Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 06, 2012, 10:06:26 AM
Solar is actually able to articulate why he thinks Romney will win...

Anybody who thought Romney would win is a fool. Not only did Nate Silver give Obama a 90%+ chance of winning, but CNN and the Huffington Post BOTH had Obama WAY ahead in the Electoral College in the weeks leading up to the election.

Only crazy people thought that Romney would win.

Quote from: Yawn on November 06, 2012, 10:47:52 AM
No "ifs" with me.  I have zero doubt.

Still have no doubt about Romney winning?   

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 06:15:54 PM
Yeah, what does Nate Silver know. He correctly predicted all 50 States +DC in 2012, and 49 out of 50 States + DC in 2008. He's correctly predicted 101 out of 102 States/DC in the last two presidential elections.

But what does he know?

So I could go to Vegas and Bet on the Red....or the black or Odd and even....plunk my fortune down and either doubled it and been rich or lost it all....That makes me "smart"?????

Is silver 'Smart' or did he know they were going to stuff the ballot anyway?

Quote from: BILLY Defiant on November 11, 2012, 06:21:11 PM
So I could go to Vegas and Bet on the Red....or the black or Odd and even....plunk my fortune down and either doubled it and been rich or lost it all....That makes me "smart"?????

Is silver 'Smart' or did he know they were going to stuff the ballot anyway?

What a stupid analogy. In your example you are making ONE bet. Nate Silver made 102 separate "bets" over the last two presidential elections, and was correct 101 times. He was making a separate "bet" for every State. Yes, that makes him smart.

And if you have evidence about "stuffing the ballot", please share.

QuoteAnd you fools actually think the American people are so stupid as to have lived in a bubble the last four years?

YES!

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 06:18:44 PM
Anybody who thought Romney would win is a fool. Not only did Nate Silver give Obama a 90%+ chance of winning, but CNN and the Huffington Post BOTH had Obama WAY ahead in the Electoral College in the weeks leading up to the election.

Only crazy people thought that Romney would win.

Awesome....

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 06:19:25 PM
Still have no doubt about Romney winning?   

Democrat Voter fraud explains it to my satisfaction.  YOU know it happened. You just refuse to internalize what crooks your "side" really is.  ANYTHING for a "win."

Quote from: Yawn on November 11, 2012, 07:32:08 PM
Democrat Voter fraud explains it to my satisfaction.  YOU know it happened. You just refuse to internalize what crooks your "side" really is.  ANYTHING for a "win."

Please share with us all of your "evidence".

But reading your past posts, you made it clear that Romney would win no matter what. You didn't say he would win IF the Democrats didn't engage in "voter fraud".

And Obama won by nearly 3 million votes and 126 Electoral Votes. You really think that more than 3 million of the Democrat votes were "fraudulent"?

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 08:39:37 PM

And Obama won by nearly 3 million votes and 126 Electoral Votes. You really think that more than 3 million of the Democrat votes were "fraudulent"?

That 3 million votes is less than 3% of the total vote, so, yes it is possible to effect the fraudulent election with just 1% of the vote.

Quote from: a777pilot on November 11, 2012, 11:08:41 PM
That 3 million votes is less than 3% of the total vote, so, yes it is possible to effect the fraudulent election with just 1% of the vote.

Even if that were true, which it is not, there are probably just as many (if not more) people who fraudulently voted Repugnican.

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 11:38:10 PM
Even if that were true, which it is not, there are probably just as many (if not more) people who fraudulently voted Repugnican.

Repugnican. Really?

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 06:29:24 PM
What a stupid analogy. In your example you are making ONE bet. Nate Silver made 102 separate "bets" over the last two presidential elections, and was correct 101 times. He was making a separate "bet" for every State. Yes, that makes him smart.

And if you have evidence about "stuffing the ballot", please share.

Wait a minute a fifty fifty chance that one of two people is going to win
is stupid?   No wonder your stupid.

Billy

Quote from: RightIsRight on November 11, 2012, 11:38:10 PM
Even if that were true, which it is not, there are probably just as many (if not more) people who fraudulently voted Repugnican.

Well I would rather be a Repugnican than a Democrap

Quote from: Yawn on November 11, 2012, 05:35:26 PM
Good grief! Now he thinks you mine or drill for hydrogen!  You create hydrogen, usually by breaking down water.  That takes energy--usually in the form of electricity (which would be produced with coal, hydro, oil, or natural gas).  Hydrogen is a great way to STORE energy, but it is not used to create it (unless we scoop a bucketful from the sun  )

And to think he actually wanted to debate me mono a mono.

Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2012, 03:09:58 PM
Hydrogen requires electricity, a Hell of a lot of electricity.

Math?

Quote
So why is your party/Husein setting road blocks against nuclear plants

We can debate all day about Obama's stance on nuclear power, but I don't support unreasonable restrictions on it.

Quoteand killing coal along with stopping drilling for oil on Fed lands and increasing taxes on all natural fuels, including Ng.?

You do realize that NASA has helped program supercomputers to run complex simulations of the Earth's climate, and has therefore officially stated that climate change is very much real and man made, right?

Quote
And oil is nowhere near running out for at least a millennium, I think we have plenty of time to find a replacement, or technology to make our own.

Please show me the math.  Do you have any idea how long a millennium is?