[quote=markmax33]
Zk,
Obviously you can’t read facts. Some dude created a horrible youtube video, created a new account and put Ron Paul’s name on it and it makes news? You are even troll enough to repost a retarded story like that? Good job! Why don’t we talk about the real national threat, the national debt? I would bet you anything this was a Huntsman fan trying to make the news as a last ditch effort to get him in the spot light. It ain’t news, keep trying…[/quote]
[quote=Rich Toscano]
Markmax, please stop foaming at the mouth for just a minute and actually try to understand what other people are saying. ZK very obviously wasn’t posting that story because of the specific Huntsman video. He was posting it because the article made the point that certain Ron Paul supporters, by acting obnoxious and irrational and overzealous, are actually hurting Paul’s chances of winning.
[/quote]
OK, pretend I said that, because that’s what I’d have said (although I might not’ve been as nice).
[quote=markmax33]
I respectfully disagree with this statement. A few posts before he called me out:
[/quote]
[quote=zk]
The republicans’ main objective seems to be to defeat Obama. So I don’t understand why Jon Huntsman isn’t getting more votes. He and Romney are the only two, in my opinion, who have a chance in hell of beating Obama. Heck, I’d consider voting for Huntsman, and I think a lot of moderates would.
[/quote]
[quote=markmax33]
He is clearly a Huntsman sympathizer and brought that up for a reason. I don’t know how in the world that Youtube video should even be looked at as news. I’m offended anyone made it news. It only incentivizes the creator to make more crap like this.
[/quote]
Your logic is, as usual, faulty. First of all, I didn’t “call you out.” I didn’t mention you. I didn’t even mention Paul. I said Huntsman and Romney are the only ones who had a chance of beating Obama. How is that calling you out? When I called you a pathetic troll who likes to ride around on a high horse and would probably enjoy jacking off to Ron Paul porn, THAT was calling you out.
Using the word “sympathizer,” while possibly technically accurate, connotates something different. I think it’s possible he’d make a good president. I’d consider voting for him.
You think that because I’d consider Huntsman, I must have pointed to that article “for a reason,” but you don’t state what that reason is. Of course I pointed to that article for a reason. That reason is that the article pointed out what I’ve said about you in several posts: Your type of obnoxious, ridiculous posts have hurt Ron Paul more than they’ve helped him. I thought it might be interesting to you to know that I’m not the only one who thinks that.
I agree that the video of Huntsman was only one (possibly spurious) data point in the case the author of the article was making, and shouldn’t turn anyone off from Paul. But you put it together with all the other data points, and it starts to paint a picture of a segment of Ron Paul supporters who are doing Paul more harm than good. THAT is the point. Try to remember that.
[quote=markmax33]
I have converted 100s of people to Ron Paul fans in conversations.
[/quote]
Ah, the sweet naivete of youth. markmax, you know what mature people sometimes do? They nod, smile, listen, pretend they don’t think you’re a lunatic, maybe even pretend to agree with you, especially if you seem a bit unstable, and go about their day when they’ve managed to shake you.
[quote=markmax33]
This is point I am making about the article, a few extreme supporters or people posing as supporters shouldn’t be taken seriously or as part of the campaign.
[/quote]
You agree that extreme supporters shouldn’t be taken seriously. I take it, then, that you don’t consider yourself an extreme supporter (meaning a supporter who says/does extreme things, not one who supports to an extreme degree). If that’s the case, then you still don’t understand how you’re coming across.
