I wonder how this will go over on CB...

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

"Virtually no chance" = 1 in a million. Romney's odds were better than that, although after last night, not by much.

Cali, why do you always do this? Why do you always have to tell me I'm saying something different than I'm saying? Are you so insecure in your position that you can NEVER address my actual points, instead of drawing obtuse, warped observations? Must you always distort EVERYTHING?

I am not distorting anything. You don't even appear to understand your position. How can you expect us to?

Here you said Huck had "no chance." On CB, you said he had "virtually no chance." Romney was a "longshot" that you then upgraded to virtually no chance. Clear as mud.

You hedge every statement you make, and do it so well that even you don't know what you mean when you say it.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I am not distorting anything. You don't even appear to understand your position. How can you expect us to?

Here you said Huck had "no chance." On CB, you said he had "virtually no chance." Romney was a "longshot" that you then upgraded to virtually no chance. Clear as mud.

You hedge every statement you make, and do it so well that even you don't know what you mean when you say it.

I'm not going to wade into the tall grass with you again on this. It's clear every time you post or read a post, you're just taking notes for cross-examination.

Count me out.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not going to wade into the tall grass with you again on this. It's clear every time you post or read a post, you're just taking notes for cross-examination.

Count me out.

Cali has admitted he says lots of stuff here he doesn't believe.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Cali has admitted he says lots of stuff here he doesn't believe.

Whereas we have just divined that you say a lot of stuff you don't believe.

[Tex]

Psst, Cali. Now Romney has no chance of winning the nomination.