It seems that the 2008 Presidential Election may be getting another candidate. Stephen Colbert Has announced that he will be running for President. Whether or not he's serious is debatable (as usual), but it should be interesting to see what he does with his annoucement.
'08 Election Addition?
- Thread starter Laughing Man
- Start date
|
REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS |
|
- Status
Well he's running as a Dem and a Rep which is weird. But I bet if he did run everywhere (which knowing him he might end up doing for fun) he'd win the popular vote. Not that the electoral college would let him become president but it'd be funny.
He isnt running really it just more of a stunt i guess you can say. hell if he really did run this would be a reason for me actually to register to vote.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,625
- Age
- 30
xD, I saw that episode =p It was on Wednesday =].
If he actually did run I bet he'd get a hell of alot of votes.
If he actually did run I bet he'd get a hell of alot of votes.
COLBERT '08!!!!!
I love the Colbert Report, I'm going to try to gey a Colbert '08 shirt, that would be awesome.
I love the Colbert Report, I'm going to try to gey a Colbert '08 shirt, that would be awesome.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,625
- Age
- 30
xD, I have A Wriststrong bracelet =]
Which is actually why we have the electoral college. Can't trust people like you with voting.
People like me? Don't assume you know how I would vote. I never said I wanted him as our president. I said it would be funny to see him win the popular vote.
Uh nice statement that demostrates stupidity. No duh we have electoral college thats why he would never win. Also he isnt running for president he is running to compete for president right now. Plus oh yeah cant trust people like me but i bet you could trust everyone in California that voted for the Terminator.
You're blinkboy211? That was the point of me quoting what he said.
Reading.Hard.blinkboy211 said:
There's a reason why I bolded your previous post. You only plan to register because it's Stephen Colbert. It's as stupid as voting for, say, Clinton because she's a woman.
I'll also thank you not to cut the entirety of my post seeing as how you are having trouble reading within context. It makes it easier for us to communicate.
I didn't only state that we had an electoral college. I said we had one because of inane reasons for voting, or more to the point; registering to vote only because you like one of the potential candidates based on reasons other than their platform.blinkboy211 said:
Exactly. Somehow, I hinted at that. Red-herring not needed.blinkboy211 said:
Read Hard
I didn't say if he ran that would be my only reason for voting. I said it would be A reason. When you know you are going to vote you then look over the other canadidates, and then you pick who you believe is best suited for the job. Oh yeah Clinton will get alot of votes just because she is a woman.
If inane reasons winout in each state, then the electoral college is voting for an inane reason too. The electoral college just votes for whoever won the majority in their state. So if Stephen Colbert actually runs for US President, if he just wins some of the states that have the biggest electoral college voters then he could easily win.
I don't believe I said that was your only reason. I said people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote because of stupid reasons. "Stephen Colbert is running so now I'm going to register, not a few years ago, or when the main canadiates were introduced"
When you're in an argument, you're suppose to make a point. Just for reference, this particular quote is missing it.
But since you're preaching about how to vote, it took you what, 5 seconds (same time it took you to post) to "look over the other candidates and pick who you thought was best" and say "if he really did run this would be a reason for me actually to register to vote."?
You've no idea what a comparison is, do you?
I'll say it again.
Your reason for registering to vote is just as stupid as voting for Hilary because she is a woman.
Understand now? I made no mention of her winning a lot of votes, so your sarcastic retort is pointless. In fact, I don't think the comparison I'm making is very difficult to comprehend.
I'll try to make it simpler if you still don't understand, the next bout.
Not everyone is you, nor did I make mention of the states, or other people. I specifically mentioned your desire to register if Colbert was indeed running.
Straying from the discourse seems to be a habit of yours.
No, they don't. Hence my "Which is actually why we have the electoral college."
Refer to "Straying.....yours."
you talk about me not reading into the context your doing the same. I not once said "only i am registering to vote cause i want Stephen Colbert to win." I just said this would give me a reason to vote so i can have my say.
Didnt even know i was arguing a point...For one if i could type all that in 5 seconds then i am a really awesome typer. Secondly, I never said i would vote for Stephen Colbert. If he ran i would register to hear his viewpoints and issues and also viewpoints of other canadidates. Again you couldnt read the context and comprehend it.
Again where did i say i would ever vote for him? I just said it would encourage me to vote, but you could only have gotten that if you read into what i was actually saying. Someone to shake up politics would encourage alot more people to pay attention and possibly listen to the debates that would be coming up.
Am I? There's nothing to read within context.blinkboy211 said:
My end was assuming. Why would you only decide to register if Colbert was running if you weren't going to vote for him? Colbert is your motivation to register, otherwise you would have done so already. If you aren't voting for him, you would have registered sooner because the other candidates are your choice.
See, when one person says something and another person retorts, that's an argument.
"He isnt running really it just more of a stunt i guess you can say. hell if he really did run this would be a reason for me actually to register to vote."
Doesn't take long to type.
Of course you did. I concluded so when you haven't registered for two years but decide to do so only if Colbert runs.
You don't have to register to hear their platforms.
1. It's not "read the context".
2. Learn what "read within context" means before you try to make a "clever" statement.
3. There's no "context" to comprehend, although there is an implication. "I'm voting for Colbert if he runs"
Ok, the part you quoted from me, said, in it's entirety. "I specifically mentioned your desire to register if Colbert was indeed running."
It made no claim of you voting for him, so why are you repeating the same question you used in the prior quotes?
Seems to me you aren't reading my post.
As I've said before, the only implication is "I'm voting for Colbert". Care to give me a bullshit explanation how Colbert joining encourages you to register, but you won't vote for him?
"Shake up politics" REALLY!? You do know Stephen Colbert is a comedian that plays in character, yes? And political debates aren't like our debates, but you weren't know anything about the latter either.
Apologies. I wasn't paying attention.
I think when blinkboy211 said that he would register to vote because Colbert was running, he was kind of joking anyway.
I think Colbert would make an awesome president...
Man of the Year, anyone?
Man of the Year, anyone?
He's a political satirist. I doubt he's fit for the role of president.
So? Washington needs to laugh once in a while. People down there look like they have silver spoons up their @$$es
- Status