Demon
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Election 2012: Conservatards vs Librodouches
Elect!
Obama
Romney
Others
Huy is a Faggot
View Results [Edit Poll (moderators only)]
Pages (7): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 » ... Last »  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:34. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04



Rayzik said:


Why should we? Why don't you look for yourself? Certainly you aren't THAT lazy.



Because that's what you're supposed to do? Do you do that to professors? If he wanted those math problems solved, he should have done them himself!

And you'd instantly lose an undecided voter if you told him that. Not only did you insult me, you also imply you can't do what I challenged.


I already know Romney's proposed policies. it's the same GOP BS with no real substance and no way in reality to pay for it.

All the stuff on Romney that has stuck in the media is the stuff he didn't want out.

Last edited by Csonicgo on 10-10-12 at 04:34

Old Post 10-10-12 04:28 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Rayzik
Member


Posts: 367
Registered: 10-11



Csonicgo said:
Because that's what you're supposed to do? Do you do that to professors? If he wanted those math problems solved, he should have done them himself!


You're supposed to be the one researching the candidate for yourself, it's called responsibility. I don't have professors, and your analogy is hardly relevant.


Csonicgo said:


And you'd instantly lose an undecided voter if you told him that.Not only did you insult me, you also imply you can't do what I challenged.



I wouldn't say that to someone who is truly undecided. I gathered the implication from your "challenge" that you were already decided. You won't change your mind regardless of what I tell you, so why should I bother.



Csonicgo said:

I already know Romney's proposed policies. it's the same GOP BS with no real substance and no way in reality to pay for it.



Says who? Obama? The Democrats? Obama's shit can't be paid for, that I know for certain. According to the platform, Romney is going to cut wasteful government programs and regulate spending so it's more reasonable and not inhibiting the private sector with tax increases. That also means it will be easier to pay off later on and also lower taxes in the long run, which that means more money in consumer pockets, which in turn will stimulate economic growth.

What do you mean by substance?


Csonicgo said:

All the stuff on Romney that has stuck in the media is the stuff he didn't want out.



Yea, cause we all know the media is completely unbiased.

Going to bed now. Will not reply soon/at all.

Old Post 10-10-12 04:48 #
Rayzik is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
AndrewB
I would commit first degree murder and then fabricate evidence to make it look like self defense.


Posts: 4406
Registered: 05-00


Old Post 10-10-12 04:58 #
AndrewB is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04



Rayzik said:



Going to bed now. Will not reply soon/at all.



So you can't do it, then? You could have just said that. Heck, in your concession speech, you mentioned Obama twice!


Rayzik said:


Says who? Obama? The Democrats? Obama's shit can't be paid for, that I know for certain. According to the platform, Romney is going to cut wasteful government programs and regulate spending so it's more reasonable and not inhibiting the private sector with tax increases. That also means it will be easier to pay off later on and also lower taxes in the long run, which that means more money in consumer pockets, which in turn will stimulate economic growth.

What do you mean by substance?



Here's some substance:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/chart.png?s=gdp+cqoq&d1=20080701&d2=20120731

Stock markets' performance during the Obama Administration:
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 10/08/2012: 13,583.65
Rate of Return: 70.88%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 10/08/2012: 1,455.88
Rate of Return: 80.81%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 10/08/2012: 3,112.35
Rate of Return: 116.01%


US stock markets performance since hitting the bottom on March 9th of 2009:

DOW in 03/09/2009: 6,547.05
DOW in 10/08/2012: 13,583.65
Rate of Return: 107.48%

S&P 500 in 03/09/2009: 676.53
S&P 500 in 10/08/2012: 1,455.88
Rate of Return: 115.20%

NASDAQ in 03/09/2009: 1,268.64
NASDAQ in 10/08/2012: 3,112.35
Rate of Return: 145.30%

Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation between President Bush and President Obama.

Bush
01/20/2001: 4.2%
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 85.71% increase

Obama
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Currently: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.00% increase

Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation when their budgets first took place:

Bush
01/01/2002: 5.7%
12/31/2009: 9.9%
Unemployment Rate Change: 73.68% increase

Obama
01/01/2010: 9.9%
Currently: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 21.21% decrease

Unemployment rate has been trending down now during the Obama Administration.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/galleries/2012/news/economy/1206/gallery.Obama-economy/images/chart-unemployment-rate-100512.gif

Housing Market:

[img] http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/gall...n-home-0815.gif[/img]

Manufacturing:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/galleries/2012/news/economy/1206/gallery.Obama-economy/images/chart-manufacturing-100412.gif

Consumer spending:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/galleries/2012/news/economy/1206/gallery.Obama-economy/images/chart-cpi-100412.gif

Is that enough?

EDIT: Hit a IMG limit. Oh well. I think I made my damn point.

Last edited by Csonicgo on 10-10-12 at 05:09

Old Post 10-10-12 04:58 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GhostlyDeath
Forum Retard


Posts: 1027
Registered: 08-05


Fuck em both. They both suck, along with all their supporters!

Old Post 10-10-12 19:11 #
GhostlyDeath is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
fraggle
Filled with the code of Doom


Posts: 7543
Registered: 07-00



Csonicgo said:

Stock markets' performance during the Obama Administration:
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 10/08/2012: 13,583.65
Rate of Return: 70.88%


Given that Obama took the reins essentially at the peak of the financial crisis, this is overly simplistic. You could argue that the increase was simply a regression to the mean: he started at the bottom of a trough, where the markets could only go up.

It's hard to imagine anyone could have become president at that point and after four years had the market lower than when they started. You'd have to have someone who was either really, seriously incompetent, or trying to deliberately destroy the American economy.



Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation between President Bush and President Obama.

Bush
01/20/2001: 4.2%
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 85.71% increase

Obama
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Currently: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.00% increase


You might argue that "unemployment rate change" isn't a very useful statistic, and at worst is misleading. Essentially what you're saying is: "unemployment has got worse, it's still getting worse, but at least it hasn't accelerated". I commented recently that you know things are bad when people have to go to second derivatives to find any good news.

Old Post 10-10-12 20:19 #
fraggle is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15226
Registered: 04-02



fraggle said:
It's hard to imagine anyone could have become president at that point and after four years had the market lower than when they started.
It's not so hard. Look how stubbornly Europe holds on to policies that erode the fundamentals of its economy, because they were established at its foundation as a bloc. And in Europe it's because the financial elite doesn't want to pay anything for the crisis, preferring to have other sections of society carry the weight. That's what precipitated the great depression. Hoover didn't even want to see that the market gone ballistic was eroding the economy and insisted with his innovation of old school policies until things went lower and lower and even lower.


You might argue that "unemployment rate change" isn't a very useful statistic, and at worst is misleading. Essentially what you're saying is: "unemployment has got worse, it's still getting worse, but at least it hasn't accelerated".
I don't see that in those stats. The unemployment rate is a percentage of people that aren't employed, it's not the amount of people that are becoming unemployed or something like that.

Old Post 10-10-12 20:49 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Rayzik
Member


Posts: 367
Registered: 10-11



Csonicgo said:


So you can't do it, then? You could have just said that. Heck, in your concession speech, you mentioned Obama twice!



That is an assumption, as I had only 9 hours until I had to start work and needed a good night's sleep. Also, I never agreed to your challenge.

Csonicgo said:



Here's some substance:




Ok, now explain to me exactly how Obama's policies have been the direct cause of all this.

Last edited by Rayzik on 10-10-12 at 21:54

Old Post 10-10-12 21:03 #
Rayzik is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
hex11
Senior Member


Posts: 2237
Registered: 09-09


I wouldn't put much faith in stock market, because it's highly speculative in nature and not representative of real investors anymore. There are big players who can move the market any which way they want to, and you can see it in action when massive price changes happen despite low trading volume. The regular investors have also been enouraged by financial industry assholes to play the stock market gambling game instead of taking a hands off approach by setting long-term goals and making small yearly adjustments to stay within their portfolio allocation. A few lucky ones come out ahead, but most get fleeced or nickled-and-dimed (and taxed too, if not 401k or IRA type account).

I also wouldn't put much faith in unemployment statistics, as they don't take into account people who have exhausted their benefits and still haven't found jobs and are living off their savings, or those who have massively downsized and maybe only have some part-time work. Just having a "job" doesn't mean everything is back to normal, and the statistics don't account for that. If someone was making $50/year in 2008 and now they're barely scrapping by at $15/year, the statistics don't show it. They also don't show how medical and other benefits have been reduced, and how wages are not keeping up with inflation. That last part is actually nothing new, as even before the crash many folks didn't get yearly inflation-adjusted raises, and you would need to switch jobs if wanted that (but these days it's perhaps more common to overlook that and be content you even have a job).

Anyway, all that aside, there is indeed a major flaw in only having two parties, as it encourages a linear-thinking and team A vs. team B mindset, which often degenerates into emotional sports-like fan behavior, and discourages rational discussion. The other thing is that even though they differ in the small details, both candidates are effectively the same when it comes to the bottom line: they're both in favor of big, bloated government. One of them wants to spend wantonly on social programs, the other wants to strengthen military, keep propping up Israel, etc. And both are in favor of big business interests, as that is who funds these candidates anyway. In the past, this was almost acceptable because it was possible to kick the can down the road in the form of increased deficits, but now we're at the point where other nations are beginning to seriously question the reserve currency nature of the USD.

Old Post 10-10-12 22:06 #
hex11 is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Quasar
Moderator


Posts: 6006
Registered: 08-00


Unemployment stats also do not account for college grads who cannot find a job. I myself was in that category for several years and was never counted by any unemployment statistic. Wasn't a recent major protest in fact largely centered around the inability of college grads to find jobs?

Seems the best answer our society can manage is not to give them jobs but spray them in the face with lots of hurty chemicals.

Old Post 10-10-12 22:44 #
Quasar is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15226
Registered: 04-02



hex11 said:
I wouldn't put much faith in stock market, because it's highly speculative in nature and not representative of real investors anymore.
To boot, sometimes when they go down it's because of something positive, like a huge strike saying a firm NO to retarded policies. But in any case, with Dubya, the poor performance had little to do with not encouraging financial extremism, because his administration pretty much opened the floodgates for it on a global level, until it exploded in everyone's face.


They also don't show how medical and other benefits have been reduced,
Or how much they were absent in parts of society.


That last part is actually nothing new, as even before the crash many folks didn't get yearly inflation-adjusted raises, and you would need to switch jobs if wanted that (but these days it's perhaps more common to overlook that and be content you even have a job).
That's a key aspect of what I mentioned earlier about putting the money in the right place when you're going to generate or not go against inflation; the objective should be precisely to allow people to have money to participate in the economy and live half decently. With the way things are, the obstacle in the US seems to be that you have to humor the maws of monsters like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan before you can try to do that.


The other thing is that even though they differ in the small details, both candidates are effectively the same when it comes to the bottom line: they're both in favor of big, bloated government.
Incidentally, both parties are the caretakers of the huge government of a titanically bloated economy that spreads its tentacles all over the world. Could they be anything but "big government people"? It would probably be good for the world if the US split up into pieces or something, but try living in places that are politically fragmented and tell me if it's so pleasant.


spend wantonly on social programs
The main and possibly only way to stop spending so much on the military is to spend more on your people, all your people, not just the banks, some industries and the needy, putting a greater weight on the economics of the US than in how it extends over other economies. I'd say this is something that China also needs, if they're to avoid depending on unreliable trade partners so much. It's to be seen how far they take that.


In the past, this was almost acceptable because it was possible to kick the can down the road in the form of increased deficits, but now we're at the point where other nations are beginning to seriously question the reserve currency nature of the USD.
To a point they are, but for one they always wanted to and have looked for ways to do so historically, but also, they can't really do it fully anytime in the near and not so distant future; it's a long process. Again, if your dollar is used by everybody, expect to be spending trillions on the military. Thus, that decline isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Old Post 10-10-12 23:16 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Tarnsman
Forum Regular


Posts: 834
Registered: 05-11



Csonicgo said:
Obama
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Currently: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.00% increase



Unemployment only counts people looking for work. The unemployment rate can go "down" and result in more people being out of work. Obama has an artificially low number because we're a nearly all-time low for the labor participation rate. If the same number of people were actually in the labor pool (i.e. still looking for work) as the day he took office Unemployment would nearly be 12%. And real "unemployment" is still at like 8.1% the only reason it dropped to 7.8% this month was they just randomly decided to start counting all the temp farm workers that get hired for harvest season as part of the figure (despite never doing so before - hurray for elections!).

Edit: As for the deficit. That's congress's ball park... to which I only have this to say
http://i.imgur.com/y8lvr.png

Last edited by Tarnsman on 10-10-12 at 23:37

Old Post 10-10-12 23:22 #
Tarnsman is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Violator
Banned


Posts: 327
Registered: 07-10


Well yeah I say stupid irrational shit that doesn't help validate my point well but that's me, instead of typing a redundant 300 line essay filled with retarded loops ask yourself this, do you really think the elite would allow the risk of losing their iron clawed grip over the worlds economy at the expense of votes that actually mattered?

Old Post 10-11-12 00:21 #
Violator is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15226
Registered: 04-02



Tarnsman said:
Unemployment only counts people looking for work. The unemployment rate can go "down" and result in more people being out of work. Obama has an artificially low number because we're a nearly all-time low for the labor participation rate. If the same number of people were actually in the labor pool (i.e. still looking for work) as the day he took office Unemployment would nearly be 12%.
That rate has been decreasing steadily, but I fail to see an indication that it plummeted to make a "real" unemployment figure increase by 50%. You can look at historical stats that include people that qualify in the labor force here, and you can see the difference between the official unemployment rate and rates that include marginal and discouraged workers, but they affect all the periods more or less proportionately.

As for the deficit as in the image you posted, it increased with the crisis meltdown and stabilized there. More than party lines, I see the cost of a huge banking system bailout and a sovereign debt that does not really tend to go down, in the long term.

Old Post 10-11-12 01:36 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Tarnsman
Forum Regular


Posts: 834
Registered: 05-11



myk said:
Valid Stuff


Unemployment: I was referring to the U-6 unemployment rate which counts underemployed as well (because I can pay you twenty bucks a week to do nothing and the U-3 will consider you employed). Which, I thought was a lot lower than it currently is, at 14.7%

Deficit: I was more referring to the increase in spending from 2007 to 2008 (which does not contain any of the mountains of money congress poured into the recession due to that all happening in 2009's fiscal year) and the Clinton surplus which Bill Clinton repeatedly said was not possible to achieve in the time frame congress laid out.

Old Post 10-11-12 02:15 #
Tarnsman is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Csonicgo said:



Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation between President Bush and President Obama.

Bush
01/20/2001: 4.2%
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 85.71% increase

Obama
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Currently: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.00% increase



The hell? A 0.0% increase in unemployment is only true if you ONLY count the months of January 2009 and October of 2012. Unemployment got past 10% in the time in between, and stayed right on the edge of it for much of that time. October of 2012 marks the first time unemployment has been below 8% since the beginning of Obama's term.

And let it be known, I'm not defending Bush or Romney (I don't like either), but this particular statistic struck me as being too ridiculous to ignore.

Old Post 10-16-12 20:04 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03


Obama on top of his game tonight. Romney's now starting to become an empty windbag.

Old Post 10-17-12 02:31 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10


This is mostly just talking point after talking point from both guys, and "well, my opponent blah blah"... This is actually almost boring.

Old Post 10-17-12 02:50 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03


ACT OF TERROR! Romney Owned by the Moderator!

Old Post 10-17-12 03:17 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4928
Registered: 01-04


Yeesh. Romney's using the embassy attack as a springboard for his War On Everyone platform. No thanks.

Old Post 10-17-12 03:22 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Doom Marine said:
ACT OF TERROR! Romney Owned by the Moderator!


You did hear the part immediately afterwards when she said "and it did indeed take about two weeks", right?

Old Post 10-17-12 03:35 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03


I couldn't hear it over cheering of the audience. Romney was red and stuttered right after that.

Old Post 10-17-12 03:36 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03


Finally Obama said 47%.

Old Post 10-17-12 03:39 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Whoo
Forum Regular


Posts: 887
Registered: 04-07


So is it just me, or did I hear Romney call coal and oil renewable resources in the beginning of the debate?

Old Post 10-17-12 03:44 #
Whoo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Doom Marine said:
I couldn't hear it over cheering of the audience. Romney was red and stuttered right after that.



CROWLEY: He -- he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

ROMNEY: This -- the administration -- the administration indicated this was a reaction to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.

CROWLEY: It did.

EDIT: I can't wait to see the fact-checking on this debate. I detected a rather large amount of bullshit from both candidates.

Romney repeated his talking points too much, which was agonizing to sit through. I have to give Obama credit as well, he definitely came back with a vengeance after his miserable first performance.

Last edited by Caffeine Freak on 10-17-12 at 03:59

Old Post 10-17-12 03:53 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Rayzik
Member


Posts: 367
Registered: 10-11



Caffeine Freak said:
I have to give Obama credit as well, he definitely came back with a vengeance after his miserable first performance.


But he still didn't do better than Romney.

Old Post 10-17-12 04:47 #
Rayzik is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7906
Registered: 08-04



Whoo said:
So is it just me, or did I hear Romney call coal and oil renewable resources in the beginning of the debate?
What's ironic is he thinks that Canadian crude will help in America's energy independence. Despite the obvious contradiction, the Albertain oil fields only yield thirty million barrels a day. That's a small fraction of Americas daily consumption.

Old Post 10-17-12 05:20 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Technician said:
What's ironic is he thinks that Canadian crude will help in America's energy independence. Despite the obvious contradiction, the Albertain oil fields only yield thirty million barrels a day. That's a small fraction of Americas daily consumption.


Haha, I noticed that contradiction too. I think that's why he threw in the "America and North America."

Old Post 10-17-12 06:22 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Rayzik said:


But he still didn't do better than Romney.



In terms of who commanded the room, I think Obama won, though it wasn't nearly as clear cut a win as Romney had a couple weeks back. In terms of factual substance of what each candidate said, I think there's less of a clear winner. Both of them had their strong moments, though I don't think this particular debate will change many minds. Republicans and Democrats will vote for their candidate no matter what, and each candidate displayed a degree of hostility during the debate that undecided voters generally don't like.

Old Post 10-17-12 06:27 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4928
Registered: 01-04



Rayzik said:
Ok, now explain to me exactly how Obama's policies have been the direct cause of all this.
God, this kind of shit makes me lose hope in humanity. What is the point of this comment? Did you have some contradicting evidence that you were hoping to verify? Or are you just used to other people doing the learning for you?

Skepticism for its own sake is intellectual dishonesty.

Old Post 10-17-12 09:29 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:34. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (7): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 » ... Last »  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Election 2012: Conservatards vs Librodouches

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.