Maybe she should get a participation prize? When you play a game of chess it doesn’t matter how many pieces you have left if your king gets taken. 8 years!
Welcome delawarepolitics.net - BlueHost.com
:+1:I love this too!
No, it doesn’t. I’m just concerned that you aren’t getting my point.In your opinion it is off topic but that doesn’t change the accuracy of the statement made.
Maybe you should read the entire thread and understand the point I was making.Maybe she should get a participation prize? When you play a game of chess it doesn’t matter how many pieces you have left if your king gets taken. 8 years!
Welcome delawarepolitics.net - BlueHost.com
If that’s the case,welcome to the club.Several of us here on the forum have been engaging in circular debates with a handful of left leaning posters,who for all intents and purposes never get the point either.
Well, that’s sad. I guess when I said that my point is you shouldn’t discount the polling because of the election result because the polling was actually very close to the election results, you missed it.If that’s the case,welcome to the club.Several of us here on the forum have been engaging in circular debates with a handful of left leaning posters,who for all intents and purposes never get the point either.
No,I didn’t miss it,however my prior tongue in cheek comment,seems to have been missed by you.
“Gov. Romney, I’m glad you recognize al-Qaeda is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia — not al-Qaeda. And the 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back — because the Cold War has been over for 20 years." Funny how short a memory some people have.
What point that Hilary won the popular vote in a Republic? And polls didn’t just predict Clinton wining the popular vote but the electoral collage as well.
Was it, in some way, indicating that you didn’t get the point? Because I want to make sure everyone gets the point, since a lot of people are having difficult.No,I didn’t miss it,however my prior tongue in cheek comment,seems to have been missed by you.
No,I was in a sarcastic way ,saying,the debates on both sides of the aisle here go on ad nauseum,not because the points presented aren’t being understood.More that posters’ would rather not acknowledge the points,rather to insist on winning the debate and so it goes.
I would agree that at certain points in the last 16 years al Qaeda has been the bigger threat, but I don’t think anyone didn’t perceive that Russia isn’t a threat.“Gov. Romney, I’m glad you recognize al-Qaeda is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia — not al-Qaeda. And the 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back — because the Cold War has been over for 20 years." Funny how short a memory some people have.
youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM
My point was in response to a comment that polling was not accurate because of the election results. You should review the entire thread.
Oh, I see - you were being obnoxious. You understood the point though.
Close enough only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades,as the saying goes…
I don’t understand your point.
Nevermind,it doesn’t matter.
Ok. You do understand that I was talking about the accuracy of polling, right?
Yes,happy ?
Great. I’m still worried about a few others, though.
But those poll predicted that Clinton would win the electoral collage so they aren’t that accurate.
The polling wasn’t even close! That’s the point you were making?
Well,just because I understand the point you are making,doesn’t mean I agree
