- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,484
- Likes
- 25,603
- Points
- 113
What?![]()
I was responding to your claim that
Random polling if done right would show that this race is tied 50-50.
which is unsupported by any objective evidence.
barfo
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What?![]()
Random polling if done right would show that this race is tied 50-50.
It's wrong to thing that their opinion doesn't matter
Your article didn't even mention who did the report. (this is what it says "a nonpartisan group reported Thursday")
Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama's presidential campaign as they have to McCain's, the Center for Responsive Politics said.
Yes, that would be wrong. No one has said that. Please try to argue things people are actually saying.
You and barfo are trying to downplay the significance of the military supporting McCain
saying that they only get to vote just like us
and basically are hired killers, so who gives a crap about them.
You and barfo are trying to downplay the significance of the military supporting McCain, saying that they only get to vote just like us,
The military has supported Obama more, actually. As I showed.
*laugh* "and basically [made-up assertion]"
There's no point talking to you if you're simply going to invent things we said.
Let's get one thing clear. Barfo made an outrageous comment about our troops that was really despicable. But then, as most of you know, barfo likes to be outrageous. He can argue till he's blue in the face about what he really "meant," but all you have to do is read his comment to see how disrespectful it is. If a conservative had said something like that about the victims of Katrina or kids in the inner city, liberals would be outraged.
Perhaps you could explain to us the significance, then?
barfo
See that's the whole point, you don't care that much about the military, so what they think is no significance to you. It's like a bunch of bums talking in the streets, (who could be hired to kill, and each get a vote).
Let's get one thing clear. Barfo made an outrageous comment about our troops that was really despicable. But then, as most of you know, barfo likes to be outrageous. He can argue till he's blue in the face about what he really "meant," but all you have to do is read his comment to see how disrespectful it is. If a conservative had said something like that about the victims of Katrina or kids in the inner city, liberals would be outraged.
So is that a no? You can't explain the significance?
barfo
Oh, noes, I've disrespected the military by not seeking their counsel on who I should vote for.
Sure.
barfo
Who cares? We hire those kids to fight and die for us, not to choose our president for us.
The US Military.....is.......supporting (backing up, are for)......John McCain.......3....to........1.........that is.
Get it?
No one said seek their counsel, I said they are supporting him, gave you the article, the link, plus a pdf file to see for yourself.
You came with reply telling us that it doesn't matter because we only hire them to kill so their opinion really doesn't matter.
Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul have little in common politically, except their opposition to the Iraq war.
Both top a new list of presidential candidates receiving campaign contributions from people who work for the four branches of the military and National Guard, according to a study released Thursday by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, an Illinois senator, brought in more donations from this group than any White House contender from either party. The Democrat announced Wednesday his plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2008.
Paul, a Texas congressman and the only GOP presidential hopeful who supports an immediate troop withdrawal, comes in second.
"Paul and Obama are talking straight to soldiers, and what they are saying is resonating," said Larnell Exum, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, who gave $500 to Obama. Exum, who works for the Army as a congressional liaison, is a Democrat but voted for George Bush in 1992.
Let's get one thing clear. Barfo made an outrageous comment about our troops that was really despicable.
But then, as most of you know, barfo likes to be outrageous.
He can argue till he's blue in the face about what he really "meant," but all you have to do is read his comment to see how disrespectful it is. If a conservative had said something like that about the victims of Katrina or kids in the inner city, liberals would be outraged.
of course I'm going to disagree with your points and views
It doesn't matter. So why are we talking about it?
1) It shows a demographic of society that some people (perhaps not you, but still...) find interesting, even if they don't agree with.
2) If someone were to say (and I think I've seen it somewhere here) that percentages among white voters making less than 50k are 4% in favor of Obama, I'm not sure there would be a backlash. Wait, there was, and there wasn't a backlash. Why not? No one to say "we just hire those people to be our grocery store clerks and plumbers, not to tell us how to vote"?
3) It could spark discussion about why one segment of the population is heavily behind the minority candidate, or why it seems to be very closely drawn across racial lines, even though the military is perhaps the most successfully integrated aspect of our society.
But, whatever. As Kerry said, it's just a bunch of people who meet the following criteria:
“You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
Let's try and be honest, for once, okay, barfo? In your examples above, you conveniently left out the kind of outrageous statement that you made about our troops, i.e. that we "hire them to fight and die for us." Without the whole quote, the context is not the same, and the statement doesn't have the same kind of impact.Let's try, shall we?
News: Katrina victims favor Obama 3-1.
Conservative: Who cares? The victims of Katrina aren't going to choose our president for us.
News: Kids in the inner city favor Obama 3-1
Conservative: Who cares? The kids in the inner city aren't going to choose our president for us.
I don't see the problem. Those are simply true statements (although with a broad enough definition
of kids, maybe the second one isn't completely true).
...the anti-war nuts...
Troops don't make much. $6 for Obama and $1 for McCain isn't saying much.
Random polling if done right would show that this race is tied 50-50. The problem is we have the liberal media going to "democrat" voters and doing the random polling with them, which then in turn gives you the 54-46 (for obama, or other numbers that we keep getting)
You cannot believe the polls, especially the ones by the media which are backing up Obama, of course they're not going to say that McCain is ahead when they're supporting the other one.
You probably have no idea, but most defense counsels would like their military clients tried in civil courts, since in the military you generally don't get off because you luckily found the stupid end of the jury pool that week.