Everyone who says that a vote for RP is a vote for Obama.

[Scrumdiddles]

Opinion.....Next

Yes cris, however we are on the side of proof that there is no proof of your claim and many others claim.

[cris]

Yes cris, however we are on the side of proof that there is no proof of your claim and many others claim.

Just another opinion.....I've already proved the original question

[Scrumdiddles]

Just another opinion.....I've already proved the original question

where cris where. 1992, opinions, yoyos , what cris nothing was proven. Once again Proof - evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

[40oz]

Opinion.....Next

Any prediction is an opinion but check out your boy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38

[cris]

Not interested 40.....keep to the topic, I know you can do it

Historical evidence proves that a Third Party siphons votes from

either a Majority Demo or Republican.

Maybe more of the same evidence is needed....hmmmm?

Its just my opinion that due to the unique circumstances of Paul support,

he & your vote won't make any difference.

[kid4dinar]

You still did not prove anything but what did you say First grade math, yea that is all you proved. Now was that the question, no. Prove that a vote for Rp is a vote for Obama,that is the question. Governments do manipulate numbers like unemployment numbers so.....

Ok you proved that you really need to wake up, next. No proof here but people called a yoyo. Next.

ok 1 vote for RP is not a vote for MR..

simple

simple

i will say it 1 more time 1 vote for RP is not a vote for MR...

with a race soooo close that takes a vote away from MR column. so that equals 1 less vote against OBAMA.

What a stupid post.

[Scrumdiddles]

ok 1 vote for RP is not a vote for MR..

simple

simple

i will say it 1 more time 1 vote for RP is not a vote for MR...

with a race soooo close that takes a vote away from MR column. so that equals 1 less vote against OBAMA.

What a stupid post.

So what i hear you say is no proof. OK next.

Not interested 40.....keep to the topic, I know you can do it

Historical evidence proves that a Third Party siphons votes from

either a Majority Demo or Republican.

Maybe more of the same evidence is needed....hmmmm?

Its just my opinion that due to the unique circumstances of Paul support,

he & your vote won't make any difference.

Historical evidence also proves that Romney is the same as Obama. Oh but you dont want to listen to that. DO YOU CRIS.

[cris]

Spoiler effect

The spoiler effect describes the effect a minor party candidate with little chance of winning has in a close election, when that candidate's presence in the election draws votes from a major candidate similar to him/her, thereby causing the opposing candidate to win. The minor candidate causing this effect is often referred to as a spoiler.

If preferential ballots are not used, the spoiler candidate takes votes away from the viable similar candidate (an effect called vote splitting). In some cases, even though the spoiler candidate cannot win themselves, their influence upon the voters may allow them to deliberately determine which of the viable candidates wins the election—a situation known as a kingmaker scenario.

Here's another good Historical example

Bush, Gore, and Nader (2000 U.S. presidential election)

The 2000 U.S. Presidential election is often cited as an example of the spoiler effect. In that election, Al Gore, the Democratic candidate, received more popular votes than George W. Bush, the Republican candidate, but lost in the electoral college. In the state of Florida, the final certified vote count showed Bush with just 537 more votes than Gore.[1] Because Bush defeated Gore in Florida, he won the state, received more votes in the electoral college, and became president of the United States.

Gore supporters pointed out that, had candidate Ralph Nader, a liberal, not run in the election, the majority of the 97,421 votes he received in Florida would have been cast for Gore. Gore supporters contend that Nader's candidacy spoiled the election for Gore by taking away enough votes from Gore in Florida to swing the election to Bush. Their argument is bolstered by a poll of Nader voters, asking them for whom they would have voted had Nader not run, which said 45 percent of Nader voters would have voted for Gore, 27 percent would have voted for Bush, and the rest would not have voted.[2]

[kid4dinar]

Scrum -

Romney would continue to lead this country in the same direction as Obama. Voting for Romney is like voting for Obama. I think the only vote that isn't for Obama is Ron Paul. Hopefully Ron Paul will be the Republican nominee. If he isn't our only voice against Obama will be 3rd party, write-in, or Johnson.

Are you for real???

prove that it is not a vote for OBAMA.

[cris]

So what i hear you say is no proof. OK next.

Historical evidence also proves that Romney is the same as Obama. Oh but you dont want to listen to that. DO YOU CRIS.

Not interested in your 'opinion' Try to stay on topic

[Scrumdiddles]

Spoiler effect

The spoiler effect describes the effect a minor party candidate with little chance of winning has in a close election, when that candidate's presence in the election draws votes from a major candidate similar to him/her, thereby causing the opposing candidate to win. The minor candidate causing this effect is often referred to as a spoiler.

If preferential ballots are not used, the spoiler candidate takes votes away from the viable similar candidate (an effect called vote splitting). In some cases, even though the spoiler candidate cannot win themselves, their influence upon the voters may allow them to deliberately determine which of the viable candidates wins the election—a situation known as a kingmaker scenario.

Here's another good Historical example

Bush, Gore, and Nader (2000 U.S. presidential election)

The 2000 U.S. Presidential election is often cited as an example of the spoiler effect. In that election, Al Gore, the Democratic candidate, received more popular votes than George W. Bush, the Republican candidate, but lost in the electoral college. In the state of Florida, the final certified vote count showed Bush with just 537 more votes than Gore.[1] Because Bush defeated Gore in Florida, he won the state, received more votes in the electoral college, and became president of the United States.

Gore supporters pointed out that, had candidate Ralph Nader, a liberal, not run in the election, the majority of the 97,421 votes he received in Florida would have been cast for Gore. Gore supporters contend that Nader's candidacy spoiled the election for Gore by taking away enough votes from Gore in Florida to swing the election to Bush. Their argument is bolstered by a poll of Nader voters, asking them for whom they would have voted had Nader not run, which said 45 percent of Nader voters would have voted for Gore, 27 percent would have voted for Bush, and the rest would not have voted.[2]

That has nothing to do with 2012 elections. Different time and different situation. Still no proof

[cris]

That has nothing to do with 2012 elections. Different time and different situation. Still no proof

I believe you may be partially right in this statement....Its my Opinion that

Paul wont matter in this election.....but thats just my opinion, it doesnt necessarily jibe

with historical facts.

[Scrumdiddles]

I believe you may be partially right in this statement....Its my Opinion that

Paul wont matter in this election.....but thats just my opinion, it doesnt necessarily jibe

with historical facts.

I am looking for proof cris. Once you understand that there is not any proof of your claim we will all be ok. However until then you keep stating that a vote for RP is a vote for Obama then i will ask for proof. So your beliefs are based on false information until you show proof. PERIOD.

Romney would continue to lead this country in the same direction as Obama. Voting for Romney is like voting for Obama. I think the only vote that isn't for Obama is Ron Paul. Hopefully Ron Paul will be the Republican nominee. If he isn't our only voice against Obama will be 3rd party, write-in, or Johnson.

Are you for real???

prove that it is not a vote for OBAMA.

I read your post wrong Kid4dinar, you are right on everything. RP2012

I am in the lions den but the lions are lost and can not find any food.

[jonjon]

Ron Paul is the only chance Obama has at being elected. As long as Obama can keep covertly promoting Ron Paul and discrediting Romney he has a chance at splitting his opposition and winning the election. You are among the few that doesn't understand that and your aversion to reality is only a symptom of your problem. Not being able to distinguish the true from the false is common for people with your condition.

Proof, Fact, and Truth

[Scrumdiddles]

Proof, Fact, and Truth

oh so proof fact and truth exist before the proof fact and truth happens. That is just stupid jonjon.

[jonjon]

Confusion does not govern reality Scrum, no matter how many times you display it.

[cris]

I am looking for proof cris. Once you understand that there is not any proof of your claim we will all be ok. However until then you keep stating that a vote for RP is a vote for Obama then i will ask for proof. So your beliefs are based on false information until you show proof. PERIOD.

Well.....you obviously havent been reading my posts....I'll state

very clearly....Its my opinion that Paul will have no effect

Others think differently, based on historical evidence, starting with the

Anti-Masonic third Party in 1832.....they could be right.....But since you

refuse to accept this type of evidence.....what type would you prefer?

There is plenty of empirical evidence.

Your looking to refute by trying to force people to concede an event that

hasnt happened yet......You wont win that way, its a cyclical argument....I've

shown the only evidence that matters and you refuse to open your eyes

and to see.

[DiveDeepSix]

Well.....you obviously havent been reading my posts....I'll state

very clearly....Its my opinion that Paul will have no effect

Others think differently, based on historical evidence, starting with the

Anti-Masonic third Party in 1832.....they could be right.....But since you

refuse to accept this type of evidence.....what type would you prefer?

There is plenty of empirical evidence.

Your looking to refute by trying to force people to concede an event that

hasnt happened yet......You wont win that way, its a cyclical argument....I've

shown the only evidence that matters and you refuse to open your eyes

and to see.

Why do you guys even bother LOL, the RPers are just mad because the free pot train just derailed it's over. Where is the proof it's not a vote for Obama? Oh, that's right not proof, don't waste your time gang.

[wpsmit]

My daddy is stronger than yours!

No he isn't, My daddy is stronger than yours!

Oh yeah? Prove it!

Kind of juvenile isn't it Scrum?

[Scrumdiddles]

My daddy is stronger than yours!

No he isn't, My daddy is stronger than yours!

Oh yeah? Prove it!

Kind of juvenile isn't it Scrum?

Juvenile huh, so you want to go around spreading false information and i call you on it and you can not prove the truth in it. Yes you are childish and think you can get away with a lie passed off as truth. Oh but when someone calls you on it you want to call them juvenile.

Why do you guys even bother LOL, the RPers are just mad because the free pot train just derailed it's over. Where is the proof it's not a vote for Obama? Oh, that's right not proof, don't waste your time gang.

Puff puff pass.

[WorkerBee]

Scrum, what kind of proof are you looking for? I’ve seen some good arguments and you pooh-pooh them.

Edited July 22, 2012 by WorkerBee

[Scrumdiddles]

Scrum, what kind of proof are you looking for? I’ve seen some good arguments and you pooh-pooh them.

Proof, unquestionable proof. There is no proof. They are all taking points for years. So you can tell me because one votes for a 3 party candidate, who is the vote taken away from, rep or dem. It is not taken away from anyone it is a vote plain and simple. Everyone wants to put everything in a nice little box. There is no box. There is not any proof of that anywhere. There never will be.

Edited July 22, 2012 by Scrumdiddles

[WorkerBee]

Proof, unquestionable proof. There is no proof. They are all taking points for years. So you can tell me because one votes for a 3 party candidate, who is the vote taken away from, rep or dem. It is not taken away from anyone it is a vote plain and simple. Everyone wants to put everything in a nice little box. There is no box. There is not any proof of that anywhere. There never will be.

It might work if we had a three party system but we don’t. So I’ll just have to respectfully disagree with your line of thinking.

Edited July 22, 2012 by WorkerBee

[Scrumdiddles]

It might work if we had a three party system but we don’t. So I’ll just have to respectfully disagree with your line of thinking.

It is all an illusion, 3rd party candidates are for the people they have always been, but somehow someway the people have been brainwashed into believing if they do not vote rep or dem it is just a wasted vote. In reality it is a vote no meaning just a vote. So ok you respectfully disagree, ok.

[Wimpys Bluedog]

If there is no proof there is no proof......the election isn't until November...then we will know the truth.