Poll: Two Questions
- Thread starter Blatherscythe
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Those were backgrounds. I abstained from putting anything in there about what they did in power because that would have wrecked the post and made your choice easy.StevieWonderMk2 said:
number 1, because thats how I would roll if I was in politics, except for the "astrologists" bit, but since I am an athesist I would be preceived as being far worse by the public.
I picked Winston Churchill because I could blatantly see the answers without scrolling.
I don't know what screen resolution setting you use, but I only needed to scroll down to read the very last line of the opening post.
"No peaking" doesn't even come into it when I can see the answers and clocked them within seconds of beginning to read the post... perhaps spoiler tags were necessary?
However, I would of picked option 2 anyway, because I remember the answers from the last time this question was posed.
I don't know what screen resolution setting you use, but I only needed to scroll down to read the very last line of the opening post.
"No peaking" doesn't even come into it when I can see the answers and clocked them within seconds of beginning to read the post... perhaps spoiler tags were necessary?
However, I would of picked option 2 anyway, because I remember the answers from the last time this question was posed.
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove- giving loaded descriptions of people results in unusual answers? Putting eighteenth century situations in twentieth century settings gives curious results? A good amount of the "positive" information here is loaded anyway- Hitler had affairs, but they weren't adultery because he wasn't married. The woman's eighth child isn't Beethoven- he was her third. Hitler was a vegetarian for his health, not for any moral reason (as one might expect, seeing as many of his activities were less than moral).
I agree that people can be easily swayed by loaded terminology, but that's common knowledge.
Longer digression here:
http://www.snopes.com/glurge/twoquestions.asp
I agree that people can be easily swayed by loaded terminology, but that's common knowledge.
Longer digression here:
http://www.snopes.com/glurge/twoquestions.asp
So essentially your posts show on people being unable to choose leaders in the absence of relevant information. This shows what exactly?Blatherscythe said:
Booyah! I chose Churchill, a mans man! You have to drink whiskey in such a high-stress job to stay sane and the fact he did it at night proves that he had enough sense to drink after work rather than before, so it shouldn't have much of an effect on performance and indicates good judgement.
I usually sleep past noon, so I can't fault him for that. Getting kicked out of office just means he wasn't playing by the corrupt, moneygrubbing rules, which only makes me like him more. As for the opium, anybody in charge of a people needs to have lived, man. You can't understand your many diverse people if you've been a shut-in your entire life.
This is part of the reason I don't get why Americans got so wound up over Bill Clinton having tried pot in College. He tried it and didn't get hooked. That's a good thing, imho.
Now, I'm no fan of adultery, but someone who's never smoked or had a drink? Don't trust them. They have tremendous hang-ups and probably a 'holier than thou' attitude. Also, I generally don't trust vegetarians. They want to take my bacon. I will eat their flesh if they try.
I usually sleep past noon, so I can't fault him for that. Getting kicked out of office just means he wasn't playing by the corrupt, moneygrubbing rules, which only makes me like him more. As for the opium, anybody in charge of a people needs to have lived, man. You can't understand your many diverse people if you've been a shut-in your entire life.
This is part of the reason I don't get why Americans got so wound up over Bill Clinton having tried pot in College. He tried it and didn't get hooked. That's a good thing, imho.
Now, I'm no fan of adultery, but someone who's never smoked or had a drink? Don't trust them. They have tremendous hang-ups and probably a 'holier than thou' attitude. Also, I generally don't trust vegetarians. They want to take my bacon. I will eat their flesh if they try.
I hate astrology more than vegetarianism, and am confused by how someone could POSSIBLY sleep 'til noon more than I'm boggled by the reasons behind cutting meat out of your diet. Well, I just elected Hitler and consumed the fetal Beethoven with fava beans and chianti. Cheers.
It proves just that. I gave backgrounds to famous leaders and did anyone know what they would do with the power they had? Hitler started a genocidal war, Roosevelt made the Great Depressions impacts a little softer with the government helping the people, and I really have no idea what Winston Churchill did. Anyways reading those backgrounds makes the reader think candidate 3 would have made the best leader while the other 2 would be corrupt, evil or stupid which turns out to be the other way around. But hey it's free to interpetation if it makes you feel better.StevieWonderMk2 said:
I don't like military nations, I actually chose 2 at first. I don't regret it. Very interesting post though, good work and I'm looking forward to more interesting things from you.(See what you've done? Now I have expectations for you.)
Oh damn you just had to have expectations of me. I have a hard time living up to those.Sightless Wisdom said:
Hahaha I like that.Arcticflame said:
Also, sort of in regards to the OP: Hitler said that his role models for his eugenic campaigns were the Americans, so is Hitler the bad guy or is it the people who he admired? Just some food for thought, nom nom.
Well....just elected Hitler.
As for the woman and the abortion, it-...sorry, it depend on...if...she's struggling...to...survive...
Dammit Blatherscythe...I keep getting distracted by your avatar...
As for the woman and the abortion, it-...sorry, it depend on...if...she's struggling...to...survive...
Dammit Blatherscythe...I keep getting distracted by your avatar...