If Mittens can win mod/ind vote..why isn't he?

Well, you could never prove who had better name recognition, and I'd find it hard to believe that among the voters in the R primary there was much, if any difference on that. And as for the money, you'd have to go back and see who got how much each week...as their status continued to be in flux.

So I think you better go make me a sandwich. And don't try and put anything stupid like bologna in it...vegetarian please. I do like a little pesto spread on a sandwich...

PLUS my Fred Astaire burn was awesome!

I'll bring you Beef Pate... dripping with blood. Yummy....

Romney has led in fundraising consistently. As for name recognition, other than Gingrich, none of the others are even close on the national level.
 
Yeah... that is ONE of the components of a front runner Dung.


No, it isn't. "Or" is disjunctive, not conjunctive. "Front-runner," according to your source, is the person in the lead in the polls OR the person with the most name recognition OR the person with the most funds raised OR a combination of all three.

Like I said, wonderful things you are doing with the English language in this thread, sir.
 
you guys are arguing semantics. I get superfreak's argument. Substantively, Romney has always been leading the pack. You would have to be a rather large mouth breather to think back in the fall that cain was actually going to make a deep run. No one had the organization, name recognition, money, and internal party support that Romney had. You can't just look at a daily or a weekly snapshot and determine that someone is the frontrunner based off of that. You need to extrapolate as well. And despite some people were flavors of the week, it was obvious someone like bachman wasn't going anywhere.

That's all predictive. The point is, that others have taken frontrunner status at points. I never thought anyone but Romney was going to get nominated. But my reasoning has always been that the big money chooses the nominee and they want Romney. But again, that's a prediction. I could be wrong. And Romney is not a shoe in at this point.
 
No, it isn't. "Or" is disjunctive, not conjunctive. "Front-runner," according to your source, is the person in the lead in the polls OR the person with the most name recognition OR the person with the most funds raised OR a combination of all three.

Like I said, wonderful things you are doing with the English language in this thread, sir.

don't be embarrassed... just go read Grind's response. I know you were desperately trying to play hero for Jarod. But you and I both know that it is more than just a poll that determines who the frontrunner really is.
 
bunch of biatches.

A bunch of bitches ran him off? Really? I was just trying to figure it out, when I saw old thread the other day where I came out as a gay male (btw Sf you were really interested in pics on that thread), I realized how many people used to post here that are long gone. But he was one of my favs, so I was just curious. God he made me laugh so many times each day.
 
A bunch of bitches ran him off? Really? I was just trying to figure it out, when I saw old thread the other day where I came out as a gay male (btw Sf you were really interested in pics on that thread), I realized how many people used to post here that are long gone. But he was one of my favs, so I was just curious. God he made me laugh so many times each day.

He and Desh both left this site and went to the same board.
 
Like I said, a case can be made for Gingrich. Santorum... not a chance. The media can over sensationalize all they want, but leading in the poll for two weeks does not make him the front runner.


Except if you google "Santorum now frontrunner" what do you get?

It's OK to be wrong, SF. I thought that you'd be used to it by now.
 
I seem to remember that he had posted a farewell somewhere. I think he was just burnt, but can't really recall exactly...

He made a thread about it. He just decided that he was too addicted to this site, so he went to a different one. The one he chose, at that time, had less people but now has more. I'm sure he's happy.
 
He made a thread about it. He just decided that he was too addicted to this site, so he went to a different one. The one he chose, at that time, had less people but now has more. I'm sure he's happy.

You've lost a tremendous number of posters since you first started this. I was reading your friend's list and thinking about others too. You should try to get new posters. I would never go over to that site because I am not going through all of that again and I know they are already there. Eventually this board will die and I'll just go back to my feminist blogs which is what I do when I need long breaks from here. And the rest of you will go on to that other board. So it will be no big deal I guess, but I'm just mentioning it. It's like sales. You lose customers for various reasons, so if you are not always increasing your customer base you eventually go out of business. Not that you care, it's just a message board, you make no money from it and it's a big drain of your time, I get that.
 
You've lost a tremendous number of posters since you first started this. I was reading your friend's list and thinking about others too. You should try to get new posters. I would never go over to that site because I am not going through all of that again and I know they are already there. Eventually this board will die and I'll just go back to my feminist blogs which is what I do when I need long breaks from here. And the rest of you will go on to that other board. So it will be no big deal I guess, but I'm just mentioning it. It's like sales. You lose customers for various reasons, so if you are not always increasing your customer base you eventually go out of business. Not that you care, it's just a message board, you make no money from it and it's a big drain of your time, I get that.

It's a hobby. I'd like to create a larger user base, but there is a limit to how much I'll spend to advertise...

I'm sure I could get more users if I was more nazi about post content, but I don't think I would enjoy the place as much.

Every few months we get this "you're dying here" stuff, it ebbs and flows.
 
You've lost a tremendous number of posters since you first started this. I was reading your friend's list and thinking about others too. You should try to get new posters. I would never go over to that site because I am not going through all of that again and I know they are already there. Eventually this board will die and I'll just go back to my feminist blogs which is what I do when I need long breaks from here. And the rest of you will go on to that other board. So it will be no big deal I guess, but I'm just mentioning it. It's like sales. You lose customers for various reasons, so if you are not always increasing your customer base you eventually go out of business. Not that you care, it's just a message board, you make no money from it and it's a big drain of your time, I get that.

While I personally wouldn't mind if this site went under and I was able to get away from my addiction here I agree about the need for new blood. It is fun to develop a rapport with people over time but you also get to know each other so well you pretty much know where they stand on everything. New people and ideas liven the place up.
 
It's a hobby. I'd like to create a larger user base, but there is a limit to how much I'll spend to advertise...

I'm sure I could get more users if I was more nazi about post content, but I don't think I would enjoy the place as much.

Every few months we get this "you're dying here" stuff, it ebbs and flows.

Yeah, no, without people chasing BAC around calling him a n*gger, this place would suck.

:)
 
Back
Top