*sighs* That's twice today I've been insulted as Clintonian (someone called me a Hillary pawn, which is essentially the same thing).
Spam is something posted over and over, repeatedly.
Using that definition, all of the posts about Rudy's liberal record (which I note you aren't even bothering to refute at all) ARE spam.
But, using that same definition, all of these Pro-Rudy polls (polls that are meaningless and have no meaning this far away from the primary) are spam as well. I recall a pro-Rudy Deroy Murdock article being posted FOUR times; can I call that spam?
All I'm saying is that I see no refutation of the information being posted; I only see "See no evil, hear no evil".
This has got to be intentional ignorance on your part. There's simply no other explanation.
Remember, if it's pro-rudy, it's valid. No matter how many time it's posted.
If it's anti-rudy, it's spam, outdated, irrelevant, or just a vicious attack by right wing extremists who want hillary to win.
When did the GOP start adopting liberal tactics? Only when it became necessary to defend a liberal republican.