[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Well, then let’s bet on it. Sound good?
(Here it comes folks…)[/quote]
What are the stakes and what odds will you give me since you are so confident?[/quote]
What odds will you give me since you are so confident?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
ZEB, You need also put up a contender who will do better than Paul and by a certain spread. Sound good, chief?[/quote]
I’m sorry I thought that you were so sure that he’d become President all I’d have to do is bet that he wouldn’t. But I’ll give you a break. I’ll bet that he won’t get the nomination. Keep in mind I have no idea who will get the nod, all I know is that Paul will not.
You are the one offering the bet.
Either make the bet or shut up.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
You are the one offering the bet.
Either make the bet or shut up.[/quote]
Fair enough, since it would be too silly to make any sort of bet that Paul would actually be elected President of the US. I bet that Paul will NOT get the republican nomination for President.
And if he does I will not post on T Nation for 6 months. If he doesn’t get the nomination you don’t post for 3 months.
I’ve given you 2-1 on the bet----And why? I’m a sport 
And I actually like having you around as I do agree with you on other issues better than half the time.
2:1…?
I’ll accept 2:1 if you name one candidate that does better than him by more than 2:1 margin. For example, if you pick Bachmann and Paul gets 33% of the vote she would have to get the other 67%.
Now that’s fair considering you still haven’t said who can specifically beat him. If you cannot even name one person then you must really believe he is unbeatable.
Those are my terms…and now its a real interesting bet.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
I love how allllllllllllll the Paul supporters are bagging on her now. Seriously, I’ve never met ONE ron paul supporter that I could get along with- not even outside of politics. They’re just such pieces of shit and incredibly delusional. The bulk of his supporters are all conspiracy theorists and absolutely won’t listen to any other points of view- which ironically they despise others for supposedly doing the same thing. “Oh Ron Paul is different. He won’t play the game.” Ok, well he’s still a politician and different doesn’t always mean better or even GOOD. You could vote a dog into the office and that’d be different, but I don’t see a lot of support for Lassie in 2012.[/quote]
I don’t think you are in a position to know “the bulk of his supporters” so please continue to speak out of your ass.
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent. This is because it takes an IQ bigger than one’s shoe size to understand Paul’s positions as being constitutional. Plus he does not speak in vacuous and annoying rhetoric like the other losers (who are all the same candidate as far as we are concerned) and requires the ability to think outside of the sanctioned, establishment canon.[/quote]
Actually I AM in a position to know them because they’re all around my age range: 18-25. Why hasn’t there been a poll on the average age of Paul supporters? Because it would be a testament to how YOUNG and DUMB his supporters are. I would wager that nearly 90% of his support base is between the age of 20-28. They’re not intelligent, they’re pseudo-intellectuals at best with absolutely no life experience. His own supporters will be his downfall.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]tedro wrote:
Personally, my ideal campaign would revolve around nothing more than an online debate like this one. Lay it all out and let the candidates quote and debate each other in print.
[/quote]
So your solution would be to make it so that people who are too illiterate to have an educated vote in the first place to have to read what the candidates have to say?
Haha. That’s too funny.
[/quote]
[quote]tedro wrote:
Personally, my ideal campaign…
[/quote]
!
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
2:1…?
I’ll accept 2:1 if you name one candidate that does better than him by more than 2:1 margin. For example, if you pick Bachmann and Paul gets 33% of the vote she would have to get the other 67%.
Now that’s fair considering you still haven’t said who can specifically beat him. If you cannot even name one person then you must really believe he is unbeatable.
Those are my terms…and now its a real interesting bet.[/quote]
Ha…I’ve told you and the other Paulies I have no idea who will win. You don’t like my bet because it places you in a position of responsibility. Are all anarchists like this?
No really, it’s a good bet take it. All Paul has to do is win the nomination you guys think he can do that right? You’re all over the board mouthing off about it being his year. Now it’s time to back it up and well…you just can’t.
Reminds me of how you guys acted in 08’.
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
I love how allllllllllllll the Paul supporters are bagging on her now. Seriously, I’ve never met ONE ron paul supporter that I could get along with- not even outside of politics. They’re just such pieces of shit and incredibly delusional. The bulk of his supporters are all conspiracy theorists and absolutely won’t listen to any other points of view- which ironically they despise others for supposedly doing the same thing. “Oh Ron Paul is different. He won’t play the game.” Ok, well he’s still a politician and different doesn’t always mean better or even GOOD. You could vote a dog into the office and that’d be different, but I don’t see a lot of support for Lassie in 2012.[/quote]
I don’t think you are in a position to know “the bulk of his supporters” so please continue to speak out of your ass.
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent. This is because it takes an IQ bigger than one’s shoe size to understand Paul’s positions as being constitutional. Plus he does not speak in vacuous and annoying rhetoric like the other losers (who are all the same candidate as far as we are concerned) and requires the ability to think outside of the sanctioned, establishment canon.[/quote]
Actually I AM in a position to know them because they’re all around my age range: 18-25.[/quote]
BINGO!
[quote]Why hasn’t there been a poll on the average age of Paul supporters? Because it would be a testament to how YOUNG and DUMB his supporters are. I would wager that nearly 90% of his support base is between the age of 20-28. They’re not intelligent, they’re pseudo-intellectuals at best with absolutely no life experience. His own supporters will be his downfall.
[/quote]
No, actually I think Ron Paul will be his own downfall as he cannot magically turn himself into an electable candidate. He’s a crotchety old man who has simplistic answers to complicated problems. He can’t win and he never could. With that said with all the support he has around here you’d think someone would step up and bet me. Lifty won’t do it he’s too smart.
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
I love how allllllllllllll the Paul supporters are bagging on her now. Seriously, I’ve never met ONE ron paul supporter that I could get along with- not even outside of politics. They’re just such pieces of shit and incredibly delusional. The bulk of his supporters are all conspiracy theorists and absolutely won’t listen to any other points of view- which ironically they despise others for supposedly doing the same thing. “Oh Ron Paul is different. He won’t play the game.” Ok, well he’s still a politician and different doesn’t always mean better or even GOOD. You could vote a dog into the office and that’d be different, but I don’t see a lot of support for Lassie in 2012.[/quote]
I don’t think you are in a position to know “the bulk of his supporters” so please continue to speak out of your ass.
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent. This is because it takes an IQ bigger than one’s shoe size to understand Paul’s positions as being constitutional. Plus he does not speak in vacuous and annoying rhetoric like the other losers (who are all the same candidate as far as we are concerned) and requires the ability to think outside of the sanctioned, establishment canon.[/quote]
Actually I AM in a position to know them because they’re all around my age range: 18-25. Why hasn’t there been a poll on the average age of Paul supporters? Because it would be a testament to how YOUNG and DUMB his supporters are. I would wager that nearly 90% of his support base is between the age of 20-28. They’re not intelligent, they’re pseudo-intellectuals at best with absolutely no life experience. His own supporters will be his downfall.
[/quote]
They all are? So then you prove my point.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
2:1…?
I’ll accept 2:1 if you name one candidate that does better than him by more than 2:1 margin. For example, if you pick Bachmann and Paul gets 33% of the vote she would have to get the other 67%.
Now that’s fair considering you still haven’t said who can specifically beat him. If you cannot even name one person then you must really believe he is unbeatable.
Those are my terms…and now its a real interesting bet.[/quote]
Ha…I’ve told you and the other Paulies I have no idea who will win. You don’t like my bet because it places you in a position of responsibility. Are all anarchists like this?
No really, it’s a good bet take it. All Paul has to do is win the nomination you guys think he can do that right? You’re all over the board mouthing off about it being his year. Now it’s time to back it up and well…you just can’t.
Reminds me of how you guys acted in 08’.[/quote]
That is not even a bet. I thought you understood risk versus reward.
By saying you don’t know who it will be you are effectively acknowledging Paul’s chance.
I’ll even let you rank them according to how you think they will do.
And by the way I have never even stated I think he will win only that he has a chance and that he will do much better than last time which he has already proven himself to be capable of.
My bet is that the win will come down to who ever still has money in their campaign account. After Bachmann’s turnout she has a better chance than before. I believe the top three, in no particular order, will be Paul, Romney, and Bachmann.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
My bet is that the win will come down to who ever still has money in their campaign account. After Bachmann’s turnout she has a better chance than before. I believe the top three, in no particular order, will be Paul, Romney, and Bachmann.[/quote]
You’re saying when it’s all said and done Ron Paul will have the nomination with Romney second and Bachmann third. And I’m saying I don’t care who is in second or third place just that Ron Paul will NOT be first by convention time. In essence we do have a bet. Let’s now decide the stakes.
I see it ending this way:
At THIS point, you have to look at Romney and Perry as going head-to-head. Perry carries the “enthusiasm” of the Party; Romney the money and organization. It’s almost impossible to call at this point; but I give Perry the nod.
I see Bachmann as one of those candidates who will continue to “run”…despite it being mathematically impossible that she can win. Her supporters will be on TV crying, hands in the air, for her not to “give up the fight”.
Paul: Perhaps an independent run? I just don’t see him getting the GOP nod.
Mufasa
No.
He’s saying that him having to bet on ONE candidate while you get to bet on ANY OTHER candidate is not fair. That much should be obvious.
Edit: Something is off with the forum. The post I was replying to seems to have disappeared.
If Ron doesn’t come in at least the top 3 I’ll go one month.
If Ron does come in top 3 but not first it’s a draw.
If he wins it you go three months.
Deal?
You can’t lose, right?
Where is Perry in this “bet”?
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Where is Perry in this “bet”?
Mufasa[/quote]
He won’t even carry enough steam to make it to the end of the primary…maybe he can call a prayer meeting to help him or something.
Actually, my position is that Paul is in the top 3 and not co ncerned with the other candidates placing (though I suspect Bachmann and Romney will also finish high just based on financing).
Interesting hypothesis, Lift…
Mufasa
[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
No.
He’s saying that him having to bet on ONE candidate while you get to bet on ANY OTHER candidate is not fair. That much should be obvious.[/quote]
Oh junior I know what he’s saying but that has nothing to do with what I’m saying. You’re going to have to take my advice son…Shhhhh.
Do you think leaving the forum would help? Hmm…try it and I’ll let you know when it clears up.
K?
Smile skippy life is short.
Your Friend,
ZEB
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I just don’t see him (Paul) getting the GOP nod.
Mufasa[/quote]
BLASPHEMY!
How dare you go against the 20 something candidate? Don’t you know that he wants to legalize drugs, never…EVER go to war and let everyone do about what they want?
READ THE CONSTITUTION!
Mufasa man I really am surprised to hear you say that a 76 year old Congressman who espouses nutty views and reminds most of their crotchety grandfather isn’t going to get the nomination.
