this is going to be one of the 75% of times i agree with dids

ive always assumed scrooge mcduck- the real scrooge mcduck not the cartoon character) operates a lot like tywin lannister and wouldnt disown people unless they were short.

Ikes' plague permeates every corner of the forum. That's why he gets my vote. Well, that and I want the poster who KO'ed me to win it all.

I too will ship some money to Doctors Without Borders in the name of the winner. Using posting AIDS to fight the real AIDS!

I will donate to the Patriarchy if the one i voted for wins.

ikes doesn't deign to support his own views (he attributes their worth to him, not to reason) or fully comprehend those of others whereas I do. And you don't see me going around saying "I nailed it". This shouldn't be a tough call.

That really chaps your ass, doesn't it? I think I said a little more than that on the general subject of the popular discourse regarding American racism. Meanwhile, ikes running theme of "lol social science", which is stupendously condescending (and moronic and ironic given the forum he posts in daily), stands in stark contrast to my respect for the contributions from those fields.
A girlfriend once complained that I knew more about 911 than her body lol. Call my theories stupid if you disagree with the logic, but I know the facts and am not ignorant.

Ikes does it more as it's a significant portion of his volume and his "substance". I do it almost always in retaliation and try to mix in actual arguments.

What does the data scraping nerd think about humor? hmmm, go on..

This is such a muddled concept here that it shouldn't weigh in your decision. I could actually see giving this to me since ikes has been here a lot longer. Just stepping into nebulous muck here tho.

I find your choices of categories interesting in that there is no category for reasoning, which I would consider an important category. Maybe that speaks to a fundamental difference between me and the majority in that I see this forum ideally as a place for lively debate whereas I get the sense that many others see it as a place only to mock backward republican imbeciles.

Didn't think either candidate would run away with it, especially Ikes, but at this point it seems the O/U could be set at 26 votes for Ikes.

This is a typical example of the thinly veiled but very present anti-intellectualism in this forum. Maybe there is some benefit to that view, given that the internet is somewhat of an intellectual ghetto. You can't take every random person expressing the outward signs of intellectual argument (carefully chosen or expansive vocabulary, citing known intellectuals, referencing academic concepts) seriously because there is no real vetting on the web. But if you just write off everyone with these outward signs as a pretentious blowhard you will be ignoring some of the best stuff.

I get that John Stewart and Rachel Maddow types are popular. But these people only criticize the serial excesses of our systems rather than the fundamentals of it, and their style fits well within that limited criticism. If you really want to understand things or challenge things substantially you simply have to go deeper than that. This means using more vocab and concepts beyond those which are merely conversational. If that's not your thing then fine, you can bypass those threads or or those trails of discussion. There is no need to label people "unreadable" however, just because you prefer a different format or type of discussion.

Sick burn IMO

A few days ago I posted an argument which I said I lost. So you lose this argument in which you assert I believe I win every argument. Score another one for me! "easy game" lol

But I posted my full neocon LIH theory for review/rebuttal. There were few takers. Fly tried, and ended up arguing himself into saying an established genius is an idiot. So he lost.

I know you are short on brain power JJ, but even you can imagine what an ikes full disclosure of what he really thinks might look like. It wouldn't be pretty.

rofl this thread isn't voting for this guy.

Kind of mind blowing you're bad enough to be the clear winner over him, I agree.

Deuces.

I'll vote for Ikes if you promise to drop 9/11ism and stop posting about it.

yeah, a guy making a self-denigrating admission in the interests of humor and levity. What an ahole!

The best I can do is say I won't bump any 9/11 thread or start any new 9/11 thread (which I have never done) unless some really big news comes out.

hhhaahh that's humour and hilarious.

Deuces becoming likeable in this contest, who could have thought.

He gave me my avatar and location and I like it a lot.

I'm voting for Ikes. But if its a 9/11 argument you've already made 100x before, please don't re-argue it when someone goads you into it.

Don't take it personally. I like your attacks against the far left liberals in this forum.

ok yeah I can see that. Many of the points of the discussion have been belabored and I share in the responsibility.

I'm actually guilty of purposely goading you into 9/11ism because im a troll. But looks like you do care what other people think and thats a good thing.

Why are you arguing with the people who didn't vote for you? Not a good endgame.

You are making a mistake here though. I am not against long posts. Many of the best posters here write long detailed posts. I would be a hypocrite if I was against long posts in general as I tend to be long winded myself.

But a bad or boring long post is worse then a short bad post. This should go without saying.

I have addressed you in the past that my issue with your posts is so much of your time is spent arguing with people about why your posts aren't as bad as others think they are. I think the constant back and forth between you and a horde of people arguing about how bad you are is dull. And since so much of your posting amounts to you engaging them, so much of your posting is unreadable. When I say that your long posts are easy to skip, I'm not referring to a long detailed post on the merits of one political position, I'm referring to long posts by you about why you're not bad.

It is not anti-intellectualism to bemoan endless and repetitive posts about why you're not a bad poster.

him admitting that shows more humility and a sense of humor about himself then I would think you've ever shown.

Well, given his complete ignorance of the NIST report, that says nothing but really bad things about him. Humility though!

It's not like Deuces is some 9/11 heavy information user. He's a ****ing idiot that pretends he knows something.

no one is defending Deuces 9/11 theories... but him acknowledging what his girlfriend said is self deprecating and funny. This is a good thing.

Except that it oversells his knowledge of 911, but pinky swear guys he won't talk about it anymore. God help whatever else he decides to be wrong on.

My vote is pretty clear, but that Deuces 911 post was funny.