Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2]

< Previous Page  

Page 2 of 2

 

(921084)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 18 09:12:38 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by italianstallion on Sat Mar 17 23:36:35 2012.

Woody Harrelson and Ed Harris were certainly good in the movie, but were Woody Harrelson and Ed Harris. Julianne Moore on the other hand was Sarah Palin in the movie. A Heath Ledger caliber performance.

Post a New Response

(921087)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 18 09:51:11 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 07:35:28 2012.

Some of us can actually calculate probabilities and use those probabilities to guide us in making decisions. It is why some people are better gamblers than others.

If Santorum were to become the nominee, he would have essentially zero chance of becoming president. No one remotely moderate would vote for him and Democrats would be out in force to ensure he didn't win.

Romney on the other hand has a much better chance of winning the election (although I think even his chance is still quite small). Romney winning would ultimately be a bad thing. While he is certainly a bright guy (probably quite a bit smarter than I initially gave him credit for), Republicans have repeatedly demonstrated their poorer ability to manage the economy, primarily because their fundamental belief—give all the money to the rich where it will trickle down—is wrong. It's unlikely Romney would be as an effective military leader as Obama (who did kill Osama bin Laden, among many others), and it's not clear what additional conflicts he'd get us into. Worse still, the damage Romney himself would inflict as President pales in comparison to what the Republican establishment could do under him. The Republican congress could run amok under Romney with one crazy bill after another, which Romney would sign due to party pressure. As well, he would likely have an opportunity to nominate a few more Supreme Court Justices to a court that's already pretty conservative. God only can imagine what damage a right-wing court could do for years to come.

If Romney was representative of the Republican establishment, his election wouldn't be too bad. But, unfortunately, he's not; he's a lot saner than most of the people in his party. So, no, in contrast with Spider-Pig, I don't view Romney as an acceptable alternative to Obama, and it is important to do whatever it takes to stop him.

Post a New Response

(921095)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by AlM on Sun Mar 18 10:09:42 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 18 09:51:11 2012.

Some of us can actually calculate probabilities and use those probabilities to guide us in making decisions. It is why some people are better gamblers than others.

It's not that you calculate probabilities well, it's that you put different values on outcomes.

Spider-Pig seems to value Obama as maybe a +10, Romney as a +5, and Santorum as a -100. I probably would put them as +10, 0, and -50. In either case anything that favors Santorum is a bad idea because it introduces a risk of the -100 or the -50.

You seem to put Obama at +10, Romney at -80, and Santorum at -100. In that case I agree that it might be rational to push Santorum's candidacy because of his lesser chance of winning, and the lower ADDED risk (relative to Romney) you perceive in a Santorum victory.





Post a New Response

(921101)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 18 10:38:40 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by AlM on Sun Mar 18 10:09:42 2012.

Between Spider-Pig and I, yes. GP on the other hand is dismissing this concept on principle.

I would say my odds/values are more like this:

Santorum: –100
Romney: –25
Obama: +10

Such a system favors making Santorum the nominee so long as Santorum's chances of winning are less than a quarter of Romney's. Since I think Santorum's chances of winning the presidency (if he could win the nomination, which isn't going to happen now) are very near zero (less than 1%), making Santorum the nominee is clearly the favored strategy.

Unfortunately, since Romney will be the nominee, it's a moot point now.

Post a New Response

(G00GLE)

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'


(921106)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 11:17:36 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 07:24:31 2012.

HBO had it on, which we all knew. Your language never effectively personalized your having seen it.

Post a New Response

(921111)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 11:43:02 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 18 10:38:40 2012.

IMO, you have the odds right. How do you think this scenario, which could very well play out given that Rmoney hasn't caught on with the r-base.

Romney/Santorum
vs
Obama/Biden (as they have already committed to re-election)

They may have their appointed candidate. So let's consider the next step. Since Rmoney has no political favors to cash out, excluding to the party's establishment, it's not a stretch to see that playing out. Superficially, when considering solely the primary experience, it would be logical. Considering a brokered convention remains a very real possibility, compounded with the fact that Citizens has permitted some of the candidates to linger long after their 15 minutes expired thanks to their sugar daddies, it may be the only way they can unify their party and use the summer to get funding. The fall campaign begins once they leave the convention.

Do you think Rmoney would do it? Do you think the republican establishment would require him to? What do you think that ticket's chances would be?

Tying this back tot he topic,this is the same strategy McCain tried 4 years ago....a RW running mate, Ms Palin, to appeal to the RWers.

Post a New Response

(921147)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 18 15:03:01 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 07:41:03 2012.

And you were wrong.

Post a New Response

(921148)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 18 15:06:32 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 11:43:02 2012.

And again, such a strategy would lose, as the prospect of a Santorum a heartbeat way from the presidency would scare rational people away.

Post a New Response

(921154)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 15:37:42 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 18 15:06:32 2012.

Hopefully scare them straight to the polls to "stop this now".

Post a New Response

(921162)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Mar 18 16:26:00 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 15:37:42 2012.

No...the democrats insured the better republican candidate will win...as they started their attacks prematurely on santorum. People like bingbong being the loudest. Thank people like bingbong for getting santorum out.

Post a New Response

(921163)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Mar 18 16:27:35 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 18 15:03:01 2012.

No.

Post a New Response

(921169)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 18 16:53:20 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 07:24:31 2012.

That's not how it works in chronological listing, which is how I do this place. You're quoting threaded.

Post a New Response

(921171)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Mar 18 17:09:47 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 18 16:53:20 2012.

Lol! You responded DIRECTLY to the post ia said I saw it on HBO. You are saying you didnt read the post you directly responded to?

Post a New Response

(921182)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 19:24:12 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 11:17:36 2012.

????

What's hard to understand about "Yes." I was asked if I watched, it and in my immediate response after I said "Yes." Yes doesn't mean yes anymore?

Post a New Response

(921208)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 21:14:35 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 19:24:12 2012.

Your language appeared tome that you were only acknowledging that it was on HBO. You didn't follow your statement with any thoughts or impressions of the film.

Post a New Response

(921222)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 21:50:55 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 21:14:35 2012.

Your language appeared tome that you were only acknowledging that it was on HBO. You didn't follow your statement with any thoughts or impressions of the film.


????

Question: Did you see it? How was it?

Answer: Yes, HBO had it on. It was pretty bad in my opinion....like a Michael Moore movie.

Seems pretty clear answer on both question one and two.

Post a New Response

(921223)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Mar 18 21:57:24 2012, in response to Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by dand124 on Fri Mar 16 01:51:37 2012.

i wonder if Sharpton knew any of this when he talked about running for President?

Post a New Response

(921225)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 22:02:08 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 21:50:55 2012.

Those sentences are from 2 different messages, by your own admission. Together they appear clear. Not so separately.

Post a New Response

(921233)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 22:32:34 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 22:02:08 2012.

?????????????????????

My post was in direct response to his. His response in DIRECT response to mine.

Post a New Response

(921243)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 22:48:06 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 18 22:32:34 2012.

The disconnect did not make it clear you saw the movie, but chose to talk as if you did.

Post a New Response

(921266)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 19 02:45:12 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by bingbong on Sun Mar 18 22:48:06 2012.

Please. Bull. I was asked if I watched it and I said "yes" in the first response to it, a response that was then DIRECTlY responded to.

Post a New Response

(921276)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 19 03:22:08 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 19 02:45:12 2012.

But you're still getting all pissy about it because I responded to your other message before I saw THAT one. THAT'S why I went off in the first place about it in that other message. Once I saw the one you're crowing about, I backed off but you still came after me about it.

Post a New Response

(921279)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 19 03:27:13 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 19 03:22:08 2012.

I am not talking about your other message. The one I quoted was a response by YOU made DIRECTLY to mine, in which I saw I it. Your other message is not the one I kept mentioning. In fact, I didn't link to that one at all.

Post a New Response

(921282)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 19 03:31:27 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 19 03:27:13 2012.

Alright ... whatever ... truce. I fucked up. Feel better? C'mon man, post ponies! :)

Post a New Response

(921382)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Mon Mar 19 10:30:43 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 19 03:31:27 2012.

butbutbut...the ponies are confused!



Post a New Response

(921384)

view threaded

Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

Posted by bingbong on Mon Mar 19 10:33:06 2012, in response to Re: Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq', posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 19 03:31:27 2012.

butbutbut...the ponies are confused!



Post a New Response

[1 2]

< Previous Page  

Page 2 of 2

 

[ Return to the Message Index ]