Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Reply To Thread

Debate #2 Go......Follow

#252 Oct 15 2012 at 7:56 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
That would do it... Did he say that and I missed it?

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#253 Oct 15 2012 at 9:07 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,626 posts
Almalieque wrote:
That would do it... Did he say that and I missed it?

Yes, he did say it, but that doesn't mean much when you're just responding to someone else's quote of him.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#254 Oct 15 2012 at 10:20 PM Rating: Good
Almalieque wrote:
Word a day calendars are not the best way to learn words.
OK, that was pretty funny. Smiley: laugh
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
I'm smarter then you. I know how to think. I've been trained in critical thinking instead of blindly parroting what I've been told.
#255 Oct 16 2012 at 9:07 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,427 posts
Gbaji wrote:
I said that he put a lot more on the table than Biden. Which he did.


Just because he said more stuff does not mean he provided more substance. Laying out a laundry list of sh*t is talking points, not substance. Laying out several key issues, discussing how they compare to the alternative, and then discussing how you plan to implement and pay for them is substance. The latter is what Biden did. The former is what Ryan did.

Quote:
Yes. The moderator asked for more detail of Ryan, and none of Biden. Think about that.


Because Ryan was not detailing his points.

Ryan: We want to offer 5 trillion in new tax cuts to everyone!.
Mod: How will you pay for this?
Ryan: Oh we will cut some stuff!
(What stuff?)

Biden: We are going to continue pushing for tax cuts for the middle class, we are going to increase taxes on the super wealthy to compensate.

See the difference? (probably not.)

Quote:
I'll ask again: What substance did Biden present at the debate?


If you have it DVR'd I suggest you watch it again, of course it won't matter because you would be unable to watch it without bias. A luxury that I suppose I have as a Canadian.

Biden offered substance in every point he made. He presented an option, compared it to the Romney/Ryan plan, and then elaborated on its planned implementation and how they intend to pay for it. That is what substance is. Well real substance, talking points are great for the water cooler and the morning drive to work on talk radio, but they have no substance.

I guess to compare Biden was like ordering a steak dinner with potatoes and corn, Ryan was like just ordering corn. One takes a bit of time to digest, the other shoots right through you in a couple hours.

Edited, Oct 16th 2012 12:31pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#257 Oct 16 2012 at 12:47 PM Rating: Good
******
41,328 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Lol yeah the ambassador died from natural causes.
Your ability to think for yourself must have caught the same disease the other three of yous had.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#258 Oct 16 2012 at 1:34 PM Rating: Excellent
******
21,715 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Lol yeah the ambassador died from natural causes. Even hitlary is having to admit this was a political assassination.

Obamas running and hiding like the coward he is. Hell obamas campaigning in new Hampshire in the upcoming days. Meanwhilee Romney is drawing huge crowds in swing states.


I'm just curious here. I get Gbaji. He's an idiot who's attached himself blindly to a political party in a feeble attempt to fill some void in his life and will argue the defense of any and all members, policies, and declarations of said party to avoid the collapse of his inner emotional igloo. I get it. I don't think it's meaningful or beneficial to him in any possible fashion, but at least I understand.

People like you run around on internet forums not attempting to carry on any reasonable measure of discourse or make any factual statements whatsoever, rather preferring to spout off nonsensical babble that offers no inherent value to whatever audience you command.

I know this is typically the function of an internet "troll", so to speak, but usually the expected result of a troll attempt is to find someone who will take up your argument and legitimately disagree with you to whatever end you seek. That doesn't happen here. People recognize that you're at a cognitive disadvantage and immediately dismiss you as such.

Whatever continued response is rewarded to you is at the expense of none other than yourself. Perhaps you like being labeled the village idiot (and also, I guess this forum needs one to thrive), but if that's your sole purpose in life, I pity what a wretched, awful existence you must endure.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#259 Oct 16 2012 at 3:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,529 posts

I'm throwing this here because it's semi-relevant and it doesn't deserve its own thread:
http://www.romneytaxplan.com/
Heh.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#260 Oct 16 2012 at 3:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,427 posts
Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#261 Oct 16 2012 at 3:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
/golfclap DNC
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#262 Oct 16 2012 at 3:36 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
30,889 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Laying out several key issues, discussing how they compare to the alternative, and then discussing how you plan to implement and pay for them is substance.


Which is what Ryan did. Repeatedly. Biden did not do this at all. Biden doesn't have a plan, much less details for one. I suspect that fact was missed by most people claiming that Biden won on substance. What happened was that Biden wasn't challenged on substance because he never offered anything in the first place, so the moderator couldn't ask him for specifics of his plan.


Quote:
Quote:
Yes. The moderator asked for more detail of Ryan, and none of Biden. Think about that.


Because Ryan was not detailing his points.


No. Because Ryan put a proposal on the table. Biden did not. It's always easy to attack the other guys plan when you don't have one. I'll say again: Think about that.

Quote:
Ryan: We want to offer 5 trillion in new tax cuts to everyone!.
Mod: How will you pay for this?
Ryan: Oh we will cut some stuff!
(What stuff?)


Ryan never said that. What he said was that the claim that their plan would cut tax revenue by $5T is false and has been debunked by several different sources. So when the moderator asks him how his plan will pay for a loss of revenue that he has insisted his plan wont create, she's not asking for details, she's promoting an Obama campaign talking point.

Let me again point out the Complex Question Fallacy. For those who still don't get it, it's when you ask a question which contains within it an assumption that the answerer does not agree with. The correct response to this sort of fallacy is *not* to answer the question, but to challenge the assumption within it (which Ryan did by stating that the $5T number was incorrect). If he answers the question, he's acknowledging the assumption. He *can't* explain how their tax plan will account for $5T in cuts because their plan will not result in $5T in cuts. That's not a failure of the plan, or his understanding of the issue, but him correctly responding to an unfair question.


Quote:
Biden: We are going to continue pushing for tax cuts for the middle class, we are going to increase taxes on the super wealthy to compensate.

See the difference? (probably not.)


And she asked him for specifics, right? She asked him exactly what cutoff defines "middle class" and "rich" in that tax plan, right (hint: It's not "super wealthy", it's $250k/year)? And she asked what tax cuts they're aiming at the middle class. And she called him on the whole "extending existing tax rates isn't really a tax cut". No, she didn't. She gave him a pass on all of that.

Quote:
Quote:
I'll ask again: What substance did Biden present at the debate?


If you have it DVR'd I suggest you watch it again, of course it won't matter because you would be unable to watch it without bias. A luxury that I suppose I have as a Canadian.


So you can't answer. Got it.

Quote:
Biden offered substance in every point he made.


Then it should be trivially easy for you to give us some examples. Here, I'll make it easy for you

Hell, just the first section shows a glaring difference. Biden is like "We got Bin Laden, Rar!". Ryan talks about a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq, which was supposed to be in place, but the Administration failed to get before with withdrawing. He countered rhetoric "they just wanted to stay in Iraq" with facts.

I could go point by point with how Biden failed to really respond to what Ryan said, instead clinging to a handful of talking points, but you can read for yourself. Biden looked better on the screen, so for those who think that's the most important thing they thought he did great. But when you look at what he actually said, and how limited it was (and often completely off the mark), Ryan won "on substance". Ryan had his facts straight. He brought up many more relevant points in each area. In the defense portion, he talked about several failures of foreign policy, with specifics. Biden says that's malarky, is asked for specifics and then proceeds to toss out a series of talking points which didn't even address what Ryan had said.

There were some areas Biden did a bit better, but overall, Ryan absolutely presented more substance.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#263 Oct 16 2012 at 3:47 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Word a day calendars are not the best way to learn words.
OK, that was pretty funny. Smiley: laugh


?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#264 Oct 16 2012 at 5:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,374 posts
Quote:
Which is what Ryan did. Repeatedly. Biden did not do this at all. Biden doesn't have a plan, much less details for one. I suspect that fact was missed by most people claiming that Biden won on substance. What happened was that Biden wasn't challenged on substance because he never offered anything in the first place, so the moderator couldn't ask him for specifics of his plan.


Okay, it's actually not possible you watched the debate.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#265 Oct 16 2012 at 5:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,710 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Quote:
Which is what Ryan did. Repeatedly. Biden did not do this at all. Biden doesn't have a plan, much less details for one. I suspect that fact was missed by most people claiming that Biden won on substance. What happened was that Biden wasn't challenged on substance because he never offered anything in the first place, so the moderator couldn't ask him for specifics of his plan.


Okay, it's actually not possible you watched the debate.


But he dvr'ed it!
____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#266 Oct 16 2012 at 5:28 PM Rating: Good
Well, he just sees everything through his GOP colored glasses. That changes everything.
____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#267 Oct 16 2012 at 5:32 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
Well, to be fair.. it's no different than what Democrats were saying about President Obama in the first debate. People simply make stuff up to make themselves feel better about their candidate's performance.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#268 Oct 16 2012 at 6:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Well, to be fair.. it's no different than what Democrats were saying about President Obama in the first debate.

Hrm? The wide-spread opinion after the first debate was "Wow, Obama seriously sucked. I hope that doesn't cause real problems".

I won't say that nobody was overly optimistic but extra-optimism sure wasn't the common wisdom.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#269 Oct 16 2012 at 6:58 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts


http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-4-2012/polish-that-turd---barack-obama-s-lethargy



Edited, Oct 17th 2012 2:58am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#270 Oct 16 2012 at 9:47 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
*****
19,529 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Well, to be fair.. it's no different than what Democrats were saying about President Obama in the first debate.

Hrm? The wide-spread opinion after the first debate was "Wow, Obama seriously sucked. I hope that doesn't cause real problems".

I won't say that nobody was overly optimistic but extra-optimism sure wasn't the common wisdom.


The conspiracy theory on DKos was the Obama deliberately sucked the first debate, because he wanted to appear calm, cool, and rational. Thus, people would say "Wow, Obama sucked and had no energy." And then, for debates 2 and 3, he could unleash a can of whoop ass while handily avoiding Angry Black Man accusations.

DKos is partisan, but not blindly so. 90% of the diaries were wailing and gnashing of teeth because Obama lost the first debate. The other 10% were the aforementioned conspiracy theory.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#271 Oct 16 2012 at 10:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT

You seem to be confused as to the difference between Democrats at large and Obama campaign staff and surrogates.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#272 Oct 16 2012 at 10:39 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,540 posts
The first sentence in Alma's clip: "The consensus on the president's performance last night seems to be whohoho."

It also doesn't help your point that the clip you played was immediately preceded by a clip showing each of the big three commenting on how much of a poorly Obama performed in the first debate.
#273 Oct 17 2012 at 2:54 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
Jophiel wrote:
You seem to be confused as to the difference between Democrats at large and Obama campaign staff and surrogates.


You seem to be confused as to the difference between "Obama sucking" and "Obama sucking on purpose for reason, x, y and z". Most people are not denying that he sucked, but that wasn't the point. They were saying that he sucked on purpose, which was my point.

Besides, it is beyond the Obama campaign staff. I've heard it on the radio, seen it on news programs and most importantly, Facebook, aka the common people.

Allegory wrote:
The first sentence in Alma's clip: "The consensus on the president's performance last night seems to be whohoho."

It also doesn't help your point that the clip you played was immediately preceded by a clip showing each of the big three commenting on how much of a poorly Obama performed in the first debate.


Read above
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#274 Oct 17 2012 at 3:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,427 posts
In before the thread devolves into a "my facebook friends say I'm cool" thing?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#275 Oct 17 2012 at 3:03 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,616 posts
Surely a Facebook reference as proof is enough to warrant not bothering to reply. I'm going to camp you bitches for a month if you acknowledge that post.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#276 Oct 17 2012 at 3:53 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
In before the thread devolves into a "my facebook friends say I'm cool" thing?


Since I've never said that, I will infer that you're clueless.... You are dismissed.

Uglysasquatch wrote:
Surely a Facebook reference as proof is enough to warrant not bothering to reply. I'm going to camp you bitches for a month if you acknowledge that post.


Yes, because I only mentioned facebook and we all know that thousands of people aren't posting their political beliefs and their beliefs are more recognized on national and local media, not the commentators and their guests....Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#277 Oct 17 2012 at 3:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,427 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Since I've never said that


Since when has that mattered? Smiley: dubious
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#278 Oct 17 2012 at 4:06 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,815 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Since I've never said that


Since when has that mattered? Smiley: dubious


Since the start of that phrase?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#279 Oct 17 2012 at 4:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I'm going to camp you bitches for a month if you acknowledge that post.

BRING IT!!! Smiley: mad
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#280 Oct 17 2012 at 4:28 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,616 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I'm going to camp you bitches for a month if you acknowledge that post.

BRING IT!!! Smiley: mad
I might have to camp myself, I'm having a hard time not attacking that last post of his.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 26 All times are in CDT
Kuwoobie, Anonymous Guests (25)