For or Against? **AD#5**

[??????????]

Recently in the thread that was created about not PMing inactive voters George W. Bush said the following [/i]

I also support this in full.

Ok, that position is perfectly respectable to have.

But then after that Senator States Rights posted that he was strongly against this idea as his strong integrity told him this would suppress voters. After the fact George W Bush then came out with this

That is way to far, I would not support that either.

Some may think nothing of this but when the tough issues come to decision time. Would you trust this way of thinking?





Or would you support Senator StatesRights. A consistently strong on the issues senator who has never let his district citizens down?

We'll let you decide.[/i]



[*Paid for by the StatesRights Senatorial Campaign]

[Sam Spade]

Funny.

Maybe his name should really be John F. Kerry after all.

[Reaganfan]

Recently in the thread that was created about not PMing inactive voters George W. Bush said the following [/i]

I also support this in full.

Ok, that position is perfectly respectable to have.

But then after that Senator States Rights posted that he was strongly against this idea as his strong integrity told him this would suppress voters. After the fact George W Bush then came out with this

That is way to far, I would not support that either.

Some may think nothing of this but when the tough issues come to decision time. Would you trust this way of thinking?





Or would you support Senator StatesRights. A consistently strong on the issues senator who has never let his district citizens down?

We'll let you decide.[/i]



[*Paid for by the StatesRights Senatorial Campaign]

[George W. Bush]

Recently in the thread that was created about not PMing inactive voters George W. Bush said the following [/i]

I also support this in full.

Ok, that position is perfectly respectable to have.

But then after that Senator States Rights posted that he was strongly against this idea as his strong integrity told him this would suppress voters. After the fact George W Bush then came out with this

That is way to far, I would not support that either.

Some may think nothing of this but when the tough issues come to decision time. Would you trust this way of thinking?





Or would you support Senator StatesRights. A consistently strong on the issues senator who has never let his district citizens down?

We'll let you decide.[/i]



[*Paid for by the StatesRights Senatorial Campaign]

Wrong, You simply have it wrong. The First thing was proposed by KEmp was simply saying he wanted to get legislation to stop tomatosouping. He gave very little details.

Nym90 on the other hand (the one I oppose) wanted to make a mandatory test about Candidates platforms, and a person would have to pass a test before they vote. There is a difference and I Support the first one, Not the Second one.

[A18]

Oh, okay, that makes sense then.

[KEmperor]

Recently in the thread that was created about not PMing inactive voters George W. Bush said the following [/i]

I also support this in full.

Ok, that position is perfectly respectable to have.

But then after that Senator States Rights posted that he was strongly against this idea as his strong integrity told him this would suppress voters. After the fact George W Bush then came out with this

That is way to far, I would not support that either.

Some may think nothing of this but when the tough issues come to decision time. Would you trust this way of thinking?





Or would you support Senator StatesRights. A consistently strong on the issues senator who has never let his district citizens down?

We'll let you decide.[/i]



[*Paid for by the StatesRights Senatorial Campaign]

Wrong, You simply have it wrong. The First thing was proposed by KEmp was simply saying he wanted to get legislation to stop tomatosouping. He gave very little details.

Nym90 on the other hand (the one I oppose) wanted to make a mandatory test about Candidates platforms, and a person would have to pass a test before they vote. There is a difference and I Support the first one, Not the Second one.

That's not what Nym said at all.  Nym was taking my position to an extreme, in order to paint it as bad.  Which is fine, but he certainly didn't propose what you think he did.

[George W. Bush]

I’m sorry; it was my fault for not quoting Nym’s thread.

[George W. Bush]

Recently in the thread that was created about not PMing inactive voters George W. Bush said the following [/i]

I also support this in full.

Ok, that position is perfectly respectable to have.

But then after that Senator States Rights posted that he was strongly against this idea as his strong integrity told him this would suppress voters. After the fact George W Bush then came out with this

That is way to far, I would not support that either.

Some may think nothing of this but when the tough issues come to decision time. Would you trust this way of thinking?





Or would you support Senator StatesRights. A consistently strong on the issues senator who has never let his district citizens down?

We'll let you decide.[/i]



[*Paid for by the StatesRights Senatorial Campaign]

Wrong, You simply have it wrong. The First thing was proposed by KEmp was simply saying he wanted to get legislation to stop tomatosouping. He gave very little details.

Nym90 on the other hand (the one I oppose) wanted to make a mandatory test about Candidates platforms, and a person would have to pass a test before they vote. There is a difference and I Support the first one, Not the Second one.

That's not what Nym said at all.  Nym was taking my position to an extreme, in order to paint it as bad.  Which is fine, but he certainly didn't propose what you think he did.

Ok, I might have misread Nym's post. It seems that I did. This Ad is false but it’s my fault.
-Sorry

[minionofmidas]

In other words, Nym explained to you what KEmp's alluringly-worded proposal meant, and you then changed your mind.
I don't think this is flip-flopping. I think it's misinformedness on your part.
If you'd been more active about six weeks back (heck, I don't blame you for not being, it wasn't a pleasant period in forum history) this would have been clear to you right away.

Now, the question you should ask yourself is: Can you still support this man for President?

[KEmperor]

In other words, Nym explained to you what KEmp's alluringly-worded proposal meant, and you then changed your mind.
I don't think this is flip-flopping. I think it's misinformedness on your part.
If you'd been more active about six weeks back (heck, I don't blame you for not being, it wasn't a pleasant period in forum history) this would have been clear to you right away.

Now, the question you should ask yourself is: Can you still support this man for President?

Nym has totally misrepresented my proposal. 

[minionofmidas]

His presentation was not entirely fair, especially in the second paragraph...but it was fairer than your own.

[Reaganfan]

We need a senator who will not misrepresent people in D3 and all of Atlasia. NASO!

[Colin]

George you need to calm down. You don't need to respond to every ad that States puts out. It's an attack ad its not supposed to be completely factually accurate. If you want to bring this up either do it in a campaign speech or in one of your own ads.

[??????????]

This sounds a lot like "I actually did vote for KEs plan before I went against it".


Flip






FLOP!






BUMB!!