SC goes to Obama, Clinton loses black supporters...

[skylark]

Okay... so how many people are going to look at that long-ass post I just put up there and think "why bother" but then still assume that "skylark thinks Barack is perfect" or "skylark said she wanted everyone to read political books" without bothering to read the detailed post to find out?

Many, if not most, right?

Does anyone else see the analogy?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by skylark

Okay... so how many people are going to look at that long-ass post I just put up there and think "why bother" but then still assume that "skylark thinks Barack is perfect" or "skylark said she wanted everyone to read political books" without bothering to read the detailed post to find out?

Many, if not most, right?

Does anyone else see the analogy?

Okay this a horrible attempt at pretending you typed that long ass post to make an analogy. I certainly didn't read it because I have no REASON to assume it's anything more than wordier(?) redundancy.

If I typed "asdfjk;lasfdjlk;jljkl;fjlk;dsj;lsdfjsd;" for 10 pages but included the key to eternal life in the middle paragraph on the 10th page, can I blame anyone for not giving a damn enough to read until the 10th page?

If it is truly the key to eternal life, why preface it with a bunch of unnecessary hurdles and gatekeeping? Do YOU see the analogy?

[skylark]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Okay this a horrible attempt at pretending you typed that long ass post to make an analogy. I certainly didn't read it because I have no REASON to assume it's anything more than wordier(?) redundancy.

Actually, I didn't type the post thinking that it would be an analogy. I realized the irony afterwards and thought I'd be the first to make light of it and give some people in this thread a reason to laugh.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by skylark

Actually, I didn't type the post thinking that it would be an analogy. I realized the irony afterwards and thought I'd be the first to make light of it and give some people in this thread a reason to laugh.

My point, exactly.

The same after-the-fact reasoning applies to people pretending that a candidate's book should be read.

[skylark]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

My point, exactly.

The same after-the-fact reasoning applies to people pretending that a candidate's book should be read.

But I don't think that I said that someone had to read an entire book. I believe I pointed out this wonderfully useful thing called an index. I don't think that looking something up in a book is an "unnecessary hurdle" to someone who wants something really specific as to a candidates position on something. Just look up "abortion" "gay marriage" "educational system" or "strict constructionist" and go wild.

I'm not "pretending" that a candidate's book should be read by everyone who wants to vote. I only said that if you want to know what specifically a candidate would like to see done on a certain issue and the candidate wrote a book on politics in america about a year or so ago, instead of assuming and representing to others that the candidate doesn't have a plan, why not find out first by looking it up.

[DSTCHAOS]

Circular discussion.

[Drolefille]

Regarding the idea that people in Florida don't want Obama, and that it wasn't about name recognition, what about reports that of people who voted within the last month, Obama won, and of people who voted earlier than that up to a year (?) ago, Clinton won?

There may be a lot of other factors their, it's not a random population sample, but it shows that Obama gained ground in Florida, not lost it. And that's without making useless promises of "fighting" for Florida's delegates. (And let's not get to Michigan. Of course Clinton wants their delegates counted, every other major candidate pulled his name from the ballot.)