Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (5823)	10/25/2003 11:52:55 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 10965

That's what I meant. Then why didn't you say that? It isn't what you meant; you meant what you said. Boy you like to waste your time don't you, digging up irrelevant stats Yeah, when they prove what a blithering idiot you are, they're "irrelelvant".

To: American Spirit who wrote (5823)	10/25/2003 11:58:09 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10965

Oh, come on. You said the NH winner "rarely wins" the nomination or the Presidency. I think it's a bit relevant to that statement that in the past 50 years only two Presidents did not win New Hampshire, and a solid majority of party nominees did win New Hampshire. You're the one who brought up the issue (NH primary significance) and said something about it (winning NH rarely matters) that wasn't true, all to further your bizarre infatuation with Senator Kerry. I get a good laugh when you lecture others about what constitutes a relevant fact. You wouldn't know the words "relevant" or "fact" if they landed on your head after falling from the top of a ten-story building.