2012 presidential debates

  On 10/4/2012 at 3:06 PM, azatoth said:

  On 10/4/2012 at 8:32 AM, Awepittance said:

i think between this and the recent embassy attacks, Obama has been setup or is setting himself up to be Carterized, holy shit that was unexpected

 

its really super depressing that there was little to no talk whatsoever about our continuing Bush era preemptive warfare, rendition, torture, secret and offshore gulags. Is the 2nd debate supposed to cover that? I almost don't see how it could be done given that Romney is trying to do something virtually impossible, position himself to the right of Obama on foreign policy.

 

This debate was about domestic policy. The foreign policy debate will be the last one on Oct. 22. The vice-presidential debate on Oct. 11 will cover both domestic and foreign policy and then there's the town meeting-type debate on Oct. 16 which probably will cover some foreign policy questions.

wow, ok can't wait for that one because as i said before Romney will literally have to do the impossible, position himself to the right of Obama on foreign policy. How's he going to do that exactly? Short of saying he's going to preemptively nuke iran and will hire someone to write a memo saying we could insert live insects into someone's anus or pull out their fingernailsi don't understand what he could say that wouldn't seem more bat shit insane blood thirsty than the Bush era we are still living in.

Even Bush as crazy as he was, positioned himself to the left of Gore on foreign policy. He referred to the Bosnian war as 'nation building'and that it was american meddling in the interests of other countries (of course this was all before the blessing for him that was 9/11, that gave his PNAC filled cabinet their biggest wish). We've gotten to the point now where what Bush ended up doing post 9/11 has become normalized, it's honestly really fucking scary and to have the first black president who seems 'friendly' pushing all this stuff it's more scary to me than when it was going on under Bush.

even Kerry as abominably bad as he was overall he at least pushed the idea that Bush's war on terror was based on a faulty premise, that using the military to fight faceless people overseas indefinitely in the name of protecting our country is flawed. 'Terrorism' should be stopped with law enforcement not full out warfare he claimed (even though he agreed with the bizarre invasion of an entire country, Afghanistan to stop a small group of people). This was part of the Kerry VS Bush debate in 2004, but in 2012 I guess Bush won on that front since you never/rarely ever hear anyone bringing up this point anymore. Obama hasn't done anything as far as i'm concerned to de-legitimize the architecture of the war on terror. Even his supposed '2014' pull out date is a ruse, if you read the whole document the date is actually 2024, by that time the war on terror would will have literally gone an entire generation, the longest war in American history.

that's the other thing romney kept repeating, "i want to keep america's military strong". every time he'd say that, the graph would spike.

it makes no sense, when you have the military running secret and publicly known about gulags across the world where the soldiers and generals are immune to prosecution for torture and even beating people to death, how could you make them stronger than that? It may sound hyperbolic, but maybe someone could answer this question for me because it's true.

also i know this has become sort of a generic mantra, but Obama has lost his 2008 mojo... big time. It wasn't even his round about halting way of speaking that makes me think his heart wasn't in it this time around, it was his inability to seem confident and collected in the face of the joke that it Robotney. Why was he looking down so much each time Romney would speak? Why did Obama keep clenching his cheek muscles like a nervous tick repeatedly? When Romney would try to 'zing' Obama would give this bizarre full teeth display nervous smile, was that odd to anyone else?

It's because if Obama went off at all he'd fuel the fire to the "claim" that he's a pissy liberal elitist who subconsciously hates white people - he tried to go on the offensive but that's impossible to pull off without uttering Idiocray-esque zingers back to Romney - people watching are either political junkies with fixed opinions or absolute idiots - he catered to to the former last night, the ones on the left I mean, albeit with little effort

  On 10/4/2012 at 9:12 PM, chaosmachine said:

that's the other thing romney kept repeating, "i want to keep america's military strong". every time he'd say that, the graph would spike.

I didn't watch the debate but how much stronger do we need to make the fucking military for chrissakes? It's bigger than all of the other militaries combined. Are we planning a hostile takeover of all continents? Is there an impending alien invasion we need to fend off??

  On 10/4/2012 at 11:01 AM, vamos scorcho said:

the worst thing about the debates is that i'm the only person i know who didn't watch them. can't believe you supposedly intelligent people still pay even the smallest amount of attention (respect) to this raging tornado of bullshit.

glad to see you are still holier than thou.

btw, farts go away after a while. shit policy doesn't.

  On 10/5/2012 at 12:13 AM, sweepstakes said:

  On 10/4/2012 at 9:12 PM, chaosmachine said:

that's the other thing romney kept repeating, "i want to keep america's military strong". every time he'd say that, the graph would spike.

I didn't watch the debate but how much stronger do we need to make the fucking military for chrissakes? It's bigger than all of the other militaries combined. Are we planning a hostile takeover of all continents? Is there an impending alien invasion we need to fend off??

just so this makes more sense, the sample group of undecided voters was almost entirely from southern rural areas.

  On 10/4/2012 at 9:23 PM, Awepittance said:

it makes no sense, when you have the military running secret and publicly known about gulags across the world where the soldiers and generals are immune to prosecution for torture and even beating people to death, how could you make them stronger than that? It may sound hyperbolic, but maybe someone could answer this question for me because it's true.

 

also i know this has become sort of a generic mantra, but Obama has lost his 2008 mojo... big time. It wasn't even his round about halting way of speaking that makes me think his heart wasn't in it this time around, it was his inability to seem confident and collected in the face of the joke that it Robotney. Why was he looking down so much each time Romney would speak? Why did Obama keep clenching his cheek muscles like a nervous tick repeatedly? When Romney would try to 'zing' Obama would give this bizarre full teeth display nervous smile, was that odd to anyone else?

hint: its to win votes aka. everyone pays attention to rhetoric, no one pays attention to evidence.

Who is running the country while Obama is in campaign mode?

I love how no one gives a shit that the president has been in campaign for the last year or so.

I sometimes ask myself why are people still buying into this bullshit then i realize most people are fucking idiots.

  On 10/4/2012 at 6:15 PM, sergeantk said:

  On 10/4/2012 at 12:45 PM, Friendly Foil said:

  On 10/4/2012 at 12:20 PM, YO303 said:

For the next debate Obama should get on that podium and read some facts about mormonism and their ridiculous beliefs and make Mitt Romney explain Planet Kolob to the world.

Dum-dum-dum-dum-dumb!

 

brilliant

yea, id pay to watch that

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:28 AM, YO303 said:

Who is running the country while Obama is in campaign mode?

 

I love how no one gives a shit that the president has been in campaign for the last year or so.

 

I sometimes ask myself why are people still buying into this bullshit then i realize most people are fucking idiots.

Who is running the country while Obama isn't in campaign mode? Obama and Obama alone?

If by bullshit you mean a representative republican hierarchy, yes, I suppose this is bullshit. Obama is not Overlord of the Western Hemisphere.

i think it's also telling that during a debate about 'domestic' issues things like women rights, abortion and gay rights were not mentioned once. Usually debate moderators (especially in the primary) like to ask tough hot button questions like this, i wouldn't be surprised if Jim Leher had some sort of pre-debate agreement that any of those subjects would be omitted.

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:39 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:28 AM, YO303 said:

Who is running the country while Obama is in campaign mode?

 

I love how no one gives a shit that the president has been in campaign for the last year or so.

 

I sometimes ask myself why are people still buying into this bullshit then i realize most people are fucking idiots.

 

Who is running the country while Obama isn't in campaign mode? Obama and Obama alone?

 

If by bullshit you mean a representative republican hierarchy, yes, I suppose this is bullshit. Obama is not Overlord of the Western Hemisphere.

The whole thing is stupid. The fact that people are voting based on a FUCKING PERFORMANCE on a televised debate is insane to me.

No real issues are raised in these debates, its always hot button issues that affects a small percentage of the population, while issues that affect all of us (like the war on drugs or money in politics) are never touched.

We need to have a "Newsroom opening" moment where the candidate looks at the camera and tells the whole world what a farce politics are and how everyone who is in a position of power are fucking pieces of shits controlled by billionaires.

They don't care about any of us these politicians, if they have to kill 3 million of us to make money the will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEyUWKJFER8

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:46 AM, YO303 said:

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:39 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 10/5/2012 at 1:28 AM, YO303 said:

Who is running the country while Obama is in campaign mode?

 

I love how no one gives a shit that the president has been in campaign for the last year or so.

 

I sometimes ask myself why are people still buying into this bullshit then i realize most people are fucking idiots.

 

Who is running the country while Obama isn't in campaign mode? Obama and Obama alone?

 

If by bullshit you mean a representative republican hierarchy, yes, I suppose this is bullshit. Obama is not Overlord of the Western Hemisphere.

 

The whole thing is stupid. The fact that people are voting based on a FUCKING PERFORMANCE on a televised debate is insane to me.

 

No real issues are raised in these debates, its always hot button issues that affects a small percentage of the population, while issues that affect all of us (like the war on drugs or money in politics) are never touched.

 

We need to have a "Newsroom opening" moment where the candidate looks at the camera and tells the whole world what a farce politics are and how everyone who is in a position of power are fucking pieces of shits controlled by billionaires.

 

They don't care about any of us these politicians, if they have to kill 3 million of us to make money the will.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEyUWKJFER8

I hate to burst your bubble, but televised debates have never resulted in a major change in the voting pattern.

Kennedy/Nixon? Reagan/Carter?

Debates always give whoever won it a spike in the ratings, maybe not mayor but noticeable.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121003/POLITICS01/210030430/Polling-shows-debates-don-t-affect-elections-despite-mythy-Kennedy-Nixon?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/29/presidential-debates-rarely-have-much-effect-on-election-outcomes.html

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_larry_j_sabato/romney_wins_debate_but_how_much_does_it_matter

If you read up on polling data prior to the Kennedy/Nixon showdown, Kennedy was already well ahead because he stuck to educational policy, something which was (for once) important in 1960, whereas Nixon was the tired old anti-commie watchdog argument that lost Democratic power after Truman's Korean debacle.

also, Carter had no fucking chance from the get go, but that is also self-evident from the poll data prior to debates.

Politics, law... shameful things in this day and age.

Two of those articles were written after Romney "won" the debate and have a clearly liberal agenda (yeah im calling the rasmussen report has liberal bias, FIGHT ME!). The other one is just a bunch of bullshit opinions that needs citation.

ok. read the polling data before and after televised debates.

i guess temple university's poly sci department isn't credible enough?

http://www.pressherald.com/news/nationworld/in-focus-value-of-debates_2012-10-04.html

Holy shit. I'm voting for Romney. I feel better now. Really takes a load off. I'm not even joking guys.

  On 10/5/2012 at 2:56 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

ok. read the polling data before and after televised debates.

 

i guess temple university's poly sci department isn't credible enough?

 

http://www.presshera...2012-10-04.html

Why did you suck me into this?, my post was 1% about the influence of debates.

And i'm right about Kennedy/Nixon and Reagan/Carter, the articles you are showing me are statistics mixed with bullshit soundbites and opinion.

suit yourself

  On 10/5/2012 at 2:53 AM, vamos scorcho said:

Politics, law... shameful things in this day and age.

yeah - fuck society! who needs order and all that kind of bullshit.

  On 10/5/2012 at 3:15 AM, chenGOD said:

  On 10/5/2012 at 2:53 AM, vamos scorcho said:

Politics, law... shameful things in this day and age.

 

yeah - fuck society! who needs order and all that kind of bullshit.

dude if you would only like, open your mind, youd realize that there really is no such thing as a social contract and this is all perpetuated by the banks

just believe what you want to believe

just believe what you want to believe