Voters Support Bombing Cartoon Kingdom

[rogue06]

Your failure in your Post #11 to understand my point about Repub monstrous bloodthirstiness qualifies you for SOME "badness" list, but not mine. Your post kind of implies you can't see ill of people and condemn even what SHOULD be condemned. I'm looking for candidates who condemn people just to be condemning people whether or not they are guilty of ANYTHING except for God having it in for them.

I have too much appreciation for your diligent research to want to pronounce a pox upon you. Admit you're a good guy and slink away.

Poopiehead

[rogue06]

One question: What is the appropriate answer if you do

None of the above. Are you stupid? What sort of nonsense is this? Don't you realize that there is no such place?

Any of those would work fine. If they throw out those sort of answers then I think we can agree that such polls are useless and can dismiss both as B.S.

Remember that (i) You're not unsure, since you know Agrabah is fictional, (ii) the genie would definitely improve US infrastructure, and (iii) princess Jasmine is hot.

True but we'd get stuck with Iago as our president. Then again, all things considered...

[seanD]

Assuming large numbers of both parties did not recognize the reference, I think this is more of a problem for Republicans. Military action is not to be taken lightly and one should never authorize action for a situation they do not understand (if the place doesn't really exist they don't get the situation). Why would you want to bomb a place for seemingly no reason?

An openness to accept refugees from a nonexistent place is less of a problem because it can just stem from a general humanitarian impulse.

It's funny that both the right and left support big government just the same, just different aspects of big government (though more times than not the support overlaps for both parties). The right, however, has a propensity to support the most dangerous aspects of big government.

[Jedidiah]

Who can be surprised that voters are stupid? I mean they elected Obama as president - twice.

[Roy]

None of the above. Are you stupid? What sort of nonsense is this? Don't you realize that there is no such place?

"I'm sorry, sir, those are the only three options... I'll put you down as 'unsure'"

True but we'd get stuck with Iago as our president. Then again, all things considered...

If the alternative is Jafar - lesser of two evils?

[Teallaura]

It's useless. Y'all are assuming that the respondents didn't know that Agrabah is fictional. I suspect the opposite _ people frequently will deliberately skew surveys they react poorly to. Both sides may have given typical answers just because the question was inane.

[KingsGambit]

It's useless. Y'all are assuming that the respondents didn't know that Agrabah is fictional. I suspect the opposite _ people frequently will deliberately skew surveys they react poorly to. Both sides may have given typical answers just because the question was inane.

Maybe but then you would expect a randomizing of answers that wouldn't produce such a divergence between adherents of various parties on that question.

[Juvenal]

Maybe but then you would expect a randomizing of answers that wouldn't produce such a divergence between adherents of various parties on that question.

I expect Trump supporters know Agrabah is ficitonal, and want to bomb it anyway.

They're evil like that.

[jordanriver]

I expect Trump supporters know Agrabah is ficitonal, and want to bomb it anyway.

They're evil like that.

but its ok, its like blowing up wiley coyote, he'll be fine

[rogue06]

I expect Trump supporters know Agrabah is ficitonal, and want to bomb it anyway.

They're evil like that.

I'm not what you would call a Trump supporter but I want Agrabah bombed. It could be a boon for rogue tech.

Selling fictitious bombs for a fictitious war with a fictitious country. I just have to make sure that I get paid in real money in advance.

[Jesse]

Are Repubs really as obtuse as Brieibark thinks they are, that they can be fooled by dueling polls that make a moral equivalence between BOMBING SOMEPLACE and letting in refugees (the poll said "refugees", not opportunists)? Are Repubs so callous that they think a dumbness equivalence is sufficient to give the nod to Repub superiority when the particular poll settles nothing except that many Repubs are monsters who will wantonly kill anybody and everybody as against Dems whose fault is merely a compassion for fellow humans in dire straits.

Here I am, a Rightist who can occasionally see his way clear to vote for such a one as Trump, yet this "moral equivalence" Breitbart sees makes me determined never to vote for Trump because such a large minority of people (his kind of people) bomb for the sake of bombing.

Jesse, you're so obviously making yourself look ridiculous to get yourself into one of the vacancies in my "Dirty Dozen" list that it just works against your ambition. I'll have to take everything you say from now one as just your jaded attempt to curry my disfavor. (But you might try dissing me about my Theodicy I posted in Theology 201. It's hard-hearted soteriology that gets my ire aroused in deciding who goes on my list.)

You will have to send me a link to your post, can't seem to find it. I don't know why you are resisting so much, I'm going to get on that list. Just accept it and lets all move on.

And Rogue is right, you are a poopiehead. Now put me on the list.

[Adam]

Sorry, it got moved to (or was always in) Apologetics 301, It's Post #5 in Is Creation ex nihilo?
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...ion-ex-nihilo?
What are you going to do? Argue that it would be bad for God to be good? That it's good that the universe is bad? Somehow or other can you convince me that you're as bad as you want to be.

[Teallaura]

Maybe but then you would expect a randomizing of answers that wouldn't produce such a divergence between adherents of various parties on that question.

I expect Trump supporters know Agrabah is ficitonal, and want to bomb it anyway.

They're evil like that.

Taoist is (almost) right - you wouldn't expect wildly random responses but extreme versions of anticipated expectations - or the opposite.