Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
biccat wrote:
I appreciate the misguided assumption by so many that Obama is "safe" in 2012. Must be why he expects to spend a billion dollars (mostly Wall Street money, like last t ime) to get re-elected.
This goes both ways. If those candidates were any good they wouldn't need to spend any money, amirite?
Meanwhile back in the real world where we aren't intellectually dishonest, we understand that literally anyone in any race has to spend boat-loads of money to win even a perfect race.
So, biccat, you will now address my actual bet instead of willfully misunderstanding it: If a Republican beats Obama in 2012 I will buy you a Battalion or Battleforce of your choice while you will buy me a $40 or $50 box set if the Republican loses. That's 2:1 odds for you, buddy!
If you're so sure of it, surely you will take a bet that favors you!
TheHammer wrote:So, biccat, you will now address my actual bet instead of willfully misunderstanding it: If a Republican beats Obama in 2012 I will buy you a Battalion or Battleforce of your choice while you will buy me a $40 or $50 box set if the Republican loses. That's 2:1 odds for you, buddy!
If you're so sure of it, surely you will take a bet that favors you!
You have this fascination with betting, or at least betting Biccat. Despite him saying he won't bet you-for whatever personal reason (you do know in some states its legally unethical for attorneys to gamble?) Have you sought help for this strange addiction?
Edit spelling - its weird that my laptop has a spellcheck feature, but not desktop.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/01/04 19:14:50
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
I'm not sure, but it seems you don't understand hyperbole. However, your link clearly shows the error of the "powered overwhelmingly by small online donations" myth of the Obama campaign.
Rented Tritium wrote:
biccat wrote: I appreciate the misguided assumption by so many that Obama is "safe" in 2012. Must be why he expects to spend a billion dollars (mostly Wall Street money, like last t ime) to get re-elected.
This goes both ways. If those candidates were any good they wouldn't need to spend any money, amirite?
My argument isn't that candidates spend money, it's that the scope of spending.
TheHammer wrote:So, biccat, you will now address my actual bet instead of willfully misunderstanding it: If a Republican beats Obama in 2012 I will buy you a Battalion or Battleforce of your choice while you will buy me a $40 or $50 box set if the Republican loses. That's 2:1 odds for you, buddy!
Is that what you were getting at? Honestly, you could have been clearer. Your previous post suggested that if Republicans were to win I should buy a battlebox.
TheHammer wrote:If you're so sure of it, surely you will take a bet that favors you!
I'm not sure about the legality of the bet, in my state, yours, or even on Dakka. Assuming that it is legal, I'll take that wager. And, to Frazzled's point, so long as it is not unethical (I don't think it is, but I can check) in any of the states where I'm admitted.
One important stipulation: I'm not buying any fething Space Marines.
edit: I see from your posting history that you've posted this in at least three threads. Don't you think it would have been easier to simply PM me?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/01/04 19:09:53
biccat wrote:Not a good chance? Even without the official endorsement, Romney is -1.6 vs. Obama, which is likely within the margin of error.
And, were the election today, that would be a problem. But it is not. The man campaigned in Iowa for essentially 6 years, to a net result of 7 less votes then in 2008. Still has many more months of other republicans whaling away on Romney, while Obama is building his donations and honing his knives for the weak points that will be revealed by Gingrich Santorum et al., all the while the economy is likely slowly improving.
And that is really the only hook Romney has to hang his hat on, since he can't use the obvious thing - that which Republicans despise most, Obamacare - to any real effect. He can't use his experience in the private sector, since it's at least somewhat tainted by his perception as being a unpalatable wall street corporate raider who destroyed companies and profited. He can't claim he understands middle classs kitchen table issues; this is a man who casually makes $10,000 bets on whimsy. He can't even insinuate Obama is a secret muslim, since he has his own religious problem. Also, this is supposition on my part, but I suspect he's going to pick one of those also-ran nutjobs as his VP pick to play to the fringe element that is now steering the ship. I suspect someone like Santorum, even, would play quite well to his thinking should he decide to do so.
On the other hand, he might go with Huntsman - that would be a shrewd pick, since Huntsman appears to have common sense, a rarity in politics. That would be a very good race, but nonetheless unless Obama makes some disastrous misstep in the coming year, unless the economy worsens, I think it's still his election to win, albeit by a likely thin margin.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
biccat wrote:One important stipulation: I'm not buying any fething Space Marines.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/01/04 19:11:50
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
biccat wrote:
It appears you've resulted to tautologies.
The initial point was obviously rhetorical, so the tautology is a reflection of your continued attempt at discourse.
Are you saying that you understood the point I initially was making ("mostly Wall Street money, like last time"), but included a link and a deliberately provocative comment regardless? If so, do you think this is trolling, flaming, or merely a run-of-the-mill attempt at being demeaning?
Or are you saying that my subsequent comment ("it seems you don't understand hyperbole") was well understood, but suggested that refuting it would be the work of a young child? If so, do you think this is trolling, flaming, or merely a run-of-the-mill attempt at being demeaning?
I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have interpreted my next comment ("You must not know too many 5-year-olds") as rhetorical, unless you were referring to members of this board as 5-year-olds, a relationship I would be well aware of. Because such a comment would certainly be trolling, flaming, and the standard run-of-the-mill demeaning comment.
I'm also pretty sure that my question "when he was 5-years-old?" wouldn't be rhetorical, because to do so assumes the tautology that I accused you of making.
And my previous comment, ("Are there other 5-year-olds who lampoon hyperbole in the manner you suggest, or only Thomas Payne (when he acted like a 5-year-old)?") certainly couldn't be the one you're referring to, because you referred to an "initial point."
biccat wrote:
Are you saying that you understood the point I initially was making ("mostly Wall Street money, like last time"), but included a link and a deliberately provocative comment regardless?
Yes.
biccat wrote:
If so, do you think this is trolling, flaming, or merely a run-of-the-mill attempt at being demeaning?
I call it banter, what you call it is up to you.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
biccat wrote:
I'm also pretty sure that my question "when he was 5-years-old?" wouldn't be rhetorical, because to do so assumes the tautology that I accused you of making.
Post hoc fallacy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/01/04 21:07:31
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Dogma, I hate to be pedantic, but it's Thomas Paine
Back OT in my view, nobody comes out of this with any credit. The Republicans are a shadow of what they used to be, and Obama (if he wins) will just muddle through another four years.
Somebody once said that society gets the leaders it deserves. If the calibre of western leaders is anything to go by, it's no wonder the BRICS and the Chinese are surging ahead.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
I've seen it both ways as well, but he did sign his name P A I N E. I could be wrong but in 18th C writing both spellings were considered correct. Irish vs. English if memory serves.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
Regardless of the spelling, we will never see the likes of Thomas Paine again, and that's not just a tragedy for America, but democracy and liberty as a whole. A man of principal who put his money where his mouth was.
Back OT: If Only this guy were running for the oval office
Automatically Appended Next Post: Quote: "It seems like only yesterday I was strafing your homes, here I am today begging you not to make such good cars!! " Priceless.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/01/04 22:17:09
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
I'm not sure, but it seems you don't understand hyperbole. However, your link clearly shows the error of the "powered overwhelmingly by small online donations" myth of the Obama campaign.
How, in this instance, was the reader to recognize it as hyperbole rather than a sincere claim?
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
Speaking of Palin, this looks like it might be entertaining.
Though Julianne Moore is probably a bit too pretty.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/01/05 03:23:36
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
