Ron Paul 2012?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-03-2012, 02:40 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:36 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 07:41 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(13-03-2012 09:20 PM)satan69 Wrote:  a couple more last place finishes for Paul tonight. He is going to be second by the convention??

None of the popular vote or projected delegates matter if Romeny doesn't get to 1144 delegates. If we go to Tampa brokered you will see what I'm talking about. And if not then Romeny will most likely have the delegates before Tampa. I'm not delusional dude. But even if Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination the effect that his views have had on the younger generation of voters will be immense. Once the baby boomers are all dead or too old to get out and vote we might actually get something accomplished around here.

I like when people use the term, "we" when taking about politics and sports. It just kinda lets you know just how deluded they are.


It's a collective 'we' you fucking retard. As in 'We The People'. FFS why do I click show post?

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 02:47 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:40 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:36 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 07:41 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(13-03-2012 09:20 PM)satan69 Wrote:  a couple more last place finishes for Paul tonight. He is going to be second by the convention??

None of the popular vote or projected delegates matter if Romeny doesn't get to 1144 delegates. If we go to Tampa brokered you will see what I'm talking about. And if not then Romeny will most likely have the delegates before Tampa. I'm not delusional dude. But even if Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination the effect that his views have had on the younger generation of voters will be immense. Once the baby boomers are all dead or too old to get out and vote we might actually get something accomplished around here.

I like when people use the term, "we" when taking about politics and sports. It just kinda lets you know just how deluded they are.


It's a collective 'we' you fucking retard. As in 'We The People'. FFS why do I click show post?

There is a non-collective 'we"?

He has no chance of winning anyways... He is fucking looney toons. The American people are dumb, but not that dumb. Even if he could win you would soon find out there is no 'we', unless you are in the top 1%. But I am betting your not, so Ron Paul actually gives two shits about you. He just doesn't care! He just wants to increase his bank account and power status.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 02:48 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:47 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:40 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:36 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 07:41 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(13-03-2012 09:20 PM)satan69 Wrote:  a couple more last place finishes for Paul tonight. He is going to be second by the convention??

None of the popular vote or projected delegates matter if Romeny doesn't get to 1144 delegates. If we go to Tampa brokered you will see what I'm talking about. And if not then Romeny will most likely have the delegates before Tampa. I'm not delusional dude. But even if Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination the effect that his views have had on the younger generation of voters will be immense. Once the baby boomers are all dead or too old to get out and vote we might actually get something accomplished around here.

I like when people use the term, "we" when taking about politics and sports. It just kinda lets you know just how deluded they are.


It's a collective 'we' you fucking retard. As in 'We The People'. FFS why do I click show post?

There is a non-collective 'we"?

As if Ron Paul actually gives a shit about you. He doesn't care, he just wants to increase his bank account and power status.

He has no chance of winning anyways... He is fucking looney toons. The American people are dumb, but not that dumb.

lol are you really trying to start an argument on the definition of "we"?

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 02:50 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:48 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  lol are you really trying to start an argument on the definition of "we"?

No, I am not an English professor, so I don't honestly care that much. I was just kind of curious....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 02:55 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:50 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:48 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  lol are you really trying to start an argument on the definition of "we"?

No, I am not an English professor, so I don't honestly care that much. I was just kind of curious....

Well, if you aren't sure if the usage is correct or not, then maybe you shouldn't criticize it until you're sure?

Because, germanyt is right. Collective nouns and pronouns are a very real thing.

It's just your post was so frivolous and non-sequitur it almost seemed as if you were being antagonistic just because you wanted to be contrary and antagonistic.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 02:57 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:50 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(14-03-2012 02:48 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  lol are you really trying to start an argument on the definition of "we"?

No, I am not an English professor, so I don't honestly care that much. I was just kind of curious....

Well, if you aren't sure if the usage is correct or not, then maybe you shouldn't criticize it until you're sure?

Because, germanyt is right. Collective nouns and pronouns are a very real thing.

It's just your post was so frivolous and non-sequitur it almost seemed as if you were being antagonistic just because you wanted to be contrary and antagonistic.

I didn't criticize.

Use we as non collective noun. I learn better with examples.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 03:01 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 02:57 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  I didn't criticize.

Use we as non collective noun. I learn better with examples.

Quote:I like when people use the term, "we" when taking about politics and sports. It just kinda lets you know just how deluded they are.

Oh okay.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 03:15 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2012 03:22 PM by mysticjbyrd.)
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
People who think 'they' won the big game are deluded. They didn't win shit. 12 black guys, who would likely hate them if they knew them, won the game.
Politics are the same.

PS: Still waiting for that example...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 03:31 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
Must suck to go through life thinking everyone hates you. But then again, you are you.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 03:32 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(14-03-2012 03:31 PM)germanyt Wrote:  Must suck to go through life thinking everyone hates you. But then again, you are you.

Did Ron Paul teach you that fallacy while you was sucking his dick?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: