Please settle a debate

[bicker]

As I've said many times before, if it was just McCain versus Obama, i.e., McCain never selected a religious zealot as his VP, then I'd have voted for McCain.

Please help me settle a debate.

When you read the quote above, does it mean that if McCain never selected Palin that the OP would have chosen McCain?

 

[just4today]

Whoah. Deja vu.

 

[mickeyboat]

It is taking every ounce of restraint not to post a "Please settle a debate" poll of my own.

The possibilities are endless.

 

[wardfamily1]

Whoah. Deja vu.

Ditto

 

[Aisling]

As I've said many times before, if it was just McCain versus Obama, i.e., McCain never selected a religious zealot as his VP, then I'd have voted for McCain.


To me, it clearly says that if Palin weren't in the picture, the person would vote for McCain.

Since Palin is in the picture, the person has to vote for Obama.

The person first choice is McCain.

 

[wardfamily1]

It is taking every ounce of restraint not to post a "Please settle a debate" poll of my own.

The possibilities are endless.

Ahh, go ahead. I double-dog dare ya.

 

[tlens]

Perhaps if things weren't always said in such convoluted ways people would understand easier.

 

[bicker]

I triple-dare you!

 

[bicker]

Perhaps if things weren't always said in such convoluted ways people would understand easier.

Nah, that would just make it easier for the people who want to distort things to get away with doing so.

 

[wardfamily1]

For the people that are voting NO, could you explain your interpretation please?

 

[Aisling]

Nah, that would just make it easier for the people who want to distort things to get away with doing so.

I am not one of the distorters.

I read the quote, and, as written, it says that the poster would vote for McCain if not for Palin being on the ticket.

 

[bicker]

Please don't encourage them.

Oh heck, why not?

 

[bicker]

I read the quote, and, as written, it says that the poster would vote for McCain if not for Palin being on the ticket.

Even after being told by the author that your interpretation was wrong?

Just checking...

 

[rparmfamily]

To me, the quote is saying that if McCain hadn't picked Palin, the person would have voted for McCain.

 

[Master Mason]

I am not one of the distorters.

I read the quote, and, as written, it says that the poster would vote for McCain if not for Palin being on the ticket.

And I agree with this interpitation, which was what I was trying to convince him of in the other thread.

 

[just4today]

Is this some sort of cagey trap?

 

[moredisneyplease]

i see it as: it would have been a vote for McCain but he selected Palin as VP so now its not a vote for McCain!

 

[bicker]

These three threads are a pretty good representation of the campaign itself: A real discussion about issues, which isn't going the way one side wants it to go, so they throw a stink bomb in to derail things.

To give you the background: Mason picked apart a sentence of mine (the one in the quote box in message #1 in this thread) and refused to acknowledge that it means what I (its author) said it means (also as indicated in message #1 in this thread). He even went so far to create a poll (just like this one) trying to get people to agree with his interpretation (without including in his poll the alternative interpretation -- the one he had been told by the author was the correct interpretation -- this is very much like what some campaigns do, asking poll questions in the absence of all the relevant facts). This was after being given "the last word" in the original thread. Evidently, he wants the last word and the one after that and the one after that until he gets to impose his personal views of what I said on me.

And he's done this to me before. Sigh.

 

[just4today]

I hate when people's words get misinterpreted.

 

[shirleyb]

I'm still confused.

What does Mason think it says?