Poll for ALL Presidential candidates 2012

[tryingtogrow89]

I don't think everybody base their vote on the next POTUS on pot..I in no way do...more important things in life then just pot..

You're exactly right, we have much more important things, like voting this P.O.S. out of office for his constant lies and treason, the pot example was exactly that, just one example of why someone who advocates pot for recreational use or Medicinal wouldn't vote for the lying treasonous P.O.S.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

Here is some brand new materiel for your uneducated brain.
July 28, 2011 NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

 

[deprave]

Ok sure GLOBAL WARMING is real , but WTF does that have to do with Carbon Taxes, NOTHING! If we tax carbon guees who wins? Hint: ITS NOT THE EARTH.....



Its the big corporations...



Obvious scam is obvious..... why don't people see this?

When I watch AL Gore or someone STRUGGLE to explain carbon taxes for hours on end, I laugh my ass off, its almost like they are at a loss of words, Im reminded of a D.A.R.E seminar of sorts.


[video=youtube;ObbLapUaZd4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObbLapUaZd4&playnext=1&list=PL0B3D283B72F5C24D[/video]

 

[tryingtogrow89]

Ok sure GLOBAL WARMING is real , but WTF does that have to do with Carbon Taxes, NOTHING! If we tax carbon guees who wins? Hint: ITS NOT THE EARTH.....



Its the big corporations...



Obvious scam is obvious..... why don't people see this?

When I watch AL Gore or someone STRUGGLE to explain carbon taxes for hours on end, I laugh my ass off, its almost like they are at a loss of words, Im reminded of a D.A.R.E seminar of sorts.

ManBearPig!!!!!!!

 

[tryingtogrow89]

[youtube]xf69EEL3WBk[/youtube]

 

[sync0s]

Here is some brand new materiel for your uneducated brain.
July 28, 2011 NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

Global warming is a hoax, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be searching vigorously for technologies that will treat our earth better. After all, it's all we've got.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

Global warming is a hoax, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be searching vigorously for technologies that will treat our earth better. After all, it's all we've got.

Oh, i dont disagree that humans can ruin environments and are, but it is impossible for us to change our climate.

 

[WillyBagseed]

Oh, i dont disagree that humans can ruin environments and are, but it is impossible for us to change our climate.

What is it you do to your grow room?

 

[UncleBuck]

Here is some brand new materiel for your uneducated brain.
July 28, 2011 NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

a study that was published by an intelligent design proponent who is on the take from exxonmobil and refuted handily by his peers is weak sauce.



is that the best you got? if so, you suck pretty bad.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

a study that was published by an intelligent design proponent who is on the take from exxonmobil and refuted handily by his peers is weak sauce.



is that the best you got? if so, you suck pretty bad.

You are not making any damn sense, this is a nasa study get over your self.

 

[UncleBuck]

You are not making any damn sense, this is a nasa study get over your self.

do you even know who roy spencer is?

i can tell you all about him, but it might bweak youw wittle heawt.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

do you even know who roy spencer is?

i can tell you all about him, but it might bweak youw wittle heawt.

All right quit jacking my style. It was only one example, id tell you all about gore and his propaganda but you're well aware.

 

[UncleBuck]

All right quit jacking my style. It was only one example, id tell you all about gore and his propaganda but you're well aware.

but we're not talking about gore.

we are talking about a man who believes in intelligent design, who is in the pocket of exxonmobil, who is highly disputed by his peers, putting out a paper that is mocked in the scientific community.

and you guys wave it around like it were something to be proud of, some mother fucking trump card

he is also the same guy who took money from big tobacco to deny the harmful effects of smoking. if you take him on his word, you are just as bad as gore is.

and kindly find me the quote where i ever expressed approval of the idiocy of gore. i'll be waiting

you're not good at this.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

but we're not talking about gore.

we are talking about a man who believes in intelligent design, who is in the pocket of exxonmobil, who is highly disputed by his peers, putting out a paper that is mocked in the scientific community.

and you guys wave it around like it were something to be proud of, some mother fucking trump card

he is also the same guy who took money from big tobacco to deny the harmful effects of smoking. if you take him on his word, you are just as bad as gore is.

and kindly find me the quote where i ever expressed approval of the idiocy of gore. i'll be waiting

you're not good at this.

You sound like your explaining me the very thing you smock at.

 

[UncleBuck]

You sound like your explaining me the very thing you smock at.

smock?

 

[NoDrama]

smock?

 

[deprave]

Wonder why Ron Paul wins every online poll so dramatically among republicans ? Have a look at this poll and think about that for a minute. How many of you that pressed Obama would of pressed Ron Paul if Obama was not an option? Damn near every last one of you. Now multiply that by a lot and you get Ron Paul online polls that look like this every time.




http://www.ronpaul.com/images/cpac-2010-straw-poll.gif

 

[mame]

The Fox News one with Michelle Bachmann at over 27% is pretty scary...

 

[budlover13]

Your poll seems to be in line with this one at the moment.

http://www.thestatecolumn.com/capitol/harris-poll-if-ron-paul-won-gop-nomination-he-would-split-vote-with-obama/#ixzz1TFk498Zd

 

[UncleBuck]

Wonder why Ron Paul wins every online poll so dramatically among republicans ? Have a look at this poll and think about that for a minute. How many of you that pressed Obama would of pressed Ron Paul if Obama was not an option? Damn near every last one of you. Now multiply that by a lot and you get Ron Paul online polls that look like this every time.

that proves that you are a deluded cult member is all.

if a fair and representative sample of people actually thought ron paul dominated the debates by such sweeping margins as 93.91% lol, would it not follow that fair and representative scientific samples of random people should reflect this?

why is ron paul STILL polling at about 7% if 93% of people thought he won the shit out of that debate?

are you too dense to realize that it is a simple case of ron paul cult worshippers flooding online polls?

i know, i know...i am a troll and an agent of disinformation