|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 4, 2012 23:01:47 GMT -5
I just don't understand why someone would even Tweet that at Huntsman. It's completely unnecessary and it's not like Huntsman has gone out of his way to be a dick to Paul or something (that I'm aware of).
At the end of the day, it will have precisely zero effect on the election, but still...
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 4, 2012 23:03:30 GMT -5
This dude is bat-crapcrazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 4, 2012 23:42:54 GMT -5
I just don't understand why someone would even Tweet that at Huntsman. It's completely unnecessary and it's not like Huntsman has gone out of his way to be a dick to Paul or something (that I'm aware of). At the end of the day, it will have precisely zero effect on the election, but still... Huntsman put these ads out. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 4, 2012 23:53:29 GMT -5
LMFAO that first one is hilarious.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 4, 2012 23:54:40 GMT -5
I honestly don't know why Huntsman would attack Ron Paul. Does he think he's going to take Ron Paul's supporters?
Shouldn't he be going after Romney, Gingrich and now Santorum? You know, people whose supporters have notably been very wishy-washy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 4, 2012 23:54:48 GMT -5
Doesn't matter. It's like saying you can't hold Obama responsible for stuff the White House press office puts out. It's like blaming Obama for something his tumblr puts out. Which is appropriate. The buck stops at the top. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 4, 2012 23:55:46 GMT -5
Which is appropriate. The buck stops at the top. I agree with you to some extent. He should have better people in charge of his Twitter account. But it's not like this is going to be any sort of story at all after a day or two, so who really gives a shit? |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 5, 2012 0:08:28 GMT -5
Agreed. Still classless though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 5, 2012 0:51:19 GMT -5
Agreed. Still classless though. I guess that's what happens when people like me get drunk and Tweet under his name. LMAO. Check this out BTW. A positive interview from a major network, not done by Judge Napolitano, with Ron Paul? I'm not sure how to respond... I don't trust it. LoL |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 5, 2012 11:58:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 5, 2012 14:44:03 GMT -5
LMAO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 5, 2012 15:32:53 GMT -5
Do I smell fear?
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Jan 5, 2012 16:16:29 GMT -5
This dude is bat-poop crazy. There is no way in hell that I would live in an America with that man as President. Thank goodness he doesn't stand a chance. Oh, and just because I find it funny:  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 5, 2012 16:50:12 GMT -5
 Uhm.... |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 5, 2012 16:52:47 GMT -5
Uhm.... Even if they don't include Paul there is no Suffolk poll that has those numbers. The newest Suffolk poll has Romney at 41, Paul at 18, Santorum at 8, Gingrich and Huntsman at 7. |
|
|
|
Post by spearjack24 on Jan 5, 2012 17:31:45 GMT -5
He was leading the charge to get Clinton impeached for having an affair while having an affair at the same time. He also thinks he can go on about how gay marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage, couldn't possibly be people like him who have cheated on two of his wives right?? Here's the thing....President Clinton was THE PRESIDENT at the time. He is under our employ at the time, and living in OUR HOUSE! He is the ultimate role model |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 5, 2012 18:07:14 GMT -5
First New Hampshire poll conducted after Iowa has been released
Romney - 38
Paul - 24
Santorum - 11
Gingrich - 9
Huntsman - 8
Perry - 1
From Washington Times
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 5, 2012 18:14:10 GMT -5
Here's the thing....President Clinton was THE PRESIDENT at the time. He is under our employ at the time, and living in OUR HOUSE! He is the ultimate role model So lets elect someone with a record of adultery? |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 5, 2012 18:16:57 GMT -5
Here's the thing....President Clinton was THE PRESIDENT at the time. He is under our employ at the time, and living in OUR HOUSE! He is the ultimate role model So lets elect someone with a record of adultery? They did nominate John McCain in 20008. |
|
|
|
Post by spearjack24 on Jan 5, 2012 20:48:53 GMT -5
Here's the thing....President Clinton was THE PRESIDENT at the time. He is under our employ at the time, and living in OUR HOUSE! He is the ultimate role model So lets elect someone with a record of adultery? The only difference is no one knew about Romney's situation at the time. He knew to keep it quiet. Clinton was too stupid and did it in our house; where keeping things secret can't happen. |
|
