, he is now interfering.

What is so god damn difficult to understand?
35 point spread.

Originally posted by: SammySoc

Originally posted by: Kal-

Originally posted by: SammySoc
Hoodies and shorts? Quit being so fucking homeless.

Dude, re-read my post...

Reading comprehension ftl.

Originally posted by: Coba|t

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Coba|t
Do you not see where it says "STARTING now"?
That word you're selectively ignoring every chance you get indicates a parameter of time, which is STARTING now, and ENDING July 1st.

STARTING now, ENDING before July 1st.

Thus, the entire premise of your post, that Dean is changing the outcome of the primary process is a farce. Its conjured up by your complete ignorance of the subject, Dean wants them to START saying who they're for, and to FINISH before July 1st. Your portrayal of his statement as being NOW is a lie, because it clearly says STARTING now, and he states the ENDING parameter as AFTER the last primary.

Dean is not changing the outcome by encouraging the SDs to say who they're for STARTING now and ENDING July 1st.

You're a drama queen.

Whatever you say asslips.

Prove your case or just STFU. If that is all you have, then back to my last point:

Kiss.
My.
Ass.
You.
Liar.

I've already proven my case, and you've got nothing better than this to say - juvenile insults and emoticons.

Liar.

I have been raping the shit out of you all across this thread.
35 point spread.

Originally posted by: SammySoc

Originally posted by: Kal-

Originally posted by: SammySoc
Hoodies and shorts? Quit being so fucking homeless.

Dude, re-read my post...

Reading comprehension ftl.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Coba|t

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Coba|t
Do you not see where it says "STARTING now"?
That word you're selectively ignoring every chance you get indicates a parameter of time, which is STARTING now, and ENDING July 1st.

STARTING now, ENDING before July 1st.

Thus, the entire premise of your post, that Dean is changing the outcome of the primary process is a farce. Its conjured up by your complete ignorance of the subject, Dean wants them to START saying who they're for, and to FINISH before July 1st. Your portrayal of his statement as being NOW is a lie, because it clearly says STARTING now, and he states the ENDING parameter as AFTER the last primary.

Dean is not changing the outcome by encouraging the SDs to say who they're for STARTING now and ENDING July 1st.

You're a drama queen.

Whatever you say asslips.

Prove your case or just STFU. If that is all you have, then back to my last point:

Kiss.
My.
Ass.
You.
Liar.

I've already proven my case, and you've got nothing better than this to say - juvenile insults and emoticons.

Liar.

I have been raping the shit out of you all across this thread.

You've been ignoring the facts for long enough, now you've switched from lying to us, to lying to yourself.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: the wierdo
While we're underlining and highlighting and selecting random stuff, how does this look?

Originally posted by: Howard Dean
I need them to say who they're for starting now. They really do need to do that. We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time. We've got to know who our nominee is. There's no reason not to know after the last primary on June 3rd. So the superdelegates have been pretty good so far. They've trickled in, made alliances known as things have gone on. They need to keep doing that so we can get all this wrapped up in June.

So Dean wants the superdelegates to keep on trickling in through April and some of June, but no longer than that, because there's no reason to extend this process after the last primary. Accurate summary?

Not as I see it. He wants this done as soon as possible. They are trickling in but he wants MORE time to focus on the General Election, so that means he wants decisions starting now.

Notice the part he clearly mentions 2 or 3 more months of active campaigning. He is saying they CAN NOT afford to lose that time. That is extremely relevant. So by having them make a decision now, they gain that time back instead of slugging it out to the very end.

That in effect changes his hands off policy of staying out of it. By doing this, he is now interfering.

What is so god damn difficult to understand?

Whats so difficult to understand? He never said he wanted it immediately, he said he wanted it starting now, and to continue, as planned, throughout the primary process.

Keep posting though, one day you might make a convincing case, but not today and not in this thread.

I am sure people can make their own decisions. I'll walk away at this point.
35 point spread.

Originally posted by: SammySoc

Originally posted by: Kal-

Originally posted by: SammySoc
Hoodies and shorts? Quit being so fucking homeless.

Dude, re-read my post...

Reading comprehension ftl.

Originally posted by: Coba|t

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

What is so challenging for you to understand?

I'd ask you the same question - you still have not respond to my 3 points.

-Nobody is forcing a vote, he wants them to say who they're for before July 1st.

-Nobody is being disenfranchised who have followed the rules.

-Nobody is changing the rules, let alone changing rules to disenfranchise voters or to force a vote.

Thats the spin you're putting on the story, don't act as if you're an impartial observer in all of this and expect everyone not to notice.

So, seeing as all 3 of those have been established repeatedly, why do you continue to outright lie and say Dean is changing rules?

It seems like pure concentrated ignorance.

You forgot to respond to these arguments.

You know, the ones you've been ignoring for the entire thread.

SS, I pointed out all the ways that Dean was laid-back and simply nudging the superdelegates along. You pointed out his firm tone. Take an average of our two interpretations and you have a pretty good summary of what was actually said. Just don't be so arrogant as to think that underlining "now" invalidates everything that Cobalt and others have legitimately been pointing out this entire thread.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Is that really the best you have bako??



Seriously? You mean page after page of the same thing and you still dont understand this power play by Dean? What is so challenging for you to understand? Those hillary supporters are pissed because they know the same thing as I outlined earlier -it brings one of them the nominee status: AKA Obama. Why look at that, what I mentioned as far back as page 4. In the world of logic, that is providing FACTS.

Surely an evasion eh? haha.

Really at this point, the true "weak sauce" is that I suspect you are arguing for argument's sake. You are dead wrong and you know it. Poorly played on your part -I expected better from you.

So I'll tell you what, by all means, provide a sterling analysis of your own if you consider mine incorrect. Here's is what I expect:

1. Explain the heading of the article.

2. Explain why Dean would like their votes NOW.

3. Explain why he wants a nominee NOW so they can start their "healing process".

4. Explain why he has changed his position from 3 weeks ago.

5. Explain why having the SDs pledge their votes NOW wont change the very essence of the rest of the primaries. After all, surely you can explain that if a nominee is chosen through SD votes how people WILL NOT be disenfranchised. ROFL, this ought to be great.

6. Explain why Dean wanting the pledged votes now doesnt break his rule of staying out of the process and consequently, break his own primary process.

You havent offered anything so far and that is the real evasion. Now you need to put up, or shut up.



In the end, it is pitiful in the quote above where you miserably attempt to disprove the salient points outlined and accuse of evasion. It cracks me up that your sole support comes from the village idiot who doesnt even know what logic is. And that is a fact too. Do you need a link?



Otherwise bako, we are done here. Maybe you will do better next time.

(Translation: 'I clearly have no clue what I am talking about and so I am writing a bunch of gibberish that proves this hoping people will think I have a clue, even though I obviously don't.')

<-- the mandatory smile...

You're even worse at this than I remembered.

You really should look into a career as politician when you retire. Seriously, you truly have a penchant for obfuscation, evasion and distortion. Its a gift I tell you.

In this thread you have been asked over and over what rules Dean is breaking. Simple question and yet eight pages later you have nothing to show. Here I'll even help you, here is a link to the DNC 2008 rules. I am sure with your stellar reading comprehension it should be easy to point out the rules Dean is breaking. Those FACTS should be easy enough to find, right?

Best you have is "Oh yeah, prove Dean isn't breaking any rules." Wow, that's great logic and reason. But even the village idiot knows how silly you continue to make yourself look (your aggressive and childish temperament not withstanding)

Next time some hippy conspiracy socialist tells you "Bush Lied, people died." You can retort with the usual "Oh yeah, prove he lied" That hippy conspiracy socialist is gonna own your ass (just for you stones) with a simple "prove he didn't"

But I really can understand why you are done. I can understand the personal attacks, that's you SOP. You go negative in the hope that either you get banned or the thread gets locked. A desperate attempt to avoid egg on your face.

You'll probably get away with it but you and I both know what happened here So please continue the personal attacks and show us how truly "smart" and "logical" you are.

[TRK]PredatorBako

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Cobalt

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Whatever you say asslips. ... Kiss. My. Ass. You. Liar.

I've already proven my case, and you've got nothing better than this to say - juvenile insults and emoticons.

Liar. I have been raping the shit out of you all across this thread.

Originally posted by: Coba|t

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Liar.

I have been raping the shit out of you all across this thread.

You've been ignoring the facts for long enough, now you've switched from lying to us, to lying to yourself.

Cobalt, obviously he has won this debate. He told us so. Check Norris better look out because there is a new sheriff in town. If he says his case is proven, its proven. How can you debate the "asslips" argument? or the "Kiss my Ass"? That is just golden.

Obviously his mental capacity is way past us mere mortals. We should give thanks that he graces us on these forums to, let me get this right, "rape" the "shit" out of us.

Obviously a man of such character and class (not to mention the narcissistic, god-complex, legend in his own mind) is really out of our league.

We need only bow and say "yes master, whatever you say is the light and the truth" and all will be right in the world


[TRK]PredatorBako

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Cobalt

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Whatever you say asslips. ... Kiss. My. Ass. You. Liar.

I've already proven my case, and you've got nothing better than this to say - juvenile insults and emoticons.

Liar. I have been raping the shit out of you all across this thread.

Cobalt, SS, Aria, etc.

You're all lucky that I don't decide that your heated argument is beyond the delineations of "debate" and ban you all for 2 weeks like I did to Puddin' and G.AS.
---------------------------------------
Did you notice that ~~Snake~~ has a hardon for Mack because his last name is Chin?