Blue

Bad idea: Turning vegatables into mutagenic zombie slaves with will power (which have the ability to make free thought and rebellion) Good idea: Driving a steam engine.

SEE! HE ADMITS IT! FINALLY! Keep tellin' yourself that, buddy. It's also fascinating how much of Doom Shepard's fight is fought through Bullseye, his unofficial subordinate, as opposed to it being Party Leader on Party Leader.

You are talking nonsense. I thought I firmly established myself as ambivalent on the topic of Ponies several times. If it is your prerogative to not get that effect through your thick skull then that's your problem. Being your problem it comes to bear on no one else, pro or anti pony. Neutral = sympathizer. If that is how you define neutral, then that is also still your prerogative.

Blue is a sympathizer... You are talking nonsense. I thought I firmly established myself as ambivalent on the topic of Ponies several times. If it is your prerogative to not get that effect through your thick skull then that's your problem. Being your problem, it comes to bear on no one else, pro or anti pony.

Pause at 56 seconds. Who is the man in the window, to the right of the bird?

Look up. Back down. THE POSTER IS NOW A SIGNATURE Anything is possible when you vote for the man of Boldness. I'm makin' music Or if you prefer, you can make the signature I'm using right now your own, with this: [img]http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/6059/bluesigw.png[/img]

"Philosophers do it without bias"

Loch Ness Hampster

"Deserves [Death]! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends." -Gandalf the Gray You presume that you are far wiser than any user, possibly even the Moderators. What an audacious and temeritous statement! Stupid people have the right to be corrected, or at least laughed at. But killing them would not solve much; in fact it would probably cause a large logistical problem, dealing with all the newly dead. Such a large logistical problem that it would probably outweigh the benefits of killing those that are stupid in the first place. Bold Blue on the other hand, strongly promotes inter-interest tolerance, so that people who very strongly like ponies and people who very strongly do not like ponies can be much less flame-war inclined due to mutual respect of interests. This also precludes prejudices of either group. That sounds like an exorbitant usage of time for something that this forum already exists for. Why? What do you have against 6? Did sixes kill your family or something? Why circumvent that number in your mission statement? Unless you plan on instigating a new system of mathematics which operate off of base 10 excluding one number, which would be horrendously inefficient. Efficient and complete numbers and lists for all! Vote Bold Blue. TWO CAN PLAY AT THIS EXTREMELY NERDY GAME!! H.G. Wells once said "It is one of the duties of those with power to be the first to state the obvious." It is obvious that this statement means his party is corrupt, bribable, and plans on enslaving you and potentially your children, since if he is corrupt, how trustworthy is his analysis on children being slaves? Futhermore, bribable isn't even a word! Lies! Its dumbfoundedness only gave me a few brain aneurysms! Your party is a shambling wreck of foolish plans and ill-conceived notions pandering to the worst excesses of human degeneration! Your party is terrible! The only solution is to vote for anyone but you! ______________________________________________________ As General Secretariat, I will comment on the following components of your mission statement: This statement has rather strong and negative consequences if interpreted seriously, which obviously is not your intention, but could occur, should your campaign go forward unamended. Please have that in mind.

No harm done. Vote for Blue.

That's actually one of the first rules (which can be read on the 2nd page of this thread). No you can't. By having users suggest other users, it points out a certain amount of external competency, as opposed to a single user thinking themselves cool and competent enough. Otherwise every user and their dog would have their own party, and the final election would be decided by like, three votes for one party out of fifty as opposed to one user winning by twenty out of five parties. Or somesuch. If the next election is head over heels more popular than this one, there will probably be amendments to change the qualifications of a nomination as opposed to simply being one user suggesting another.

I would have to say, nay, I'd have to shout: YES! Fascinating, what you are saying is that you are entirely removed from prejudice or any sort of pre-inclination to one side or another.

There are 13 different ways of making an "o" sound in English grammar. The German letter ß (called an eszet) is pronounced "ss" or "sz".

There is a 100% chance that one of them will happen. Which is formulated as a 50/50 chance.... To reiterate and ameliorate confusion, the 50/50 is a rewording of the idea that either Christianity is true or is not true. There is no middle ground; belief in Christianity is a dichotomy. The 50/50 does not say anything of the credibility or incredibility of the religion in of itself (which I personally hold has a much higher chance of being true than not true). I will also reiterate the fact that one should research heavily on the subject of the credibility of both arguments.

As General Secretariat, I will say that I would personally prefer not to have the subject of My Little Pony a significant point of this Election race (due to the conduct and opinions of few members) but if the populace sees it as one, then so it should be. As Party Leader, I will say

Yeah, that's right! Where we're going, we don't need roads!

How is plastic money more "secure?" And why would it have to be durable? You don't use it for sports or anything. Plastic is more resilient to average usage (like folding and crumpling) than paper. It also allows more security options to be built into the bill to counter forgeries. Don't think there aren't inventive ways that National mints encode their tender in order to prevent counterfeits. Transparency in the polymer is one of them.

Behold, majestic Bush Heavies in their natural habitat.

J'aime.

Let's get dangerous.

It is only logical then to do as much research as possible to figure out what would happen to oneself after they die. Either there is nothing and therefore nothing to worry or think about, or there are diametric eternities. Personally if the razor's edge is between void and eternity after we die, I would want to be absolutely certain it was one or the other, as opposed to leaving it to some sort of mullthory assumption. Entirely removed from prejudice, guessing or ambivalence. If after we die there is nothing, then there are a great deal of things I should set about doing, since in the end of it all there is no consequence to me personally. If after we die there is eternity, then there is an incredible amount of importance to what is said and done by each moment. Either way, both decisions have an incredible amount of social and moral weight to them- so much so that being on one side or the other is too important to the individual to be said that it could be thought about objectively. Eternity is longer than any career will promise, and longer still how long an army will endure or a civilization will stand. The importance of such a decisio has a 50% chance of being more important than anything we know of to that individual, so to say that an individual can look at such a decision objectively would be a conflict of interest of laughable proportions.