Author Topic: #'s on the Teaparty  (Read 5618 times)

Adios

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 96724
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #15 on: October 08, 2010, 12:11:04 am »
I have a plan. After careful consideration I have decided to start preaching to the Holy Speed Limit Sign in my yard. I will develop a reputation and thereby earn a place as a re-educator in the coming camps.

Yes, I intend to profit from your misery.
You need to get someone to take videos of you cursing out the sign on a shitty cellphone camera as if they were spying on you from a car or adjacent trailer and then post them on youtube.

Excellent idea. You sir, have a future in the coming Dark Ages.

Prince Glittersnatch III

  • Heir to the throne of King Kong
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 27301
  • Landlord of the Flies
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2010, 02:31:10 am »
The only problem I see is whether or not those are percentages of population, or percentages of people who actually vote; and it appears that Tea Party members are more likely to vote.

The average percentage of eligible voters who actually cast a ballot during midterm elections is about 37%. Now, the math on this makes my head hurt, so I'm going to make a rough example:

100 eligible voters, with 10 tea partiers.
Only 30 people vote, but that contains all 10 teabaggers, leaving 20 non-bags.
As typical, the non-baggers are roughly equal, so 10 vote D, 10 vote R.
Whichever way the baggers vote, wins the election.


Hurray for voter apathy.
So if the Tea Party does nominate their own candidate for the presidency then were guaranteed 4 more years of Obama.
 :kingmeh:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?=743264506 <---worst human being to ever live.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Other%20Pagan%20Mumbo-Jumbo/discordianism.htm <----Learn the truth behind Discordianism

Glittersnatch would be a rather unfortunate condition, if a halfway decent troll name.

AORTAL SEX MADES MY DICK HARD AS FUCK!

Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 385766
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2010, 03:10:37 am »
The only problem I see is whether or not those are percentages of population, or percentages of people who actually vote; and it appears that Tea Party members are more likely to vote.

The average percentage of eligible voters who actually cast a ballot during midterm elections is about 37%. Now, the math on this makes my head hurt, so I'm going to make a rough example:

100 eligible voters, with 10 tea partiers.
Only 30 people vote, but that contains all 10 teabaggers, leaving 20 non-bags.
As typical, the non-baggers are roughly equal, so 10 vote D, 10 vote R.
Whichever way the baggers vote, wins the election.


Hurray for voter apathy.
So if the Tea Party does nominate their own candidate for the presidency then were guaranteed 4 more years of Obama.
 :kingmeh:

Who would you prefer?

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87066
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #18 on: October 08, 2010, 03:02:45 pm »
Palin/Beck, 2012: "THE MAYANS SAW IT COMING."

Cramulus

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 130574
    • View Profile
    • Cramul.us
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #19 on: October 08, 2010, 03:03:58 pm »
:mittens:

Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 104989
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2010, 03:16:05 pm »
The only problem I see is whether or not those are percentages of population, or percentages of people who actually vote; and it appears that Tea Party members are more likely to vote.

The average percentage of eligible voters who actually cast a ballot during midterm elections is about 37%. Now, the math on this makes my head hurt, so I'm going to make a rough example:

100 eligible voters, with 10 tea partiers.
Only 30 people vote, but that contains all 10 teabaggers, leaving 20 non-bags.
As typical, the non-baggers are roughly equal, so 10 vote D, 10 vote R.
Whichever way the baggers vote, wins the election.


Hurray for voter apathy.
So if the Tea Party does nominate their own candidate for the presidency then were guaranteed 4 more years of Obama.
 :kingmeh:

Who would you prefer?

At this stage, the only difference would seem to be speed of decline.  Hell, Obama is even deporting more immigrants and has been more strict on abortion funding than Bush, in addition to emulating his War on Terror/Executive privileges/secrecy/bank-loving hardon.  The next crop of Teabaggers will of course be worse, then be followed by Democrats who emulate them while appearing all nice and spineless etc etc until policeman are given the legal power to whack people for looking at them funny and every reporter who doesn't toe the Beltway line is in Gitmo, or one of it's Afghan/Iraqi equivalents.

Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 385766
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #21 on: October 08, 2010, 03:18:59 pm »
The only problem I see is whether or not those are percentages of population, or percentages of people who actually vote; and it appears that Tea Party members are more likely to vote.

The average percentage of eligible voters who actually cast a ballot during midterm elections is about 37%. Now, the math on this makes my head hurt, so I'm going to make a rough example:

100 eligible voters, with 10 tea partiers.
Only 30 people vote, but that contains all 10 teabaggers, leaving 20 non-bags.
As typical, the non-baggers are roughly equal, so 10 vote D, 10 vote R.
Whichever way the baggers vote, wins the election.


Hurray for voter apathy.
So if the Tea Party does nominate their own candidate for the presidency then were guaranteed 4 more years of Obama.
 :kingmeh:

Who would you prefer?

At this stage, the only difference would seem to be speed of decline.  Hell, Obama is even deporting more immigrants and has been more strict on abortion funding than Bush, in addition to emulating his War on Terror/Executive privileges/secrecy/bank-loving hardon.  The next crop of Teabaggers will of course be worse, then be followed by Democrats who emulate them while appearing all nice and spineless etc etc until policeman are given the legal power to whack people for looking at them funny and every reporter who doesn't toe the Beltway line is in Gitmo, or one of it's Afghan/Iraqi equivalents.

Sure.

I'm kind of hoping for a Palin/O'Donnell victory in 2012, just to make the whole thing at least amusing.

Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 104989
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #22 on: October 08, 2010, 03:22:35 pm »
You know the really funny thing?

There is probably at least one guy in every major government in the world who is right now being forced to create scenarios based on the assumption that Palin or someone very much like her will become President in the next 4-12 years.

BEST.  JOB.  EVER.  It's like writing Apocalypse Porn...only with access to classified documents at the same time.

Cramulus

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 130574
    • View Profile
    • Cramul.us
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #23 on: October 08, 2010, 03:23:23 pm »
 :lol: that is a hell of an image

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87066
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #24 on: October 08, 2010, 03:29:09 pm »
You know the really funny thing?

There is probably at least one guy in every major government in the world who is right now being forced to create scenarios based on the assumption that Palin or someone very much like her will become President in the next 4-12 years.

BEST.  JOB.  EVER.  It's like writing Apocalypse Porn...only with access to classified documents at the same time.

Cain, can I borrow that?  It's awesome.

Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 104989
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #25 on: October 08, 2010, 03:30:22 pm »
Sure, feel free.

Adios

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 96724
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2010, 06:12:05 pm »
The only problem I see is whether or not those are percentages of population, or percentages of people who actually vote; and it appears that Tea Party members are more likely to vote.

The average percentage of eligible voters who actually cast a ballot during midterm elections is about 37%. Now, the math on this makes my head hurt, so I'm going to make a rough example:

100 eligible voters, with 10 tea partiers.
Only 30 people vote, but that contains all 10 teabaggers, leaving 20 non-bags.
As typical, the non-baggers are roughly equal, so 10 vote D, 10 vote R.
Whichever way the baggers vote, wins the election.


Permission to use requested.

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87066
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2010, 07:28:16 pm »
Granted, certainly.

Adios

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 96724
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2010, 07:29:47 pm »

East Coast Hustle

  • Missile Command
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 46213
  • Omnimalevolent Polyfather of Exsanguination in Red
    • View Profile
Re: #'s on the Teaparty
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2010, 09:04:16 pm »
I fully intend to vote for Romney in the republican primary. And not as a joke.

Feel free to pile on now.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"