Alaska Darin Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 YOU'RE the one who mentioned Perot and GHW Bush, so I gues you'd better listen to your own advice!!! Not MY fault or BUFTEX'S fault ***YOU*** were the only who mentioned them by trying to make a case for why GWB lost his election! Whaqt do you expect, us to jump right back into Carville after that? He responded to your obvious off-topic reference about someone OTHER than Carville, and therefore what so you expect????? OMG, where are the topic police when you need them???? I see NUMEROUS topics go off-topic all the TIME, and I have never heard anyone complain about that before. Lighten up just a BIT! 27708[/snapback] Thanks for the expected "hot pockets" comeback. Carville was given credit for something he didn't do, which is the reason I cited Ross Perot. Neither of the 2 campaigns in 1992 did much of anything to separate themselves from the other. Hence the reason Mr. Perot garnered nearly 20% of the vote. Read that number again. 20%. If Carville was effective, could some coot from Texas really take 1/5th of the votes? As usual, you blather alot and say nothing. The best way to keep your hole from getting deeper is to stop digging. The next question is which poster will you suck up to tomorrow?
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 Thanks for the expected "hot pockets" comeback. Carville was given credit for something he didn't do, which is the reason I cited Ross Perot. Neither of the 2 campaigns in 1992 did much of anything to separate themselves from the other. Hence the reason Mr. Perot garnered nearly 20% of the vote. Read that number again. 20%. If Carville was effective, could some coot from Texas really take 1/5th of the votes? As usual, you blather alot and say nothing. The best way to keep your hole from getting deeper is to stop digging. The next question is which poster will you suck up to tomorrow? 27782[/snapback] All's well that ends well.
Recommended Posts