[oldalum]

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

I agree too. So I'm hoping to understand the purpose of your initial post in starting that now-closed thread, because the only one I can think of was to provoke a political mudfight. I read the article you linked, which I thought was a very sober, even-handed analysis of both the likely Democratic and Republican strategies for the election (it was published in the Examiner, after all). Both strategies seem to me to have reasonable arguments in support of them. Yet you took an extreme take on one side's strategy and made it the focus of a new thread. Predictably, it incited a partisan political response. (as you can see from the thread in question, I posted the first response, in which I said basically that. Then I thought better and deleted it, figuring I'd just be fueling the flames)

I usually learn a lot from your posts, so did I just miss the point?

[oldalum]

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

I agree too. So I'm hoping to understand the purpose of your initial post in starting that now-closed thread, because the only one I can think of was to provoke a political mudfight. I read the article you linked, which I thought was a very sober, even-handed analysis of both the likely Democratic and Republican strategies for the election (it was published in the Examiner, after all). Both strategies seem to me to have reasonable arguments in support of them. Yet you took an extreme take on one side's strategy and made it the focus of a new thread. Predictably, it incited a partisan political response. (as you can see from the thread in question, I posted the first response, in which I said basically that. Then I thought better and deleted it, figuring I'd just be fueling the flames)

I usually learn a lot from your posts, so did I just miss the point?