Quote Originally Posted by Punish_her View Post
No, itsl called a science becaye asshole like sounding important. You cant empirically prove anything, therefore, its not a science, and what numbers add up? ou didnt even say anything. you cant empirically show that more money from superpacs equals more votes, and if you can showa basic, relationship, you cant even prove its causual.

lol...allrighty then...you go right on thinking its not a science if you want while the people who know it is use what they know to work the system.

Numbers don't lie. Cliometrics and it's uses in Political Science are well known factors that involve a lot of in depth statistical analysis.

If money wasn't a factor Romney wouldn't be pulling back ahead of Newt in the primaries right now.

On another note :

There is a lot of overlap in things the Tea Party and the Occupy movements want and I think they would be better served by combining their independent efforts and dropping or excluding the two primary parties from participation....haven't we seen this before with the Reform and Whig parties back in the day?