Conquer Club

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry, since you don't know very much about this, I'll do you a favor and explain it to you.

The Libertarian Party is a joke. Their average state convention consists of 30 high school dropouts in a Holiday Inn conference room making speeches at each other for a day. They're a book club that, every four years, painfully forms into some semblance of a political party.

Separate from the LP are a number of libertarian (lowercase "L") institutions that predate the 197? founding of the LP by years to decades and have nothing to do with it. These include the CATO Institute, Reason Magazine, etc. The annual budget of the CATO Institute is $25 million. Gary Johnson will spend $3 million on his presidential campaign this year. The former represent the intellectual mainstream of libertarian thought in the U.S., not the Libertarian Party. There is no connection between Reason and LP. I'm not going to try to prove it to you anymore than I'd try to prove Santa Claus didn't exist to a 5-year old. These are just basic facts.

If you want to continue peddling your conspiracy theories, fine. Just realize that the Libertarian Party couldn't conspire to takeover a sidewalk flower stand and you sound very silly sowing these elaborate plots.

I'm simply pointing out how reliable their mouthpiece is as an indicator of who the Libertarian Party thinks people should vote for.

Hint- they're all for the Libertarian Party candidate.

You were also saying some really crazy stuff, Sym. Maybe you had too many beers tonight?

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry, since you don't know very much about this, I'll do you a favor and explain it to you.

The Libertarian Party is a joke. Their average state convention consists of 30 high school dropouts in a Holiday Inn conference room making speeches at each other for a day. They're a book club that, every four years, painfully forms into some semblance of a political party.

Separate from the LP are a number of libertarian (lowercase "L") institutions that predate the 197? founding of the LP by years to decades and have nothing to do with it. These include the CATO Institute, Reason Magazine, etc. The annual budget of the CATO Institute is $25 million. Gary Johnson will spend $3 million on his presidential campaign this year. The former represent the intellectual mainstream of libertarian thought in the U.S., not the Libertarian Party. There is no connection between Reason and LP. I'm not going to try to prove it to you anymore than I'd try to prove Santa Claus didn't exist to a 5-year old. These are just basic facts.

If you want to continue peddling your conspiracy theories, fine. Just realize that the Libertarian Party couldn't conspire to takeover a sidewalk flower stand and you sound very silly sowing these elaborate plots.

I'm simply pointing out how reliable their mouthpiece is as an indicator of who the Libertarian Party thinks people should vote for.

Hint- they're all for the Libertarian Party candidate.

You were also saying some really crazy stuff, Sym. Maybe you had too many beers tonight?

What upset you this time?

Sorry to interrupt, but nine of them said they aren't voting. So they aren't all voting for the Libertarian Party candidate.

And like Saxi said, unfortunately the Libertarian Party is not influential enough to make Reason a mouthpiece.

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry, since you don't know very much about this, I'll do you a favor and explain it to you.

The Libertarian Party is a joke. Their average state convention consists of 30 high school dropouts in a Holiday Inn conference room making speeches at each other for a day. They're a book club that, every four years, painfully forms into some semblance of a political party.

Separate from the LP are a number of libertarian (lowercase "L") institutions that predate the 197? founding of the LP by years to decades and have nothing to do with it. These include the CATO Institute, Reason Magazine, etc. The annual budget of the CATO Institute is $25 million. Gary Johnson will spend $3 million on his presidential campaign this year. The former represent the intellectual mainstream of libertarian thought in the U.S., not the Libertarian Party. There is no connection between Reason and LP. I'm not going to try to prove it to you anymore than I'd try to prove Santa Claus didn't exist to a 5-year old. These are just basic facts.

If you want to continue peddling your conspiracy theories, fine. Just realize that the Libertarian Party couldn't conspire to takeover a sidewalk flower stand and you sound very silly sowing these elaborate plots.

I'm simply pointing out how reliable their mouthpiece is

oh Jesus

thegreekdog wrote:Sorry to interrupt, but nine of them said they aren't voting. So they aren't all voting for the Libertarian Party candidate.

And like Saxi said, unfortunately the Libertarian Party is not influential enough to make Reason a mouthpiece.

Yeah dude- we noticed. One person was brave enough to not tell the boss anything at all. That should be the stand out.

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Sorry to interrupt, but nine of them said they aren't voting. So they aren't all voting for the Libertarian Party candidate.

And like Saxi said, unfortunately the Libertarian Party is not influential enough to make Reason a mouthpiece.

Yeah dude- we noticed. One person was brave enough to not tell the boss anything at all. That should be the stand out.

Ah, the smoking gun which confirms you're warped conspiracy theory!

The standards of evidence lower with every beer Sym drinks.

This is where Her Majesty goes into her patented "eventually everyone will have to go to the bathroom and stop posting; I just need to keep repeating everything I've said that's already been discredited so I can outlast them - it doesn't matter what I say, just as long as I keep logging comments" mode.

This surely has to be the first person in history who tries to filibuster a message board.

Well, Saxi's out. GL with Her Majesty, gang.

f'n Symmetry!

Phatscotty wrote:f'n Symmetry!

you be quiet, you're just as bad

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Sorry to interrupt, but nine of them said they aren't voting. So they aren't all voting for the Libertarian Party candidate.

And like Saxi said, unfortunately the Libertarian Party is not influential enough to make Reason a mouthpiece.

Yeah dude- we noticed. One person was brave enough to not tell the boss anything at all. That should be the stand out.

Ah, the smoking gun which confirms you're warped conspiracy theory!

The standards of evidence lower with every beer Sym drinks.

I guess he didn't read the link.

I tend to think that think-tank officers should keep their ballots secret. But I am generally guided by the fact that in 40 years of voting I've never encountered an election in which my vote would have made the difference, and by the principle that it's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.

So, the person who said he wasn't going to tell had a reason other than "I'm scared of my boss."

And in case Symmetry cannot admit to being wrong based on Saxi's various posts... one of the questions was "who did you vote for in 2000, 2004, and 2008." Here are some answers:

John Kerry (Democrat)
Bob Barr (Libertarian) - "The worst Lib candidate ever[.]"
George Bush, George Bush, Barack Obama
George Bush
"The Libertarian Party candidate in each, though often without much enthusiasm."
George Bush, George Bush, Barack Obama
Obama
Gore, Kerry, Obama
Gore, Bednarik, Obama
Kerry, Bob Barr

Hmm 2012:

thegreekdog wrote:Reason's editorial staff have released who they will be voting for on Tuesday -

Gary Johnson - 17
Refuse to Vote - 9
Won't Disclose - 1
Mitt Romney - 0
Barack Obama - 0
Jill Stein - 0
Virgil Goode - 0
Rocky Anderson - 0

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/24/w ... singlepage

And Saxi's post on 2008:

saxitoxin wrote:
2008 Reason staff votes (http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/29/w ... -your-vote):

Obama (Democrat): 12
Barr (Libertarian) 11
Refuse to Vote: 6
McCain (Republican): 4
Did Not Disclose: 3
Nader (unaffiliated): 1
McKinney (Green): 0
Baldwin (Constitution): 0

Nothing seems off about the post 2008 change? Did all the Dem voters and Republicans get fired? What happened to the Nader guy? They all shifted to the Libertarian Party the new editor wrote a book about?

Please.

saxitoxin wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:f'n Symmetry!

you be quiet, you're just as bad

I do have one thing going for me though. I'm not obsessed with foreign countries

I just had to say something...

Symmetry wrote:Hmm 2012:

thegreekdog wrote:Reason's editorial staff have released who they will be voting for on Tuesday -

Gary Johnson - 17
Refuse to Vote - 9
Won't Disclose - 1
Mitt Romney - 0
Barack Obama - 0
Jill Stein - 0
Virgil Goode - 0
Rocky Anderson - 0

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/24/w ... singlepage

And Saxi's post on 2008:

saxitoxin wrote:
2008 Reason staff votes (http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/29/w ... -your-vote):

Obama (Democrat): 12
Barr (Libertarian) 11
Refuse to Vote: 6
McCain (Republican): 4
Did Not Disclose: 3
Nader (unaffiliated): 1
McKinney (Green): 0
Baldwin (Constitution): 0

Nothing seems off about the post 2008 change? Did all the Dem voters and Republicans get fired? What happened to the Nader guy? They all shifted to the Libertarian Party the new editor wrote a book about?

Please.

In other words,

"A conspiracy! These people cannot change their minds. Obviously, there is no other possibility other than the fact that the new editor either eliminated the non-LP'ers or forced the staff to either vote LP or not vote at all!

In no way were the 2008 Obama-voters at all dismayed about Obama's past 4 years. There's no way they could've concluded that Obama sucks; therefore, they would not vote for him again. No way! <dons tinfoil hat> And the Libertarian Party with their $3 million is funding such places to make their workers vote LP or not at all"


You can stop digging your intellectual grave, Sym. 20 feet should be more than enough.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Hmm 2012:

thegreekdog wrote:Reason's editorial staff have released who they will be voting for on Tuesday -

Gary Johnson - 17
Refuse to Vote - 9
Won't Disclose - 1
Mitt Romney - 0
Barack Obama - 0
Jill Stein - 0
Virgil Goode - 0
Rocky Anderson - 0

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/24/w ... singlepage

And Saxi's post on 2008:

saxitoxin wrote:
2008 Reason staff votes (http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/29/w ... -your-vote):

Obama (Democrat): 12
Barr (Libertarian) 11
Refuse to Vote: 6
McCain (Republican): 4
Did Not Disclose: 3
Nader (unaffiliated): 1
McKinney (Green): 0
Baldwin (Constitution): 0

Nothing seems off about the post 2008 change? Did all the Dem voters and Republicans get fired? What happened to the Nader guy? They all shifted to the Libertarian Party the new editor wrote a book about?

Please.

In other words,

"A conspiracy! These people cannot change their minds. Obviously, there is no other possibility other than the fact that the new editor either eliminated the non-LP'ers or forced the staff to either vote LP or not vote at all!

In no way were the 2008 Obama-voters at all dismayed about Obama's past 4 years. There's no way they could've concluded that Obama sucks; therefore, they would not vote for him again. No way! <dons tinfoil hat> And the Libertarian Party with their $3 million is funding such places to make their workers vote LP or not at all"


You can stop digging your intellectual grave, Sym. 20 feet should be more than enough.

Stay classy dude, you don't need to be discussing my grave in any theoretical or intellectual capacity.

I simply give you the stats given to me, by TGD and Saxi. It looks odd, that difference, no? I understand what you're saying, but all the Obama folk, all the McCain folk, and the Nader weirdo, they all flipped to the Libertarians? Or told their editor they weren't gonna vote?

You'd think that if was just a problem they had with the Obama presidency those Repubs would still be voting Republican.

I already provided other possibilities which you overlooked and continue to ignore (which constitutes as faulty intelligence or trolling).

Furthermore, there's no need to get Dramatic when someone points out that you're burying your intellect in conspiracy theories. Instead, you should be embarrassed.

It is evident that you're in no capacity or are unwilling to rationally address the many problems of your shifting positions; therefore, thanks for trying. Better luck next time with the trolling conspiracy theories, Sym.

BigBallinStalin wrote:I already provided other possibilities which you overlooked and continue to ignore (which constitutes as faulty intelligence or trolling).

Furthermore, there's no need to get Dramatic when someone points out that you're burying your intellect in conspiracy theories. Instead, you should be embarrassed.

It is evident that you're in no capacity or are unwilling to rationally address the many problems of your shifting positions; therefore, thanks for trying. Better luck next time with the trolling conspiracy theories, Sym.

Seems a bit harsh there, BBS. Indeed, your whole post seems to be a screed against me. You forgot to even talk about my points, and those provided by TGD and Saxi.

Symmetry wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Hmm 2012:

thegreekdog wrote:Reason's editorial staff have released who they will be voting for on Tuesday -

Gary Johnson - 17
Refuse to Vote - 9
Won't Disclose - 1
Mitt Romney - 0
Barack Obama - 0
Jill Stein - 0
Virgil Goode - 0
Rocky Anderson - 0

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/24/w ... singlepage

And Saxi's post on 2008:

saxitoxin wrote:
2008 Reason staff votes (http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/29/w ... -your-vote):

Obama (Democrat): 12
Barr (Libertarian) 11
Refuse to Vote: 6
McCain (Republican): 4
Did Not Disclose: 3
Nader (unaffiliated): 1
McKinney (Green): 0
Baldwin (Constitution): 0

Nothing seems off about the post 2008 change? Did all the Dem voters and Republicans get fired? What happened to the Nader guy? They all shifted to the Libertarian Party the new editor wrote a book about?

Please.

In other words,

"A conspiracy! These people cannot change their minds. Obviously, there is no other possibility other than the fact that the new editor either eliminated the non-LP'ers or forced the staff to either vote LP or not vote at all!

In no way were the 2008 Obama-voters at all dismayed about Obama's past 4 years. There's no way they could've concluded that Obama sucks; therefore, they would not vote for him again. No way! <dons tinfoil hat> And the Libertarian Party with their $3 million is funding such places to make their workers vote LP or not at all"


You can stop digging your intellectual grave, Sym. 20 feet should be more than enough.

Stay classy dude, you don't need to be discussing my grave in any theoretical or intellectual capacity.

I simply give you the stats given to me, by TGD and Saxi. It looks odd, that difference, no? I understand what you're saying, but all the Obama folk, all the McCain folk, and the Nader weirdo, they all flipped to the Libertarians? Or told their editor they weren't gonna vote?

You'd think that if was just a problem they had with the Obama presidency those Repubs would still be voting Republican.

I'll just park that here.

Why does it look odd? There needs to be some more analysis here between "People voted differently in 2012 than in 2008" (which is what the data shows) and your attempt at trolling - "The editor is making people vote a certain way or admit to voting a certain way in 2012."

thegreekdog wrote:Why does it look odd? There needs to be some more analysis here between "People voted differently in 2012 than in 2008" (which is what the data shows) and your attempt at trolling - "The editor is making people vote a certain way or admit to voting a certain way in 2012."

They hadn't voted- the polls were about what the magazine said its staff intended. You even posted one of those polls. How they actually vote is something neither you nor I can say. What we can say is that the figures for the magazine post 2008 (kudos to Saxi for digging that up) are very different from the figures you posted.

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Why does it look odd? There needs to be some more analysis here between "People voted differently in 2012 than in 2008" (which is what the data shows) and your attempt at trolling - "The editor is making people vote a certain way or admit to voting a certain way in 2012."

They hadn't voted- the polls were about what the magazine said its staff intended. You even posted one of those polls. How they actually vote is something neither you nor I can say. What we can say is that the figures for the magazine post 2008 (kudos to Saxi for digging that up) are very different from the figures you posted.

Okay.

So anyway, now that we've got Symmetry's UFO and Bigfoot sightings out of the way, I like this street art -

saxitoxin wrote:So anyway, now that we've got Symmetry's UFO and Bigfoot sightings out of the way, I like this street art -

I can only assume the editor of Reason magazine intimidated you into posting that.

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:So anyway, now that we've got Symmetry's UFO and Bigfoot sightings out of the way, I like this street art -

I can only assume the editor of Reason magazine intimidated you into posting that.

While you're both being kind of dickish about discussing stuff you both posted for discussion, it's still the spelling mistake that I find annoying in that picture.

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:So anyway, now that we've got Symmetry's UFO and Bigfoot sightings out of the way, I like this street art -

I can only assume the editor of Reason magazine intimidated you into posting that.

While you're both being kind of dickish about discussing stuff you both posted for discussion, it's still the spelling mistake that I find annoying in that picture.

I acknowledge you just made a post.

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:So anyway, now that we've got Symmetry's UFO and Bigfoot sightings out of the way, I like this street art -

I can only assume the editor of Reason magazine intimidated you into posting that.

While you're both being kind of dickish about discussing stuff you both posted for discussion, it's still the spelling mistake that I find annoying in that picture.

I acknowledge you just made a post.

Thank you for making a decent try at civility. I think we need to get TGD in on this.

I thought I was perfectly civil with my "Okay." While I disagree with your analysis, there is no value in responding because you are convinced that you are correct and will not be budged or you are trolling.

In fact, if civility is defined as a response or acknowledgement of a post, then I was more civil than Saxi because I actually responded.