Now this is a riot

[cali]

The Obvious Greatness of My Presidential Candidate
by Hunter
Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 03:13:55 PM PDT
I would like to take a moment to tell you all about why I favor my candidate for President of the United States. My candidate has made many statements on issues, has drafted many proposals for moving this nation forward, and has attended many locally significant gatherings. But none of that is particularly important, and it would be a waste of time to dwell on it. I would rather highlight the obvious greatness of my Democratic candidate by noting that your Democratic candidate is shamefully inferior. In fact, all the arguments for my candidate can be boiled down to the transparently obvious: my candidate is not your candidate, and your candidate, to put it bluntly, sucks.


For starters, your candidate is not electable. I cannot imagine your candidate getting elected to any office, even the office they were previously elected to, because they are so unelectable. In a world full of unelectable candidates, yours is the least electable of them all. If it were an election between your candidate, a sweater once worn by dog of the late Leona Helmsley, and a bowl of lukewarm soup, your candidate would still be the least electable of the three. Certainly, your candidate may have the generous finances of Leona Helmsley's rich and pampered dog -- but your candidate also smells bad when campaigning in the rain. You may claim your candidate's positions are complex and satisfying, like the flavor of the now-cooling soup -- but it lies under an even more clammy and rubbery top skin, so nobody will ever know. Politicians are like dogs and dog sweaters and soup: when you've only got a single commercial to go by, it's the outer layers that everybody cares about. It's well known that Lassie's dog farts smelled like Hell's own rendering plant, but it was on television so nobody cared.

Your candidate, unlike mine, has no spine. Your candidate is so spineless that they are less politician than cephalopod: after putting down snail and slug bait, I have not once found your candidate chewing on the plants in my garden. Coincidence? No, only the truly cowardly could possibly support your candidate, who is a poster child for political cowardice, a crunchy shell of groveling insincerity around a gelatin-like center of substanceless. Your candidate could not take candy from a baby not because they are above that sort of thing, but because they are physically incapable of taking candy from a baby. They could form a focus group to take candy from the baby; they could draft legislation providing for a committee to explore ways to remove said candy from the vicinity of said baby; they could make a speech about how they are going to accomplish the act next year, or three years hence, given congressional authorization; they could not, however, actually do the deed. My candidate, on the other hand, could not only take the candy, but could look Damn Good doing it, and leave the baby happier and better off besides. The candy, after all, promoted tooth decay. Perhaps the candy was a choking hazard. Above all, my candidate would form a special commission to investigate what sorry idiot gave candy to a helpless, non-candy-digesting baby.

Your candidate is a tool of special interests. Your candidate takes money from lobbyists who steal it from schoolchildren. My candidate takes money from pixies and gives it to schoolchildren -- because my candidate loves schoolchildren, and your candidate hates them and would take candy from them if the opportunity arose. Your candidate once took money from Nosferatu at a shady D.C. nightclub. My candidate personally saw it happen, because my candidate was in the same nightclub, but only because my candidate wanted to try to stop Nosferatu from giving people money. But then your candidate pulled a gun and then ran away.

<snip>

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/27/171338/521

[Richard Steele]

1. That would be funnier if fewer people were using it as a BLUEPRINT for "supporting their candidate".

[zabet]

4. Yes, it would be funnier

if I had not seen the exact same tactics used by
some of Hillary and Obama supporters on DU.
It has gotten so bad that I do not even reply to
many of the OPs about either candidate. Many I will
not even read (depends on the poster) because they
are not so cleverly disguised flame threads. I do not
support either one as my pick for the primaries but,
being as they are both potential nominees, I will not
bash them now and be a hypocrite later if my pick does
not get the nomination.

[rucky]

2. Says almost as much about this crop of candidates.

(with the exception of my candidate) ;)

it's kind of like when they take the Congressional approval polls. Everybody hates Congress, but likes their Congressperson.

well, not everybody (Boehner's mine).

[rpannier]

3. Thanks for the link

I read the whole thing.

It is a classic -- no doubt about that.

I wish to add:
My candidate is able to raise the dead (those that deserved to raised), while your candidate killed all the Nelson Mandelas.