Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 22, 2014, 03:14:28 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Congressional Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Senate Prediction 2008
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: Senate Prediction 2008  (Read 5988 times)
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4963


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2007, 01:51:44 pm »
Ignore

He was trailing Allen by 4 pts that's why he didn't run in 2006. Mark Warner will be a tough challenger, but it won't be that easy. And voters look at the top of the ticket, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, her liberal voting record will have an effect on the race. Just like John Kerry's did on the senate candidates as well.


Thats not always the case.  John Kerry hurt Dems in open seats that they were defending in deep South states that Kerry lost by at least 15 points save for Florida.  Every Democratic Senate incumbent was reelected in 2004 except for Tom Daschle.  Ken Salazar was able to win an open seat in Colorado even as Kerry was losing the state by three points.  Virginia would likely be similar if Mark Warner ran.
Logged
Former Moderate
Mr. Moderate
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13180
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2007, 02:16:03 pm »
Ignore

As I understand it, Warner's approvals are at 62%. I don't think that spells election defeat. Although it may or maynot help out Davis. That is pretty good for your party in reelection sense. I don't see as of yet VA as a top tier opportunity for the Dems, it probably will be later, but it is a 2nd tier pickup opportunity.

Yes, but Warner is almost certainly not running for reelection, and the likely Democratic challenger is Mark Warner, with a 70% approval rating.

I don't see Mark Warner as a likely candidate for U.S. Senate at all.  I see him as a Vice Presidential or Gubernatorial candidate instead.
Logged

Rawlings
Full Member
***
Posts: 197


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: 5.22

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2007, 03:05:17 pm »
Ignore

Marquee Races:
CO: Schaffer def. Udall 50-49
IO: Harkin def. King 51-48
LA: Kennedy def. Landrieu 53-47*
ME: Collins def. Allen 49-45
MT: Racicot def. Baucus 50.1-49.9
NE: Bruening def. Fahey 53-46
NH: Sweet def. Sununu 51-48*
OR: Smith def. Westlund 50-48
SD: Rounds def. Daschle 49-48*
VA: Davis def. Moran 51-48

Competitive Races:
AK: Stevens def. Eric Berkowitz 55-40
MN: Coleman def. Franken 52-42
NJ: Lautenberg def. Kean Jr. 54-45





I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!

« Last Edit: July 17, 2007, 03:07:42 pm by Rawlings »Logged


Schaffer for Senate!

Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51924


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2007, 03:15:57 pm »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Logged

The soon-to-be-re-elected Kings of Kansas.
Sam Spade
SamSpade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27871


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 17, 2007, 03:18:43 pm »
Ignore

My prediction right now would be:  Dems win Colorado and New Hampshire.  That's it.

But it's way too early for making predictions right now.  We'll know more by October or so (or maybe later).
Logged
Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6321
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: July 17, 2007, 03:21:47 pm »
Ignore

But it's way too early for making predictions right now.  We'll know more by October or so (or maybe later).

But will even that help? I seem to recall some posters predicting a Steele win days before the election. Smiley
Logged

Here’s what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins “Country First” buttons on his man titties and chants “U-S-A! U-S-A!” at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
Jaggerjack
Fabian_the_Fastman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1408
Thailand


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: July 17, 2007, 03:31:03 pm »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27871


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2007, 03:36:35 pm »
Ignore

But it's way too early for making predictions right now.  We'll know more by October or so (or maybe later).

But will even that help? I seem to recall some posters predicting a Steele win days before the election. Smiley

Har de har har... Tongue

Actually, other than the Steele and Chafee predictions, I pretty much nailed every race within MOE and some of them (like Webb/Allen), the % was nailed as well. The polling didn't help on Chafee.

But that's ok.  In 2004, I screwed up Alaska and Colorado as well.  No one's perfect.  Of course, the polling didn't help on Alaska in that race either.

My history is to nail a couple of races everyone else misses and to screw up a couple of races that most everyone else gets right.  Partially b/c I take chances and listen to my gut and notwithstanding my allegiance to polls, I think surprises do occasionally happen.

I can only hope over time that my gut gets better at predicting.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27871


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2007, 03:40:43 pm »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Logged
Jaggerjack
Fabian_the_Fastman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1408
Thailand


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: July 17, 2007, 04:14:06 pm »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Rawlings thinks Colorado is a Republican state like South Carolina or Utah, no matter what and he'd be willing to put anything ahead of his beloved home state going Democratic. That's what I was getting at.
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4963


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: July 17, 2007, 04:44:55 pm »
Ignore

Marquee Races:
CO: Schaffer def. Udall 50-49
IO: Harkin def. King 51-48
LA: Kennedy def. Landrieu 53-47*
ME: Collins def. Allen 49-45
MT: Racicot def. Baucus 50.1-49.9
NE: Bruening def. Fahey 53-46
NH: Sweet def. Sununu 51-48*
OR: Smith def. Westlund 50-48
SD: Rounds def. Daschle 49-48*
VA: Davis def. Moran 51-48

Competitive Races:
AK: Stevens def. Eric Berkowitz 55-40
MN: Coleman def. Franken 52-42
NJ: Lautenberg def. Kean Jr. 54-45





I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



The Republicans are not beating Tim Johnson or Max Baucus.
Logged
MooMooMoo
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12372
United States


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2007, 08:58:57 pm »
Ignore

and I think Mr.Smith will be fine...for now.
Logged


the result is a sense that we were told to attend a lavish dinner party that was going to be wonderful and by the time we got there, all the lobster and steak had been eaten, a fight had broken out, the police had been called and all that was left was warm beer and chips.
[/quot
Jaggerjack
Fabian_the_Fastman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1408
Thailand


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 17, 2007, 09:14:44 pm »
Ignore

It's disappointing. Oregon is supposed to lean blue, and we don't even have a credible challenger to shoot down Smith!
Logged
OC
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9882
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 18, 2007, 09:59:44 am »
Ignore

He was trailing Allen by 4 pts that's why he didn't run in 2006. Mark Warner will be a tough challenger, but it won't be that easy. And voters look at the top of the ticket, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, her liberal voting record will have an effect on the race. Just like John Kerry's did on the senate candidates as well.


Thats not always the case.  John Kerry hurt Dems in open seats that they were defending in deep South states that Kerry lost by at least 15 points save for Florida.  Every Democratic Senate incumbent was reelected in 2004 except for Tom Daschle.  Ken Salazar was able to win an open seat in Colorado even as Kerry was losing the state by three points.  Virginia would likely be similar if Mark Warner ran.

The difference is that Kerry lost CO by 4 pts and Bush carried VA by 9 pts.

I agree that Mark Warner is much more likely an executive not a senator.

Logged
Rawlings
Full Member
***
Posts: 197


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: 5.22

View Profile
« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2007, 11:03:29 am »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Rawlings thinks Colorado is a Republican state like South Carolina or Utah, no matter what and he'd be willing to put anything ahead of his beloved home state going Democratic. That's what I was getting at.

Oh please, Fabian!  Colorado is much more conservative than Oregon and Smith has a lost a lot of his base in rural Oregon because of his stances on the war.  It's a miracle that Gordie even got re-elected in the first place in uber-liberal Oregon.

Colorado is an entirely different state.  It has a GOP registration advantage, is a consistently red state for POTUS, and will have Schaffer replacing the Senate's most conservative voting member (Allard).  It ain't Utah...but neither is it Oregon or your homestate.
Logged


Schaffer for Senate!

Aizen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4540


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: July 18, 2007, 11:17:39 am »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Rawlings thinks Colorado is a Republican state like South Carolina or Utah, no matter what and he'd be willing to put anything ahead of his beloved home state going Democratic. That's what I was getting at.

Oh please, Fabian!  Colorado is much more conservative than Oregon and Smith has a lost a lot of his base in rural Oregon because of his stances on the war.  It's a miracle that Gordie even got re-elected in the first place in uber-liberal Oregon.

Colorado is an entirely different state.  It has a GOP registration advantage, is a consistently red state for POTUS, and will have Schaffer replacing the Senate's most conservative voting member (Allard).  It ain't Utah...but neither is it Oregon or your homestate.



1. Stop calling him Gordie. I mean, what the hell?
2. Stop flaunting the fact that Republicans has a narrow edge over Democrats in voter registration. Oklahoma has more reigstered Democrats than Republicans. Voter registration stats don't matter, it's the unaffiliated who decide.
3. Oregon and Colorado are not as far apart as you're making it seem. Yes, Oregon is obviously more liberal but Oregon didn't even go 52% for Kerry while Colorado didn't even go 52% for Bush.
4. Allard is the most conservastive senate member? What are you basing this on? Regardless, Allard is not popular in Colorado so that's nothing to be proud of.
Logged
Rawlings
Full Member
***
Posts: 197


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: 5.22

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 18, 2007, 11:30:41 am »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Rawlings thinks Colorado is a Republican state like South Carolina or Utah, no matter what and he'd be willing to put anything ahead of his beloved home state going Democratic. That's what I was getting at.

Oh please, Fabian!  Colorado is much more conservative than Oregon and Smith has a lost a lot of his base in rural Oregon because of his stances on the war.  It's a miracle that Gordie even got re-elected in the first place in uber-liberal Oregon.

Colorado is an entirely different state.  It has a GOP registration advantage, is a consistently red state for POTUS, and will have Schaffer replacing the Senate's most conservative voting member (Allard).  It ain't Utah...but neither is it Oregon or your homestate.



1. Stop calling him Gordie. I mean, what the hell?
2. Stop flaunting the fact that Republicans has a narrow edge over Democrats in voter registration. Oklahoma has more reigstered Democrats than Republicans. Voter registration stats don't matter, it's the unaffiliated who decide.
3. Oregon and Colorado are not as far apart as you're making it seem. Yes, Oregon is obviously more liberal but Oregon didn't even go 52% for Kerry while Colorado didn't even go 52% for Bush.
4. Allard is the most conservastive senate member? What are you basing this on? Regardless, Allard is not popular in Colorado so that's nothing to be proud of.


1.  You're kind of a whiner.
2. You don't think registration advantages matter?  Just because it doesn't work in your favor doesn't  mean it's not important.
3. I've lived in both.  Trust me.  They are VERY different.  The GOP always comes close in Oregon but the state is too solidly blue to turn.  I think Colorado is a parallel example for the GOP.  It's like turning the Titanic around.
4. Allard was re-elected.  You may not like him, but the people of Colorado obviously do.  And, by the way, he was rated most conservative member based upon his voting record by some group about a year ago. 
Logged


Schaffer for Senate!

Aizen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4540


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: July 18, 2007, 11:47:00 am »
Ignore


I agree with everything except for Oregon.  I think Gordie is toast!



"Gordie" is toast even though he faces no major opposition as of yet and Colorado is staying GOP? Ok.
Don't forget the kind of person Rawlings is Wink

That doesn't make any sense.  At least until Gordie gets an opponent who is not some tier above third...
Rawlings thinks Colorado is a Republican state like South Carolina or Utah, no matter what and he'd be willing to put anything ahead of his beloved home state going Democratic. That's what I was getting at.

Oh please, Fabian!  Colorado is much more conservative than Oregon and Smith has a lost a lot of his base in rural Oregon because of his stances on the war.  It's a miracle that Gordie even got re-elected in the first place in uber-liberal Oregon.

Colorado is an entirely different state.  It has a GOP registration advantage, is a consistently red state for POTUS, and will have Schaffer replacing the Senate's most conservative voting member (Allard).  It ain't Utah...but neither is it Oregon or your homestate.



1. Stop calling him Gordie. I mean, what the hell?
2. Stop flaunting the fact that Republicans has a narrow edge over Democrats in voter registration. Oklahoma has more reigstered Democrats than Republicans. Voter registration stats don't matter, it's the unaffiliated who decide.
3. Oregon and Colorado are not as far apart as you're making it seem. Yes, Oregon is obviously more liberal but Oregon didn't even go 52% for Kerry while Colorado didn't even go 52% for Bush.
4. Allard is the most conservastive senate member? What are you basing this on? Regardless, Allard is not popular in Colorado so that's nothing to be proud of.


1.  You're kind of a whiner.
2. You don't think registration advantages matter?  Just because it doesn't work in your favor doesn't  mean it's not important.
3. I've lived in both.  Trust me.  They are VERY different.  The GOP always comes close in Oregon but the state is too solidly blue to turn.  I think Colorado is a parallel example for the GOP.  It's like turning the Titanic around.
4. Allard was re-elected.  You may not like him, but the people of Colorado obviously do.  And, by the way, he was rated most conservative member based upon his voting record by some group about a year ago. 


Stop being an idiot and pay attention. Oklahoma. Has. More. Registered. Democrats. Than. Republicans. That. State. Is. Not. Going. Democrat. Anytime. Soon. Your. Argument. Sucks.


The people of Colorado like Allard? I'm sorry, but you leave me no choice. I'm going to once again have to use facts on you. Allard has a 44% approval rating as of the last SUSA tracker. Allard won in 2002 for two reasons. Strickland ran a lousy campaign but more importantly, 2002 was a GREAT year for Republicans. 2008 is not going to be 2002 and Colorado Democrats have made undeniable, significant strides since 2002.
Logged
Sheriff Buford TX Justice
AndrewCT
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7158


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 18, 2007, 11:50:31 am »
Ignore

New Hampshire, and Colorado are two states that will go Democrat in 2008,  the only thing that Schaffer will do is keep Udall from getting 60% of the vote.
Logged

My parents are pretty good about smelling a rat. 
Let me put this as clear as I can (saying this to myself, as well, so I can see it): I WILL get a job with CADD and I WILL keep the job.
black and white band photos
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 72236
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 18, 2007, 11:53:12 am »
Ignore

Rawlings kind of sounds like the Republican equivalent to Colorado to me on Minnesota.

Although despite my obvious biases, his arguments mostly boil down to "Colorado is conservative, end of story", while mine were pointing out how very deeply flawed the points about Minnesota "trending Republican" were.
Logged



Green = Fake Scotland
Red = Real Scotland


01/05/2004-01/10/2014
Rawlings
Full Member
***
Posts: 197


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: 5.22

View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2007, 12:04:35 pm »
Ignore

Rawlings kind of sounds like the Republican equivalent to Colorado to me on Minnesota.

Although despite my obvious biases, his arguments mostly boil down to "Colorado is conservative, end of story", while mine were pointing out how very deeply flawed the points about Minnesota "trending Republican" were.

No.  I've given plenty of reasons.  I think the Democratic bench is obviously empty in Colorado.  The Democrats trotted out two wonderful, centrist candidates for Senate and governor and they both won against weak opponents. I don't see how that's exactly a "blude tide."

Listen, Salazar is a lot like Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Ritter is a pro-life, ex-missionary.  Those two are tailor-made for Colorado.

Also, how can you underestimate the impact of funding for the Democrats?  They bought the election last year!  Tim Gill and Pat Stryker realized that the people of Colorado wouldn't vote for their gay rights agenda and so they tried to buy it through the state government.  Last year Coloradans unexpectedly voted against gay civil unions (hardly the grist for a left-moving state, yes?).  Gill and Stryker thought they could buy that vote too (they outspent Focus on the Family 5:1).  When you give Colorado the vote, we don't vote liberal.

Finally, what I see is a wealthier, more centrist Democratic Party in Colorado that is capitalizing on Republican silliness here and in Washington.  What I don't see is any movement to the left.  Colorado voted for a pro-life, pro-business governor at the same time it voted against gay unions and for traditinoal marriage.  That's just what Colorado does.

Match the money or take away the Democrats' centrism and you have what you had in the early part of the decade: GOP dominance.  And, frankly, that's the dynamic shaping up in 2008.  Mark Udall is not a Salazar or a Ritter.  He is considerably to the left of those two and his is considerably to the left of the state, generally.  And Bob Schaffer is doing fine with fundraising and there will be more than enough money pouring into the state--for both sides.  When you put a conservative up against a liberal in Colorado, (Kerry/Bush, Strickland/Allard x 2, Owens/Schoettler, etc), the conservative wins every time.  I'm only expecting the status quo in expecting Schaffer to win.
Logged


Schaffer for Senate!

MooMooMoo
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12372
United States


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 18, 2007, 12:12:20 pm »
Ignore

yes, but the status quo is clearly changing. The state legislature are pretty strong democrats and suburban Denver voted for a liberal candidate.  Don't make me show you that map again-

Logged


the result is a sense that we were told to attend a lavish dinner party that was going to be wonderful and by the time we got there, all the lobster and steak had been eaten, a fight had broken out, the police had been called and all that was left was warm beer and chips.
[/quot
Smash255
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14312


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 18, 2007, 04:34:10 pm »
Ignore

Rawlings kind of sounds like the Republican equivalent to Colorado to me on Minnesota.

Although despite my obvious biases, his arguments mostly boil down to "Colorado is conservative, end of story", while mine were pointing out how very deeply flawed the points about Minnesota "trending Republican" were.

No.  I've given plenty of reasons.  I think the Democratic bench is obviously empty in Colorado.  The Democrats trotted out two wonderful, centrist candidates for Senate and governor and they both won against weak opponents. I don't see how that's exactly a "blude tide."

Listen, Salazar is a lot like Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Ritter is a pro-life, ex-missionary.  Those two are tailor-made for Colorado.

Also, how can you underestimate the impact of funding for the Democrats?  They bought the election last year!  Tim Gill and Pat Stryker realized that the people of Colorado wouldn't vote for their gay rights agenda and so they tried to buy it through the state government.  Last year Coloradans unexpectedly voted against gay civil unions (hardly the grist for a left-moving state, yes?).  Gill and Stryker thought they could buy that vote too (they outspent Focus on the Family 5:1).  When you give Colorado the vote, we don't vote liberal.

Finally, what I see is a wealthier, more centrist Democratic Party in Colorado that is capitalizing on Republican silliness here and in Washington.  What I don't see is any movement to the left.  Colorado voted for a pro-life, pro-business governor at the same time it voted against gay unions and for traditinoal marriage.  That's just what Colorado does.

Match the money or take away the Democrats' centrism and you have what you had in the early part of the decade: GOP dominance.  And, frankly, that's the dynamic shaping up in 2008.  Mark Udall is not a Salazar or a Ritter.  He is considerably to the left of those two and his is considerably to the left of the state, generally.  And Bob Schaffer is doing fine with fundraising and there will be more than enough money pouring into the state--for both sides.  When you put a conservative up against a liberal in Colorado, (Kerry/Bush, Strickland/Allard x 2, Owens/Schoettler, etc), the conservative wins every time.  I'm only expecting the status quo in expecting Schaffer to win.


1.  ken Slazar is actually pro choice. 
2.  Bill Ritter is not conservative, he is moderate
3.  CO was only 2 points more GOP than the national average in 04, compared to 10 points more GOP than nationally in 96.  Its trending hard towards the Dems
4.  The only state which the same sex marriage ban had less support than Colorado was Arizona, a state with a much stronger ban
5.  Udall is a liberal, and granted more left than the state as a whole.  Schaffer is easily to the right of the state as a whole.  They have elected other conservatives, but again the state is more liberal now, and they also dislike those conservatives, Allard has poor numbers Bush has brutal numbers
6  Based off average $$ a week raised Udall raised more than Schaffer (about $6,000 more a week) however the biggie is he has about $2 million more in the bank.
Logged

Grad Students are the Worst
Alcon
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29661
United States
View Profile
« Reply #48 on: July 18, 2007, 04:42:31 pm »
Ignore

4.  The only state which the same sex marriage ban had less support than Colorado was Arizona, a state with a much stronger ban

Oregon, South Dakota...
Logged

n/c
MooMooMoo
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12372
United States


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2007, 05:02:51 pm »
Ignore

4.  The only state which the same sex marriage ban had less support than Colorado was Arizona, a state with a much stronger ban

Oregon, South Dakota...
1. South Dakota's ban was just bizzare....
2. and actually' Oregon's one was worded just the same and got .5%(55.5 to 56) more than in Colorado. That's right. Oregon hates fags more than Colorado.

That would be a funny thing- If Fred Phelps ran a anti-gay marriage campaign called "X state Hates Fags"- like "Colorado Hates Fags" or "Ohio Hates Fags" and if Eminem (before his reconciliation with Elton Jon) held rallies where he raped about hating fags.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2007, 05:05:46 pm by Angry_Weasel »Logged


the result is a sense that we were told to attend a lavish dinner party that was going to be wonderful and by the time we got there, all the lobster and steak had been eaten, a fight had broken out, the police had been called and all that was left was warm beer and chips.
[/quot
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines