The Iowa caucuses convene in 5 hours. This thread is the Official PhatScotty Crisis Line / Support Thread. In it, members of The Club will offer supportive words of encouragement to PhatScotty in the event that no Ron Paul-pledged delegates are elected.
I am a qualified crisis counselor*, however, it takes a VILLAGE. Here are some tips of possible messages you can post to PhatScotty in this thread:
- You are not alone in this. I’m here for you. - You may not believe it now, but the way you’re feeling will change. - I may not be able to understand exactly how you feel, but I care about you and want to help. - When you want to give up, tell yourself you will hold off for just one more day, hour, minute — whatever you can manage.
* The California Public Health Act of 1996 requires me to note that I am not a qualified crisis counselor.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
PAUL 1,337 33.61% SANTORUM 847 21.29% ROMNEY 805 20.24%
But you have to remember, Paul only has 5 supporters that constantly spam all the polls everywhere. It just so happens that 1 of them is in the military and donated less than $200 more times than all the military members supporting the other candidates. The other 4 conspired in the various money bombs and managed to establish enough independent identities to donate less than $200 a few tens of thousand of times each.
CNN is breaking down the vote by evangelical Christians and is trying to explain why 23% of evangelical Christians are voting for Paul. I look forward to hearing about how Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats vote as well.
Seriously CNN. What the hell?
At least the one woman said "This is the economic message coming through" with respect to the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters.
thegreekdog wrote:CNN is breaking down the vote by evangelical Christians and is trying to explain why 23% of evangelical Christians are voting for Paul. I look forward to hearing about how Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats vote as well.
Seriously CNN. What the hell?
At least the one woman said "This is the economic message coming through" with respect to the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters.
I think Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats are probably less common amongst Republican primary voters in Iowa than are evangelicals.
thegreekdog wrote:CNN is breaking down the vote by evangelical Christians and is trying to explain why 23% of evangelical Christians are voting for Paul. I look forward to hearing about how Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats vote as well.
Seriously CNN. What the hell?
At least the one woman said "This is the economic message coming through" with respect to the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters.
I think Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats are probably less common amongst Republican primary voters in Iowa than are evangelicals.
Yeah, but since when does one's religion influence primary voting? Like significantly influence?
thegreekdog wrote:CNN is breaking down the vote by evangelical Christians and is trying to explain why 23% of evangelical Christians are voting for Paul. I look forward to hearing about how Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats vote as well.
Seriously CNN. What the hell?
At least the one woman said "This is the economic message coming through" with respect to the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters.
I think Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats are probably less common amongst Republican primary voters in Iowa than are evangelicals.
Yeah, but since when does one's religion influence primary voting? Like significantly influence?
Beker Baerwald, the minister, historian, and preacher who gave this religious phenomenon its name in his influential 1842 book The Great Awakening, saw the First Great Awakening as a precursor to the American Revolution. The evangelical movement of the 1740s played a key role in the development of democratic thought, as well as the belief of the free press and the belief that information should be shared and completely unbiased. These concepts ushered in the period of the American Revolution. This helped create a demand for religious freedom. ... The abolition movement emerged in the North from the wider Second Great Awakening 1800-1840. ... The Third Great Awakening in 1880-1910 was characterized by new denominations, very active missionary work, and also the Social Gospel approach to social issues. ... The idea of an "awakening" implies a slumber or passivity during secular or less religious times. Thus, awakening is a term which originates and is embraced often and primarily by evangelical Christians.[6] In recent times, the idea of "awakenings" in US history has been put forth by conservative US evangelicals.[7]
I mean seriously, HELLO GREEKDOG, WELCOME TO AMERICA. WE KIND OF CARE ABOUT RELIGION IN OUR POLITICS IN THESE PARTS. LIKE, A LOT. LIKE, WE'RE PRACTICALLY A THEOCRACY.
thegreekdog wrote:CNN is breaking down the vote by evangelical Christians and is trying to explain why 23% of evangelical Christians are voting for Paul. I look forward to hearing about how Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats vote as well.
Seriously CNN. What the hell?
At least the one woman said "This is the economic message coming through" with respect to the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters.
I think Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and cats are probably less common amongst Republican primary voters in Iowa than are evangelicals.
Yeah, but since when does one's religion influence primary voting? Like significantly influence?
Beker Baerwald, the minister, historian, and preacher who gave this religious phenomenon its name in his influential 1842 book The Great Awakening, saw the First Great Awakening as a precursor to the American Revolution. The evangelical movement of the 1740s played a key role in the development of democratic thought, as well as the belief of the free press and the belief that information should be shared and completely unbiased. These concepts ushered in the period of the American Revolution. This helped create a demand for religious freedom. ... The abolition movement emerged in the North from the wider Second Great Awakening 1800-1840. ... The Third Great Awakening in 1880-1910 was characterized by new denominations, very active missionary work, and also the Social Gospel approach to social issues. ... The idea of an "awakening" implies a slumber or passivity during secular or less religious times. Thus, awakening is a term which originates and is embraced often and primarily by evangelical Christians.[6] In recent times, the idea of "awakenings" in US history has been put forth by conservative US evangelicals.[7]
I mean seriously, HELLO GREEKDOG, WELCOME TO AMERICA. WE KIND OF CARE ABOUT RELIGION IN OUR POLITICS IN THESE PARTS. LIKE, A LOT. LIKE, WE'RE PRACTICALLY A THEOCRACY.
derp.
REPUBLICAN
PRIMARY
NOT GENERAL ELECTION
REPUBLICAN PRIMARY - ALL WHITE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS!
How is that a valid point? You just said it – they're all white evangelical Christians, therefore trying to decide what candidate white evangelical Christians prefer is a worthy exercise.
Ah, I see what your original point was: that if it was that that mattered, then the winner would have a majority of the vote, instead a plurality – am I right? Except there are other factors to consider too. The equation is a little more complex than that.
Phatscotty wrote:DRUDGE READERS FROM IOWA VOTE: PAUL 1,337 33.61% SANTORUM 847 21.29% ROMNEY 805 20.24%
Santorum being anywhere near in this thing is just plain embarrassing. Seriously.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Phatscotty wrote:DRUDGE READERS FROM IOWA VOTE: PAUL 1,337 33.61% SANTORUM 847 21.29% ROMNEY 805 20.24%
Santorum being anywhere near in this thing is just plain embarrassing. Seriously.
You're just jealous that you're not going to be President.
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
it's just really sad that every time i turn my head i see some "new" contender that's not ron paul that the mainstream media decided to spotlight for no reason other than giving people false hope and distracting them from actual issues.
dazerazer wrote:Don't worry.... I got this... watch... BOOM! Phatty's instahappy!
i would tread on that.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
john9blue wrote:it's just really sad that every time i turn my head i see some "new" contender that's not ron paul that the mainstream media decided to spotlight for no reason other than giving people false hope and distracting them from actual issues.
dazerazer wrote:Don't worry.... I got this... watch... BOOM! Phatty's instahappy!
i would tread on that.
I would tread the hell on that.
Hi, my name is the Bison King, and I am COMPLETELY aware of DaFont!
Don't worry Phatscotty. Newt Gingrich will stick around to take a large dump on Mitt Romney's chest for the rest of the primary, taking some voters away from him. Santorum will either flame out or take Perry's and Bachmann's supporters (the latter being the better alternative). The only thing staying constant is Ron Paul's support.
Chariot of Fire wrote:As for GreecePwns.....yeah, what? A massive debt. Get a job you slacker.
Viceroy wrote:[The Biblical creation story] was written in a time when there was no way to confirm this fact and is in fact a statement of the facts.
Phatscotty wrote:DRUDGE READERS FROM IOWA VOTE: PAUL 1,337 33.61% SANTORUM 847 21.29% ROMNEY 805 20.24%
Santorum being anywhere near in this thing is just plain embarrassing. Seriously.
You're just jealous that you're not going to be President.
Woodruff would make a far better President than either this one or the previous one.
Have I mentioned "f*ck Saudi Arabia!" lately? (No, I don't mean "as in going to war with them")
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
GreecePwns wrote:Don't worry Phatscotty. Newt Gingrich will stick around to take a large dump on Mitt Romney's chest for the rest of the primary, taking some voters away from him. Santorum will either flame out or take Perry's and Bachmann's supporters (the latter being the better alternative). The only thing staying constant is Ron Paul's support.
john9blue wrote:it's just really sad that every time i turn my head i see some "new" contender that's not ron paul that the mainstream media decided to spotlight for no reason other than giving people false hope and distracting them from actual issues.
dazerazer wrote:Don't worry.... I got this... watch... BOOM! Phatty's instahappy!
i would tread on that.
I would tread the hell on that.
lol... well thank you both kindly. I'm flattered. I'm sure Scott is as well. lol
How much you want for Daze? (Culs De Sac on Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:33 pm) She's priceless, Culs. ;-P (MudPuppy on Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:46 pm)
"NEW FLASH: Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are calling it quits! Gary Johnson is running 3rd party and Jon Hunstman is still at 1%. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum failed to reach deadlines to appear on ballots in some states they can't win without so they are essentially done. All of this means the race is between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul and really no one else."
3 way tie Romey 7 delegates Santorum 7 delegates Ron Paul 7 delegates
I'm sure Scott is as well. 
lol