By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Who do you want as the USA president in 2013?

 

Who do you want as the next USA president?

Barack Obama 120 43.17%
 
Newt Gingrich 18 6.47%
 
Ron Paul 78 28.06%
 
Mitt Romney 10 3.60%
 
Rick Perry 10 3.60%
 
Gary Johnson 3 1.08%
 
Rick Santorum 0 0%
 
Michelle Bachman 8 2.88%
 
Other,Please mention 31 11.15%
 
Total:278

I asked you if you could provide statistics to support the "trend" that you stated. So far, you have provided nothing but talking points. If you don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about, please don't make threads on the matter.



 

 

Around the Network
MontanaHatchet said:

I asked you if you could provide statistics to support the "trend" that you stated. So far, you have provided nothing but talking points. If you don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about, please don't make threads on the matter.


and if you don't like others thread don't comment in it.

you don't just enter a thread and just ask people to bring statistics or links to prove everything.You can have a conversation once in a whileand before asking others,you bring statistics  you are the one not agreeing with my comment

stop dictating others



Fom Britain, American politics look completely insane. Just on foreign policy alone everyone in the republican paty except Ron Paul is either uneducated, hypocritical or bat shit crazy when it comes to Iran. Why are they not being called out on this!



 nintendo fanboy, but the good kind

proud soldier of nintopia

 

Rick Perry is the only one that has successfully run the biggest state in the US and the only one that doesn't have extreme debt and the only one that still has jobs. By default, Perry is the better candidate period.



Soonerman said:
Rick Perry is the only one that has successfully run the biggest state in the US and the only one that doesn't have extreme debt and the only one that still has jobs. By default, Perry is the better candidate period.

just no



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
kowenicki said:
snakenobi said:
MontanaHatchet said:

I asked you if you could provide statistics to support the "trend" that you stated. So far, you have provided nothing but talking points. If you don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about, please don't make threads on the matter.


and if you don't like others thread don't comment in it.

you don't just enter a thread and just ask people to bring statistics or links to prove everything.You can have a conversation once in a whileand before asking others,you bring statistics  you are the one not agreeing with my comment

stop dictating others

I'm pretty sure think mods are allowed to dictate how threads work... its kinda the main part of the job description.

weird huh?

Thank you.

For the OP: I'd like to see substantial discussion. If one wants to indicate trends, statistics are an important part of that. For example, if I were to state that rates of obesity are higher in the American South than the Northeast, I would provide a graph like this:

The statistics support my claim and I've backed up my argument. If you would like to have worthwhile discussions about politics, it's something to consider.



 

 

*In before thread explodes*

I voted Barack Obama, In my opinion the past 2 decades haven't really been top-notch in terms of presidents, but Obama seems to at least keep his cool, and he has a certain charisma.

And he deserves a second term to achieve the goals he set out to do. (You can say he had his chance, but ya'll let Bush screw you over 8 years in a row so...)

And his stance on gay-rights & medical care is fairly decent in my opinion.



enrageorange said:

I don't really like any of the current candidates. I like Ron Paul the most, but some of his policies are way to isolationist.
Either way your doomsday scenerio is pretty unrealsitic. Euro collapsing soon is possible.

USA money collapsing not possible for at least a decade. The world is currently far too invested in the US dollar to let that happen.

Also Iran "threat" is way overblown. China would not go to war alongside them, the United States and Europe being their biggest trading partner and all and are the only reason China is expanding so rapidly. Russia would not either as currently the only thing it is capable of doing is launching nuclear missles, which obviously isn't practical against other nuclear countries. Iran is currently a bit more powerful then Iraq was when it got invaded.

I hope a war doesn't start, which sadly seems will only happen if Ron Paul is elected president, but a war against Iran would be no different then the ones again Iraq or Afghanistan. Iran's government will be destroyed in a month or two, but then you need to deal with a bunch of pissed off civilians which is impossible.

i agree US dollar collapse will not happen next year as they will require it to regulate but it will not take a decade.Countries have to reducing their dollar reserves and getting gold.

About Iran War,China will definitely protect both Iran and Pakistan as if they don't they will get isolated and this strategy is used again and again by isolating the countries of blocking their trade by the US elite.

As for Russia,follow closely,Russian ships are already near Syria.



kowenicki said:
snakenobi said:
MontanaHatchet said:

I asked you if you could provide statistics to support the "trend" that you stated. So far, you have provided nothing but talking points. If you don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about, please don't make threads on the matter.


and if you don't like others thread don't comment in it.

you don't just enter a thread and just ask people to bring statistics or links to prove everything.You can have a conversation once in a whileand before asking others,you bring statistics  you are the one not agreeing with my comment

stop dictating others

I'm pretty sure think mods are allowed to dictate how threads work... its kinda the main part of the job description.

weird huh?


they are allowed to dictate if anything is wrong such as insults,spam,trolling.etc

 

they can't regulate opinions and normal conversations dictate people to bring proof for every single word posted



MontanaHatchet said:
kowenicki said:
snakenobi said:
MontanaHatchet said:

I asked you if you could provide statistics to support the "trend" that you stated. So far, you have provided nothing but talking points. If you don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about, please don't make threads on the matter.


and if you don't like others thread don't comment in it.

you don't just enter a thread and just ask people to bring statistics or links to prove everything.You can have a conversation once in a whileand before asking others,you bring statistics  you are the one not agreeing with my comment

stop dictating others

I'm pretty sure think mods are allowed to dictate how threads work... its kinda the main part of the job description.

weird huh?

Thank you.

For the OP: I'd like to see substantial discussion. If one wants to indicate trends, statistics are an important part of that. For example, if I were to state that rates of obesity are higher in the American South than the Northeast, I would provide a graph like this:

The statistics support my claim and I've backed up my argument. If you would like to have worthwhile discussions about politics, it's something to consider.

i wasn't indicating trends just debating with kowen what i was trying to say

We were just debating and he came out and said that what i said was 'compeltely incorrect' which isn't relevant in our conversation as we weren't debating facts but just having a conversation.

 

yeah statistics help in a debate about trends but i din't really want to debate it in the first place as i was just having a conversation