Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Fox news flub
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Fox news flub
Tweet Topic Started: Dec 15 2011, 06:54 PM (199 Views)
boilergrad01 Dec 17 2011, 12:21 PM Post #16
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
Very well said Brum very well said.

That is why even if Paul wins Iowa his run in in vain because he has no real shot.
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chops1221 Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM Post #17
Coach
Posts:
3,802
Group:
Members
Member
#28
Joined:
February 5, 2008
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boilergrad01 Dec 17 2011, 12:26 PM Post #18
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
Choppers doesn't not like Bachmann.

I am a huge Michele fan
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hoosierinhogville Dec 17 2011, 12:40 PM Post #19
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
5,812
Group:
Members
Member
#155
Joined:
February 11, 2008
boilergrad01
Dec 17 2011, 12:26 PM
I am a huge Michele fan
Says the man who thinks Paul is running in vain.

Michele Bachmann is a moron. Not only that, she is a moron with NO chance to win the nomination.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Dec 17 2011, 12:48 PM Post #20
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
chops1221
Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Paul had one clear, unelectable moment. Brett Baier posed a hypothetical about Iran having a nuke within one year, and Paul didn't answer the question. The fact is many experts believe Iran will have nukes in the near future.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Dec 17 2011, 01:11 PM Post #21
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
HoosierLars
Dec 17 2011, 12:48 PM
chops1221
Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Paul had one clear, unelectable moment. Brett Baier posed a hypothetical about Iran having a nuke within one year, and Paul didn't answer the question. The fact is many experts believe Iran will have nukes in the near future.
So does "near future" = within a year?
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hoosierinhogville Dec 17 2011, 01:13 PM Post #22
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
5,812
Group:
Members
Member
#155
Joined:
February 11, 2008
brumdog44
Dec 17 2011, 11:47 AM
boilergrad01
Dec 17 2011, 11:04 AM
Mr Gray
Dec 17 2011, 10:31 AM
brumdog44
Dec 17 2011, 09:28 AM
ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.capitalfreepress.com/3866-accurate-2008-polls-ron-paul-support/
wow...this implies that he has a very legitimate shot! Great news
At winning Iowa or at winning the nomination?

I would say just Iowa. For every state he knocks it out of the park, there are three that he simply is just a blip in polls.

He's the one candidate that it is hard to get a true measure of -- huge deviation in the polling numbers from state to state.

One advantage that he has had in terms of keeping growing poll numbers is that unlike a lot of the candidates, he has not had a quick ascension in poll numbers that made the other candidates feel they needed to go on the attack to stop the momentum. Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and even Newt Gingrich took quick upturns in polls....Perry and Cain were put under the microscope and wilted. Gingrich is more savvy than either of them, so the attacks he'll see aren't going to have the same immediate affect and it waits to be seen how much of an affect they will have.

Paul, on the other hand, is viewed by the other candidates as having an unwaivering base...but a base that doesn't seem to have the potential to explode in numbers, or it would have by now. Percentagee wise, there are very few people that are borderline Paul supporters or detractors. There really is no gain by other candidates attacking Paul because you are going to get his hard core support group....you would only attack if he started having a bulk of less decided voters start turning his way.
I actually think he has a very real chance at winning Iowa because the amount of time and resources he has put in, as well as his proven ability to do well in caucus states.

Outside of that who knows. I think his main goal now is to have a really good showing in Iowa to legitimize his candidacy, just like Huckabee did, then go from there.

I don't think he is putting near as much resources in South Carolina and New Hampshire as he is Iowa, though he does seem to be ramping up his operation in Florida.

I am not sure if you all are really aware of this, but the Republicans have changed the rules for the primaries this year. All primaries and caucuses before April 1st are required to award delegate proportionally now whereas in the past, many of those states were all-or-nothing. There are 32 states holding primaries before that date, so that could have a major effect on the race. Especially since there is no clear front runner.

For a guy like Paul that is huge. His biggest difficulties right now are getting his name out there and convincing people that he can really win. The longer he can hang around the more of a shot he has, and proportional delegates allow him to do just that. And after the Florida primary, there are a string of caucus states, where he can excel based on how efficiently his organization is run and how passionate his followers are.

Look at the 2008 Democratic Primary. Obama was an outsider coming in. There was buzz around him, but no one really thought he had a chance to win the nomination. He had a very well run campaign though that really used the proportional delegate system to their advantage. They focused on caucus states where they had an advantage. They didn't overextend themselves in states they knew they weren't gonna win because they didn't need to. Instead they picked up small wins and good 2nd place showing here and there and built momentum. Then finally once people really realized he could actually win people started voting for him.

I am not saying that is what will happen with Paul,because I still don't think he will win. All I am saying is that there is precedent for it.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hoosierinhogville Dec 17 2011, 01:25 PM Post #23
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
5,812
Group:
Members
Member
#155
Joined:
February 11, 2008
HoosierLars
Dec 17 2011, 12:48 PM
chops1221
Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Paul had one clear, unelectable moment. Brett Baier posed a hypothetical about Iran having a nuke within one year, and Paul didn't answer the question. The fact is many experts believe Iran will have nukes in the near future.
Wow glad to see that lack of an answer to a single hypothetical question makes someone "unelectable."

If that is the case I don't see how you can vote for anyone, because most of the time none of these clowns actually really answer a question.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boilergrad01 Dec 17 2011, 01:36 PM Post #24
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
hoosierinhogville
Dec 17 2011, 12:40 PM
boilergrad01
Dec 17 2011, 12:26 PM
I am a huge Michele fan
Says the man who thinks Paul is running in vain.

Michele Bachmann is a moron. Not only that, she is a moron with NO chance to win the nomination.
Hog,

I agree as he process has played out Michele has little chance to win the nomination. I still think of the 8 she would be the best president.

I read your other post about how they will be earning delegates. Paul if he wins Iowa and i say he is probably the most likely to win Iowa will cut the field down quickly.

After Florida it should be a three man race because others will run out of money.

Paul will be one of those three. A three man race will work against Paul.
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hoosierinhogville Dec 17 2011, 01:43 PM Post #25
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
5,812
Group:
Members
Member
#155
Joined:
February 11, 2008
boilergrad01
Dec 17 2011, 01:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 17 2011, 12:40 PM
boilergrad01
Dec 17 2011, 12:26 PM
I am a huge Michele fan
Says the man who thinks Paul is running in vain.

Michele Bachmann is a moron. Not only that, she is a moron with NO chance to win the nomination.
Hog,

I agree as he process has played out Michele has little chance to win the nomination. I still think of the 8 she would be the best president.

I read your other post about how they will be earning delegates. Paul if he wins Iowa and i say he is probably the most likely to win Iowa will cut the field down quickly.

After Florida it should be a three man race because others will run out of money.

Paul will be one of those three. A three man race will work against Paul.
How in the world could you really believe she would make the best President? I would not vote for her to run the 30,000 person town I live in, much less the country.


I agree after Florida it will be a 3 person race. As to whether it will be good or bad for Paul remains to be seen.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Dec 17 2011, 02:04 PM Post #26
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
hoosierinhogville
Dec 17 2011, 01:25 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 17 2011, 12:48 PM
chops1221
Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Paul had one clear, unelectable moment. Brett Baier posed a hypothetical about Iran having a nuke within one year, and Paul didn't answer the question. The fact is many experts believe Iran will have nukes in the near future.
Wow glad to see that lack of an answer to a single hypothetical question makes someone "unelectable."

If that is the case I don't see how you can vote for anyone, because most of the time none of these clowns actually really answer a question.
Iran and the middle east is the main foreign policy issue facing the U.S. Paul basically said he'll do nothing regardless of what Iran does. I know you agree with this position, but 60+% of Americans don't, and Ron Paul scares us.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Dec 17 2011, 02:06 PM Post #27
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
IUCOLTFAN
Dec 17 2011, 01:11 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 17 2011, 12:48 PM
chops1221
Dec 17 2011, 12:24 PM
HoosierLars
Dec 16 2011, 10:34 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 04:36 PM
hoosierinhogville
Dec 16 2011, 02:40 PM
Mr Gray
Dec 16 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm more surprised that they showed Ron Paul's results
Did they? I am curious when this screen cap is from because the latest poll out of Iowa has Paul and Newt in basically a tie and Romney in 3rd.
yeah, they showed him, but I can virtually guarantee you that on air they skipped his name as they went down the list.....it's truly disgraceful, and that isn't just Fox News...that is all media on both sides.
The less people see of Paul, the better he does. I felt kind of bad for him last night...
Why? For making Bachmann look like an ignorant warmongering fool?
Paul had one clear, unelectable moment. Brett Baier posed a hypothetical about Iran having a nuke within one year, and Paul didn't answer the question. The fact is many experts believe Iran will have nukes in the near future.
So does "near future" = within a year?
hy·po·thet·i·cal
   [hahy-puh-thet-i-kuhl] Show IPA
adjective Also, hy·po·thet·ic ( for defs. 1–4 ) .
1.
assumed by hypothesis; supposed: a hypothetical case.
2.
of, pertaining to, involving, or characterized by hypothesis: hypothetical reasoning.
3.
given to making hypotheses.
4.
Logic .
a.
(of a proposition) highly conjectural; not well supported by available evidence.
b.
(of a proposition or syllogism) conditional.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Dec 17 2011, 07:07 PM Post #28
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
hoosierinhogville
Dec 17 2011, 01:43 PM
I agree after Florida it will be a 3 person race.
Huntsman, Romney, and who else?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BTown11 Dec 17 2011, 07:09 PM Post #29
Member Avatar
Mer
Posts:
20,765
Group:
Members
Member
#19
Joined:
February 4, 2008
wait is 9-9-9 officially out now?
Death to Signatures.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Dec 17 2011, 07:49 PM Post #30
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
BTown11
Dec 17 2011, 07:09 PM
wait is 9-9-9 officially out now?
His campaign needed to call 9-1-1
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:53 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy