AHHHH.

[apocalypsos]

Do you think Sarah Palin is qualified to serve as VP of the US?

It's at 52% yes, 47% no. Apparently there's an email campaign to tilt the poll towards yes. So, you know, take a sec and go vote.

Comments

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

But to say you didnt ask for an opinion when you posted the link to the poll on your site, is inane.

No, it's not. It's posting a link. It's not, "Please tell me why you're voting the way you're voting, while you're at it."

[batgurl10.livejournal.com]

Ok, then what is it?
Can we only respond to your comments if we agree with you? because if thats the way it is, I can abide by that...

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

No, but there's a reason I don't respond to political or religious posts in other journals with dissenting opinions -- because emotions run high, people take it personally, arguments like this start, and I don't think it's polite to start arguments in other people's LJs. You can't possibly have expected to NOT get into a argument here. It's a bit like walking into a biker bar wearing a shirt that says "Leather is for pussies!" and saying, "Hit me!"

[batgurl10.livejournal.com]

UGh! whatever. Excuse me for thinking we could discuss this rationally! Please delete whatever offensive responses you have received from me!
Have a nice day

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Excuse me for thinking we could discuss this rationally!

If you thought you were going to get into a rational debate in this blog rather than an argument -- and the bit about marching orders and Obama voters being loud and obnoxious makes me question that -- why pick the post that's simply a link to a poll and probably won't get much of a response instead of one where people will be discussing the candidates and there will be more traffic? Like, say, the debate post from yesterday?

Also, I don't delete comments on this journal. I ban people, but I only rarely do that, and this is certainly not worth banning.