PDA

View Full Version : Good news / Bad news




Question_Authority
11-06-2007, 12:00 AM
Good news: Ron Paul makes "Top 100" list of most influential conservative in US. (#96 on the list)

Bad news: Huckabee is #11.

Unbe-fucking-lievable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/exclusions/uselection/nosplit/uscons.xml

coffeewithchess
11-06-2007, 12:08 AM
That list is a JOKE! ROFL...they give no serious reasons for the people listed and the order they are in, they probably rolled dice to decide what positions to place people.

bbachtung
11-06-2007, 12:10 AM
That's no more official or scientific than the Greatest Music Video of all time on MTV.

Paulitician
11-06-2007, 12:10 AM
Tax Hike Mike? lololololol

American
11-06-2007, 12:10 AM
Good news: Ron Paul makes "Top 100" list of most influential conservative in US. (#96 on the list)

Bad news: Huckabee is #11.

Unbe-fucking-lievable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/exclusions/uselection/nosplit/uscons.xml

The good news is this list means shit, the bad news you are in the top three for freaking trolls on this forum.

who cares - a freakin UK site?

SWATH
11-06-2007, 12:23 AM
Yeah Huckabee "the guy who destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas" gets higher than Ron Paul, and Rudy gets #1. Fuck that shit.

HA, Arnold Schwarzenegger is the 8th most influential LIBERAL, I can't say I disagree.

BLS
11-06-2007, 12:26 AM
Ha Ha


from one of the comments.

"The only reason I do not like Ron Paul is because I work for the IRS.

Otherwise he is the ONLY honest canidate"

Bluedevil
11-06-2007, 12:26 AM
Kind of like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Planet_Index

Anything that ranks the United States at 150 and Cuba and other communist countries in the top 10 is pretty ridiculous.

amonasro
11-06-2007, 12:31 AM
96. RON PAUL
Congressman and presidential candidate

RON PAUL

Maverick former Libertarian who believes in strict interpretation of the Constitution and an isolationist foreign policy. His tirades against an overweening federal government and an expansionist war in the Middle East have made him a sensation and he has been highly effective at attracting supporters via the internet.

Paul’s impressive $5 million haul in the third-quarter fundraising totals meant he could no longer be dismissed as an irrelevant fringe candidate. He won’t be elected president or be chosen as anyone’s running mate, but his ideas will continue to motivate many.

Worst write-up ever.

Energy
11-06-2007, 12:32 AM
We need to debunk all these lists and "scientific" polls... they're tools of propaganda. Show people "numbers" over and over, they'll believe anything consciously or otherwise.

Today clearly demonstrates polls do not equal reality. We need to get to the point where more and more people don't take polls and lists literally.

.

amonasro
11-06-2007, 12:37 AM
We need to debunk all these lists and "scientific" polls... they're tools of propaganda..

Absolutely they are.



GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS

We see this highly respected scholar-warrior, educated at West Point and Princeton, as a potential future president – he would be the first general to reach the White House since Dwight Eisenhower in 1952. :eek:

ashlux
11-06-2007, 12:46 AM
Tax Hike Mike? lololololol

If the current trend of the GOP is to be taken then Huckabee qualifies.

V-rod
11-06-2007, 01:26 AM
Guiliani is the #1 most influential conservative in AMERICA?!?!?!

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAaa!

wait a moment....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

fj45lvr
11-06-2007, 01:44 AM
We need to debunk all these lists and "scientific" polls... they're tools of propaganda. Show people "numbers" over and over, they'll believe anything consciously or otherwise.
.

I am waiting for them to print the TOP 100 Conservatives of IRAQ. Who would make that list???


You think the "polls" of the Iraqis are very scientific? You know they aren't going to poll alot of the places there anyhow unless they drive up in a tank and hand them a clipboard out of a narrow port.....

richard1984
11-06-2007, 01:48 AM
Too bad they didn't bother to define 'conservative'.

That probably would have changed the results a bit. :rolleyes: