Hey Chap,
Whah happen to dat ANALysis you posted which I shredded for your benefit? 
Stop spamming my thread before I report you to The Admin
I posted an article for discussion. You do ANALysis on Bisram's pole so you should be the last to talk.
LOL@spamming
Anyways, my position on Bisram's poll stands. He predicted at least 13 seats for the PPP. Do you disagree that the PPP will win at least 13 seats out of 65 next month? If you don't then you agree with me and Bisram's poll.
I notice how you tuck tail and ran away as soon as I shredded GTMosquito idiotic analysis based on made up law and made up bullshyte fractions. GTMosquito even pulled the article fast fast before anyone got a screenshot to embarrass them with it.
None of the above responses answer the core issue. You tend to rubbish the analyses I offer wholesale almost solely because they're written by me and I was just pointing out that you adopted a total bullshyte analysis piece because your analytical skills were inadequate in noticing that the basic premise of the article was sheer and total bullshyte. The whole piece was nonsense. Don't weasel out now. People post articles here because they are partially or wholly in agreement with the contents.
So you were obviously making the case that the Coalition is good mathematically as they offer an edge with the Geographic Seats. The Coalition doesn't.
Dude, I did not analyze the article so what does it have to do with my analytical skills? I simply posted an article for discussion that I saw on the net. I do this a lot in case you haven't noticed.
I rubbish your analyses if they are rubbish. It's got nothing to do with the person posting them. I'm sure you've heard of the "Loose Change" videos. Some people jump to the conclusion that Bush bombed the Twin Towers on 9/11 because they saw it on the Loose Change video. Well, arriving at conclusions based on Bisram's poll amounts to the same thing. Lookie here, the PPP will win because Bisram's poll says so.