181
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 344:
Line 344: +
Talk:United States presidential election, 2012 (view source)
Revision as of 06:04, February 9, 2012
, 06:04, February 9, 2012no edit summary
:Predictions '''''should''''' improve as new information is obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:37, 9 February 2012 (EST)
:Predictions '''''should''''' improve as new information is obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:37, 9 February 2012 (EST)
::Correct. It's obvious that as new information is made available, it's only natural for your predictions to evolve. But at this moment, you are making two contradictory predictions. On this page you're making the case that Jeb Bush will be the likely nominee, while at the same time you're taking credit for Conservapedia being proven right for predicting it will be Newt Gingrich. And as the convention nears I am sure that the actual nominee will find his way to the #1 slot on this page. Here's a prediction I have for you: That regardless of the eventual nominee, Conservapedia will be "[[sharpshooter fallacy| proven right]]" yet again. --[[User:JoshuaB|JoshuaB]] 01:04, 9 February 2012 (EST)