Difference between revisions of "Talk:Conservapedia proven right"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Cristie and Palin: new section) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Cristie and Palin == | == Cristie and Palin == | ||
| − | If Conservapedia thought those two weren't likely nominees why is [[Presidential Election 2012|Palin still listed as one]] and [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&diff=938676&oldid=937791 | + | If Conservapedia thought those two weren't likely nominees why is [[Presidential Election 2012|Palin still listed as one]] and [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&diff=938676&oldid=937791 Christie was only removed as a potential nominee only two days ago]? |
Revision as of 04:08, November 22, 2011
The two rows about gold seem repetitive. How about combining into only one row?--Andy Schlafly 14:23, 20 November 2011 (EST)
- It is a lot of information plus Conservapedia mentioned gold and precious metals a lot. But at the same time reportedly positively about having a broad commodity strategy if possible. I think it would make a very long single entry. I will look at it though. Conservative 15:18, 20 November 2011 (EST)
- I will combine them. Conservative
- It is a lot of information plus Conservapedia mentioned gold and precious metals a lot. But at the same time reportedly positively about having a broad commodity strategy if possible. I think it would make a very long single entry. I will look at it though. Conservative 15:18, 20 November 2011 (EST)
Cristie and Palin
If Conservapedia thought those two weren't likely nominees why is Palin still listed as one and Christie was only removed as a potential nominee only two days ago?