***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[rashi]

Don't worry people. Obama will win the next debate, I mean he killed bin Laden (allegedly). I sure he will remind us of that. NDAA won't be discussed, because they both agree, the PATRIOT ACT won't be discussed, because the both agree. Assasination of a 16 year old U.S. Citizen won't be discussed, because he was "collateral damage". There will be low expectations brought upon by the media to create a "miraculous comeback" by Barry. Book it.

 

[rarefiedair24]

False promises come with the game, blatantly lying to the public is different bruh.

lol, oh' if Obama says it or does it it's a "false promise" but if it's Romney or probably any other republican they're flat out lies... way to rationalize it! lol..

 

[kix4kix]

Don't worry people. Obama will win the next debate, I mean he killed bin Laden (allegedly). I sure he will remind us of that. NDAA won't be discussed, because they both agree, the PATRIOT ACT won't be discussed, because the both agree. Assasination of a 16 year old U.S. Citizen won't be discussed, because he was "collateral damage". There will be low expectations brought upon by the media to create a "miraculous comeback" by Barry. Book it.

I've been on here for a while, and I can honestly say this is one of the first times I've agreed with you 100 percent. Nobody finds it odd that EVERY television pundit decided Romney won the debate?! Especially considering this article I read a week ago from the wall street journal, highlighting the reasons why ALL media wanted Romney to win the debate.......

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

IMO only setting him up for slaughter in a couple weeks, not to mention what Biden is about to do to Ryan.

 

[kix4kix]

lol, oh' if Obama says it or does it it's a "false promise" but if it's Romney or probably any other republican they're flat out lies... way to rationalize it! lol..

Que? You don't realize the difference between not following through on all of your campaign promises, and blantantly lying about your own platform!?

Also how sad is it that y'all only "defense" of Romney is all politicians do it.

 

[boys noize]

Last I checked, Half Truth isn't a Truth no matter how you want to swirl it spin it and serve it up... 

What are you really arguing? I don't even understand what you're trying to prove. If you're calling Obama's stump speech today "propaganda" then under that definition, all political speech is propaganda. If that's your viewpoint, what is your argument?

I didn't call it a half-truth. Politifact did. They are an independent fact checker and they have a scale that measures the honesty of what a politician says. They said that Obama's claim that Romney's policy would cause a $5bil loss of taxes is a half truth BECAUSE Romney is claiming he has a way to make up the loss. Again, Romney has yet to make clear what his plan is.

If you call this spin, you and I have very different definitions of what spin is.

 

[kix4kix]

The jobs report comes out tomorrow. That will be political fodder, especially coming right after the first debate.

Like every incumbent isn't going to do the same thing, gas prices will be 20 cents less in two weeks, and the economy will be on the upswing somehow, two guarantees come election time.

 

[rarefiedair24]

What are you really arguing? I don't even understand what you're trying to prove. If you're calling Obama's stump speech today "propaganda" then under that definition, all political speech is propaganda. If that's your viewpoint, what is your argument?
I didn't call it a half-truth. Politifact did. They are an independent fact checker and they have a scale that measures the honesty of what a politician says. They said that Obama's claim that Romney's policy would cause a $5bil loss of taxes is a half truth BECAUSE Romney is claiming he has a way to make up the loss. Again, Romney has yet to make clear what his plan is.
If you call this spin, you and I have very different definitions of what spin is.

My argument and what I'm trying to prove is, no matter how flat you make a pancake there's still 2 sides, if you're going to post something, either post it unbiased or post the facts from both sides.  Don't just come and spew rhetoric from one party affiliation. Whether you're democrat or republican!  Do the research! 

 

[futuremd]

What are you really arguing? I don't even understand what you're trying to prove. If you're calling Obama's stump speech today "propaganda" then under that definition, all political speech is propaganda. If that's your viewpoint, what is your argument?
I didn't call it a half-truth. Politifact did. They are an independent fact checker and they have a scale that measures the honesty of what a politician says. They said that Obama's claim that Romney's policy would cause a $5bil loss of taxes is a half truth BECAUSE Romney is claiming he has a way to make up the loss. Again, Romney has yet to make clear what his plan is.
If you call this spin, you and I have very different definitions of what spin is.

My argument is, if you're going to post something, either post it unbiased or post the facts from both sides.  Don't just come and spew rhetoric from one party affiliation. Whether you're democrat or republican!  Do the research! 

We need to stop this false equivalency.

Both sides lie.

Both sides do not lie about the same things or to the same extent.

There ARE differences and as such, Romney lied A LOT more and MORE FREQUENTLY.

You can get mad about that if you like, but merely looking confident is NOT enough to signal that you have a grasp of issues on stage. 

 

[rarefiedair24]

Que? You don't realize the difference between not following through on all of your campaign promises, and blantantly lying about your own platform!?
Also how sad is it that y'all only "defense" of Romney is all politicians do it.

So Obama followed through on ALL of his campaign promises, did he??? 

 

[rarefiedair24]

We need to stop this false equivalency.

Both sides lie.

Both sides do not lie about the same things or to the same extent.

There ARE differences and as such, Romney lied A LOT more and MORE FREQUENTLY.

You can get mad about that if you like, but merely looking confident is NOT enough to signal that you have a grasp of issues on stage. 

I agree looking confident doesn't mean you have a firm grasp, but for all intent purposes it's a job interview, so confidence shouldn't be stamped as a negative, but at the same time, for either candidate to really go into detail on any of their "plans/ideas" on a limited platform is unfair...   

But for people to come and post things that either candidate says or promotes and says "See, look, Obama says it is 5trill" is complete blasphemy.. It just so happens that there appears to be more Obama supporters on here posting videos/ads/speeches.  If it was reversed I'd still say the same thing, I'm an independent.  There's some things I'm liberal about, there's some things I'm conservative about.. But don't take something a candidate says and try to shove it down my throat as 100% fact! and only to back it up with more biased ads/speeches and the like..

 

[Coupé It]

We need to stop this false equivalency.

Both sides lie.

Both sides do not lie about the same things or to the same extent.

There ARE differences and as such, Romney lied A LOT more and MORE FREQUENTLY.

You can get mad about that if you like, but merely looking confident is NOT enough to signal that you have a grasp of issues on stage. 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that Mitt Romney won the debate last night? Your so focused on your own opinion of the debate but you're not focusing on what counts. America believes he won the debate so what happens now FutureMD, is a much tighter race. Every Liberal news organization and most liberals in general already conceded defeat. Obama is going to lose votes because of last night, that my friend is = Defeat. This is so simple and you still don't get it.

I'm very disappointed that Obama decided to attack and be aggressive now. He had his chance last night in front of 40 million people and he blew it. He's looking like a sore loser and needs to get back to the drawing board. He needs to be prepared for the next debate and I'm not talking about with the transcripts he memorizes, I'm talking about his demeanor, attitude, and personality. He did not look like a leader last night, he was to timid. Step it up Barry.

Btw,

My argument and what I'm trying to prove is, no matter how flat you make a pancake there's still 2 sides, if you're going to post something, either post it unbiased or post the facts from both sides. Don't just come and spew rhetoric from one party affiliation. Whether you're democrat or republican! Do the research!

Thank You, finally someone understands.

 

[kix4kix]

Since you are independent, who you support?

 

[futuremd]

We need to stop this false equivalency.

Both sides lie.

Both sides do not lie about the same things or to the same extent.

There ARE differences and as such, Romney lied A LOT more and MORE FREQUENTLY.

You can get mad about that if you like, but merely looking confident is NOT enough to signal that you have a grasp of issues on stage. 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that Mitt Romney won the debate last night? Your so focused on your own opinion of the debate but you're not focusing on what counts. America believes he won the debate so what happens now FutureMD, is a much tighter race. Every Liberal news organization and most liberals in general already conceded defeat. Obama is going to lose votes because of last night, that my friend is = Defeat. This is so simple and you still don't get it.

I'm very disappointed that Obama decided to attack and be aggressive now. He had his chance last night in front of 40 million people and he blew it. He's looking like a sore loser and needs to get back to the drawing board. He needs to be prepared for the next debate and I'm not talking about with the transcripts he memorizes, I'm talking about his demeanor, attitude, and personality. He did not look like a leader last night, he was to timid. Step it up Barry.

First of all, you don't WIN debates.

Thats what a debate is.

Just ideas competing. 

Its not like science. We can't prove who is right. All we have is theories for what would work better and a REALLY small sample set to prove things one way or another.

Second of all, I don't care who the TV in the living room says who won. Their views don't influence me.

Think for yourself.

Obama had better arguments, more accurate statements, and was more reasonable in his assertions.

Romney lacked all three.

if a slick haircut and bright teeth are all it takes, then drop your panties now and give it up to Romney.

But for someone like me, it takes A LITTLE more than a smooth talker to win me over. 

I need substance. 

Romney lacked that. 

 

[rarefiedair24]

Since you are independent, who you support?

I voted for Obama last election and still stand by my decision to vote for him.  This election I'm undecided.  

 

[boys noize]

My argument and what I'm trying to prove is, no matter how flat you make a pancake there's still 2 sides, if you're going to post something, either post it unbiased or post the facts from both sides.  Don't just come and spew rhetoric from one party affiliation. Whether you're democrat or republican!  Do the research! 

Mercy...

So what you're saying is we shouldn't look at what these candidates are saying then? Because no matter what, it's going to be biased, inaccurate, and fall under the category of 'propaganda.' I literally only posted what Obama said and the context in which he said it. The entire transcript is there. The video is there. I even linked to Politifact which is an unbiased fact checker for further analysis of his claim.

I literally did not inject an iota of my own personal opinion into this. I've only stated what is known which is that Romney's proposed cuts total $5 trillion. The tax center study YOU cited came to the same conclusion. The reason it's considered a half truth that it will cost the US government that much is SOLELY because Romney has stated that he has a plan to make up for that loss. He has NOT stated how that will be made up with any specificity.

Again, these are not opinions. These are stone cold facts.

 

[rarefiedair24]

Mercy...
So what you're saying is we shouldn't look at what these candidates are saying then? Because no matter what, it's going to be biased, inaccurate, and fall under the category of 'propaganda.' I literally only posted what Obama said and the context in which he said it. The entire transcript is there. The video is there. I even linked to Politifact which is an unbiased fact checker for further analysis of his claim.
I literally did not inject an iota of my own personal opinion into this. I've only stated what is known which is that Romney's proposed cuts total $5 trillion. The tax center study YOU cited came to the same conclusion. The reason it's considered a half truth that it will cost the US government that much is SOLELY because Romney has stated that he has a plan to make up for that loss. He has NOT stated how that will be made up with any specificity.
Again, these are not opinions. These are stone cold facts.

What I'm saying is, don't take what either candidate says for face value! Both parties will spin it to suit their own personal agenda, but lucky for us we live in a free country where the "facts" are readily available at our fingertips.  You just have to make the choice to either A) think for yourself and make your own decisions or B) believe what either candidate says as being 100% fact.  

As the great Ben Franklin said: "Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see".. 

 

[boys noize]

What I'm saying is, don't take what either candidate says for face value! Both parties will spin it to suit their own personal agenda, but lucky for us we live in a free country where the "facts" are readily available at our fingertips.  You just have to make the choice to either A) think for yourself and make your own decisions or B) believe what either candidate says as being 100% fact.  

As the great Ben Franklin said: "Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see".. 

We're discussing two different things. I posted about Obama's response to last nights debate. Very relevant to the discussion.

You decided to come riding in saying that what I posted was "propaganda" I mean... I guess let's have a political thread WITHOUT any of the politicians or what they talk about in it. Let's just, as you say, "think for ourselves and make up our own decisions" without any context in which to shape our opinion.

Also, I'm not saying let's take politicians at face value. I'm all for critically analyzing what our elected officials say. Criticize what is being said.

 

[Coupé It]

First of all, you don't WIN debates.

Thats what a debate is.

Just ideas competing. 

Its not like science. We can't prove who is right. All we have is theories for what would work better and a REALLY small sample set to prove things one way or another.

Second of all, I don't care who the TV in the living room says who won. Their views don't influence me.


Think for yourself.

Obama had better arguments, more accurate statements, and was more reasonable in his assertions.

Romney lacked all three.

if a slick haircut and bright teeth are all it takes, then drop your panties now and give it up to Romney.

But for someone like me, it takes A LITTLE more than a smooth talker to win me over. 

I need substance. 

Romney lacked that. 

Dude Listen Up.

When it comes down to me I don't take Obama or Romney seriously in a debate, I know who I'm voting for, I know the issues at hand, I know which party's presidency will support my views. That is Obama. My thoughts are already made, I've had plenty of time to think to myself so thanks for advice but you're about 6 months late.

What you don't seem to comprehend is the fact that their is an important amount of the population that are undecided and independent voters. Those majority of undecided/independent voters believe that Obama lost the debate last night. Those undecided/independent voters are very easily influenced by the way a presidential candidate carries himself on stage, in front of 40 million people.Thats very important to them. I can understand why they feel Romney won the debate because Romney did a great job of attacking last night, he seemed more engaged and energized. Obama personally looked weak and timid.

Why do you think Obama went on attack today? His campaign advisors know what he did wrong. It's not about what you or I think about the substance of the debate Future, the American people who vote for the president don't care or understand that. Put yourself in a campaign manager's shoes, if you still believe Obama won you'd be fired.

 

[rarefiedair24]

We're discussing two different things. I posted about Obama's response to last nights debate. Very relevant to the discussion.
You decided to come riding in saying that what I posted was "propaganda"

I mean... I guess let's have a political thread WITHOUT any of the politicians or what they talk about in it. Let's just, as you say, "think for ourselves and make up our own decisions" without any context in which to shape our opinion.
Also, I'm not saying let's take politicians at face value. I'm all for critically analyzing what our elected officials say. Criticize what is being said.

You posted Obama's response to prove what?? just to post it for craps and giggles?? you posted it to prove a point.  Correct? 

 

[boys noize]

You posted Obama's response to prove what?? just to post it for craps and giggles?? you posted it to prove a point.  Correct? 

I posted it because it's relevant to this thread. This is the Presidential Debate thread. That was Obama's first response in public to last night's speech. The segment I posted that the DailyKOS isolated from the rest of the speech seemed extra pertinent because that it is a response to one of the things people pointed out about Obama's performance last night.

 

[rocky437]

Romney stayed on the economy, and every time Obama tried to skate somewhere else he hit him with how all of his policies have failed over the past 4 years. Then Romney drew in the women, any case study he mentioned was about a woman. Seriously everything brought up by the moderator were things Obama failed. No wonder Obama was "timid." Romney destroyed him.

 

[obeahmyal7]

Dude Listen Up.
When it comes down to me I don't take Obama or Romney seriously in a debate, I know who I'm voting for, I know the issues at hand, I know which party's presidency will support my views. That is Obama. My thoughts are already made, I've had plenty of time to think to myself so thanks for advice but you're about 6 months late.
What you don't seem to comprehend is the fact that their is an important amount of the population that are undecided and independent voters. Those majority of undecided/independent voters believe that Obama lost the debate last night. Those undecided/independent voters are very easily influenced by the way a presidential candidate carries himself on stage, in front of 40 million people.Thats very important to them. I can understand why they feel Romney won the debate because Romney did a great job of attacking last night, he seemed more engaged and energized. Obama personally looked weak and timid.
Why do you think Obama went on attack today? His campaign advisors know what he did wrong. It's not about what you or I think about the substance of the debate Future, the American people who vote for the president don't care or understand that. Put yourself in a campaign manager's shoes, if you still believe Obama won you'd be fired.

No, what you don't seem to comprehend is that the very basis of evaluating a debate based on winners and losers is a false binary. I checked the WSJ a few hours after the debate and it was no surprise to read the Op-ed headlines: "Romney deflates the President," "Mitt's Moment," etc. You are a fool if you believe that the WSJ did not already have these columns penned and ready for circulation regardless of the outcome. The same is true for the NYT. Headlines such as "Campaign Gains a New Intensity," and "Debate Praise for Romney as Obama is Faulted as Flat" were all the rage. When the objective is to sell newspapers, attract viewers, a stale presidential race is bad for business. By evaluating the debate in terms of winners and losers you treat a talking/selling point as the basis of your analysis, which is no analysis at all. 

I happen to have a very cynical view of human beings. I believe we tend to be manipulated by mass consumer culture. But I do believe that a larger portion of the 40 million people of which you speak have the ability to cut through distortion. Will the average American pick up policy papers to read about the details of each candidates campaign? Probably not. But I do believe that people are not easily swayed by "the way a presidential candidate carries himself on stage." I do believe that the material realities of the everyday trump the so-called appearance of an "engaged and energized" Mitt Romney. More importantly, you overstate the numerical significance of the independent voter. The fact of the matter is, most viewers were going to hear what they wanted to hear. The notion that a debate, much less body language, has the ability to move people off the fence is a stretch and is a newspaper headline itself. 

I'd like to hear more about how Obama "looked weak and timid." In what ways? How should a commander-in-chief carry himself? With an arrogant, chest pumping, swagger? With a hollowed set of convictions masked by brazen salesmanship? To sport a smug, gilded age smile? 

 

[obeahmyal7]

Romney stayed on the economy, and every time Obama tried to skate somewhere else he hit him with how all of his policies have failed over the past 4 years. Then Romney drew in the women, any case study he mentioned was about a woman. Seriously everything brought up by the moderator were things Obama failed. No wonder Obama was "timid." Romney destroyed him.

So insightful. 

 

[luckyp824]

We need to stop this false equivalency.

Both sides lie.

Both sides do not lie about the same things or to the same extent.

There ARE differences and as such, Romney lied A LOT more and MORE FREQUENTLY.

You can get mad about that if you like, but merely looking confident is NOT enough to signal that you have a grasp of issues on stage. 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that Mitt Romney won the debate last night? Your so focused on your own opinion of the debate but you're not focusing on what counts. America believes he won the debate so what happens now FutureMD, is a much tighter race. Every Liberal news organization and most liberals in general already conceded defeat. Obama is going to lose votes because of last night, that my friend is = Defeat. This is so simple and you still don't get it.

I'm very disappointed that Obama decided to attack and be aggressive now. He had his chance last night in front of 40 million people and he blew it. He's looking like a sore loser and needs to get back to the drawing board. He needs to be prepared for the next debate and I'm not talking about with the transcripts he memorizes, I'm talking about his demeanor, attitude, and personality. He did not look like a leader last night, he was to timid. Step it up Barry.

First of all, you don't WIN debates.

Ummm... yes you do? Obviously.

These public debates are extensions of their campaigns. Someone wins. It's not even arguable. Someone wins. That's it. Mitt Romney won last night.

This isn't the same as you and some 18 year old debating on Niketalk. There are actual reasons for this debate. Someone wins.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Romney stayed on the economy, and every time Obama tried to skate somewhere else he hit him with how all of his policies have failed over the past 4 years. Then Romney drew in the women, any case study he mentioned was about a woman. Seriously everything brought up by the moderator were things Obama failed. No wonder Obama was "timid." Romney destroyed him.

Mitt didn't destroy Obama, not even close. And the fact dudes have had a day to research the **** Mitt said and still say Ronmey destroyed Obama is even more ridiculous.

People are upset at Obama because their BS detecors were going crazy whenever Mittens spoke and they wanted Barry you pounce on Mitt, but he didn't

It was like George Constanza walked up to Mitt right before the debate and gave him the key to so called "victory": "Mitt, just remember, it is not a lie..... if you believe it"