Grading Debates

[TheVictors]

In the Fall of 1991 my partner and I were the #1 ranked Debate team in the state of Michigan heading into the State Finals ....these televised spectacles are anything but debates and I haven't watched a minute. Clearly you can't avoid the aftermath and coverage, even when you try, but it seems pretty clear to me that:

Romney "killed" in the first debate, but this is largely due to incredibly low expectations and terrible polling (which we all know is biased and flawed until polls show Romney gaining).

The second debate showed a more prepared Obama and was considered a "draw."

This third debate seems to be going to Obama, but with less histrionics and drama and more based on a substantive analysis of very real geo-political issues.

This Politics board is an absurd venue at times and I can't say there is a true Independent voter, or rather, non-DEM/GOP voter from what I can tell .... So, are there ANY posters who have been persuaded at all by these "debates" because they don't seem to be meaningful exchanges , other than to showcase how RETARDED the political Ads are, on face.

 

[Mitchrapp]

So, are there ANY posters who have been persuaded at all by these "debates" ..

Is any body?

 

[oletoes]

I personally feel as though if you are undecided on who to vote for and need a debate performance to tell you which way to cast your vote, you are an idiot, or have been asleep for the past 18 months...or both.

Voting is a privilege not a right, and should be taken seriously as such. An undecided voter at this stage of the game (even 2 months ago) is not paying attention thus not taking it serious enough.

my 2 cents.

 

[TheVictors]

I agree and find those "focus groups" of undecideds who dial up and down with every answer or question ....how can you possibly sway back and forth in the middle of a staged talking point event like these debates?

 

[Michchamp]

...
Voting is a privilege not a right, and should be taken seriously as such. ...

...so be sure to read as many right-wing blogs as possible to reinforce your long-established political views before going out and voting based on what they tell you to do...

 

[Michchamp]

There actually was a REAL debate among presidential candidates last night, but unless you knew how to think for yourself and avoid the narrative the mainstream media had drilled into your head, you would never have known about it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

This Politics board is an absurd venue at times and I can't say there is a true Independent voter, or rather, non-DEM/GOP voter from what I can tell .... So, are there ANY posters who have been persuaded at all by these "debates" because they don't seem to be meaningful exchanges , other than to showcase how RETARDED the political Ads are, on face.

Not me.

I was intending to vote for Gary Johnson before the debates, and nothing about the debates has changed that.

 

[Michchamp]

Not me.

I was intending to vote for Gary Johnson before the debates, and nothing about the debates has changed that.

you might have checked out his performance at the third party debate last night that I posted about.

 

[tinselwolverine]

you might have checked out his performance at the third party debate last night that I posted about.

The article you linked to says it's tonight, but the only network the article names as going to be televising it is Al Jazeera English.

Which I don't get.

 

[tinselwolverine]

The article you linked to says it's tonight, but the only network the article names as going to be televising it is Al Jazeera English. Which I don't get.

Looks like it's going to be streamed on line, on Ora TV - so maybe I'll check it out.

 

[grandy]

The article you linked to says it's tonight, but the only network the article names as going to be televising it is Al Jazeera English.

Which I don't get.

The American corporate media doesn't want any 3rd party candidate to get exposure.

Gotta keep the focus on the clowns/puppets running for the two major parties.

 

[TheVictors]

Romney tried (was trying) to keep Johnson off some state ballots, but to no avail.

And the only political sign in my yard is for Johnson (as the Mrs. is certainly voting Obama, but doesn't care about putting a sign out), which seems to catch passers by who stop to read it.

Seems the 3rd Party debate is on a few alternative cable channels and Larry King is moderating.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Third Party Debate

 

[tsmith7559]

Romney tried (was trying) to keep Johnson off some state ballots, but to no avail.

And the only political sign in my yard is for Johnson (as the Mrs. is certainly voting Obama, but doesn't care about putting a sign out), which seems to catch passers by who stop to read it.

Seems the 3rd Party debate is on a few alternative cable channels and Larry King is moderating.

Romney appreciates your vote for Johnson

 

[zyxt9]

johnson lost me with his anti-drone comment. first and foremost, using drones reduces the cost of running the military while keeping our military personnel safer. there is no better "armor" for protecting our personnel than to have the enemy firing at drones instead of them. furthermore, it is a Pandora's Box situation. just like other advancements in military technology, once invented and put into practice effectively, they will continue to be used by as many militaries that can utilize the technology as possible. from machine guns to tanks, airplanes to ships, the tech advancements are what keep your military on top and stopping the deployment of such technology makes your military less strong. for the first time ever to my knowledge, drones represent a cheaper alternative as well. true, they do not prevent collateral damage, but they have proven to be just as accurate as pilots flying airplanes so to complain about their collateral damage is moot. his entire anti-military view would set this nation back militarily worse than jimmy carter did. i wouldn't be surprised if he became president that he would completely disband all military branches. couple that with his elimination of anything anti-drug and it literally scares me what this nation would turn into. his comment that the "war" on drugs belongs in the family and not the courts is ridiculous. what can parents do with kids who are doing it despite their demands otherwise? the kid won't be committing a crime and if the parent disciplines them there is the likelihood the kid would either go to Child Protective Services or run away. yes, parents do need to step up more and bad parenting is a huge issue with the war on drugs, and yes there is a huge problem with the jails getting overcrowded with druggies, but the solution to many issues would be to increase the fines on offenders in an exponential manner depending on type of drug. use marijuana in public (i don't care about at home) and the fine starts at $1000 for first charge, $5000 for second, $25000 for third. use those fines to pay down the national debt. for harder drugs like heroin or coke, add a 0 to those numbers. you have to hit people where it hurts the most, their wallet.

i like the idea of making 3rd parties stronger and more represented, i just don't think any of these individuals would be good presidents. the green party chick is a whack job, the constitution party guy, virgil, seems out of touch and that other guy, rocky, is just a waste of space.

of the 4, johnson does have the most "presidential" air...but he would ruin this nation.

 

[zyxt9]

i do agree with johnson that the solution to the student loan problem is to eliminate student loans and grants altogether. doing that will force universities to reduce their tuition. while i like the idea of making higher education free, i think at some point kids need to be accountable for making a life for themselves.

no way should kids who were given loans be given a bailout. you entered a contract, you honor it. you weren't smart enough to understand what you were getting into? well, maybe next time you will make better decisions. it is not Joe Taxpayer's job to hold your hand through life and take care of your financial mistakes. stand up and be accountable instead of turning to the government and demanding your loan be paid off.

 

[Michchamp]

johnson lost me with his anti-drone comment. first and foremost, using drones reduces the cost of running the military while keeping our military personnel safer. there is no better "armor" for protecting our personnel than to have the enemy firing at drones instead of them. furthermore, it is a Pandora's Box situation. just like other advancements in military technology, once invented and put into practice effectively, they will continue to be used by as many militaries that can utilize the technology as possible. from machine guns to tanks, airplanes to ships, the tech advancements are what keep your military on top and stopping the deployment of such technology makes your military less strong. for the first time ever to my knowledge, drones represent a cheaper alternative as well. true, they do not prevent collateral damage, but they have proven to be just as accurate as pilots flying airplanes so to complain about their collateral damage is moot. his entire anti-military view would set this nation back militarily worse than jimmy carter did. i wouldn't be surprised if he became president that he would completely disband all military branches. couple that with his elimination of anything anti-drug and it literally scares me what this nation would turn into. his comment that the "war" on drugs belongs in the family and not the courts is ridiculous. what can parents do with kids who are doing it despite their demands otherwise? the kid won't be committing a crime and if the parent disciplines them there is the likelihood the kid would either go to Child Protective Services or run away. yes, parents do need to step up more and bad parenting is a huge issue with the war on drugs, and yes there is a huge problem with the jails getting overcrowded with druggies, but the solution to many issues would be to increase the fines on offenders in an exponential manner depending on type of drug. use marijuana in public (i don't care about at home) and the fine starts at $1000 for first charge, $5000 for second, $25000 for third. use those fines to pay down the national debt. for harder drugs like heroin or coke, add a 0 to those numbers. you have to hit people where it hurts the most, their wallet.

i like the idea of making 3rd parties stronger and more represented, i just don't think any of these individuals would be good presidents. the green party chick is a whack job, the constitution party guy, virgil, seems out of touch and that other guy, rocky, is just a waste of space.

of the 4, johnson does have the most "presidential" air...but he would ruin this nation.

you are apparently unfamiliar with the substantial ink out there about how:

1. these drone strikes are anything BUT the surgical precise assassination tools we are told. the frequency and number of civilian casualties are pretty shocking, but unsurprisingly, not really covered by the US mainstream press.

2. there is evidence (again you have to mostly look outside CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, FOx...) that the US has intentionally targeted first responders to drone strikes and funeral services for victims of drone strikes. this is beyond the pale; these are war crimes.

3. the backlash from these misdirected drone strikes and the constant fear they create has been demonstrated to serve as a major recruiting tool for extremists in these regions, i.e. they actually breed more "terrorism" creating a negative feedback loop. but i suspect if you're in the drone business that's not necessarily a bad thing...

 

[zyxt9]

we CAN afford to not give higher eduation. college degrees are not required to be successful in life. there are plenty of businesses out there that were created by people without college degrees. several of those resulted in amazing success. by having to go out and hustle instead of having it handed to them, they developed amazing companies.

instead of giving money to kids who are educated, make the process for starting companies more simplified. often the problem is lack of funding at the beginning stage when not even angel funds or venture capital money is available. use the money to provide temporary services available like qualified accountants who can help confirm financial viability of new goods and services then create productive and successful business plans, and lawyers to review and assist in purchase of trademarks, copywrites, and patents and formation of companies. help the little guy transform their ideas into reality and you'll see far more return on the investment while also helping them determine whether their ideas can succeed before they pump their remaining savings into a bad idea.

 

[Michchamp]

i do agree with johnson that the solution to the student loan problem is to eliminate student loans and grants altogether. doing that will force universities to reduce their tuition. while i like the idea of making higher education free, i think at some point kids need to be accountable for making a life for themselves.

no way should kids who were given loans be given a bailout. you entered a contract, you honor it. you weren't smart enough to understand what you were getting into? well, maybe next time you will make better decisions. it is not Joe Taxpayer's job to hold your hand through life and take care of your financial mistakes. stand up and be accountable instead of turning to the government and demanding your loan be paid off.

I agree with the first part; I think a major problem is that the federal government has been guaranteeing loans for these goofy for-profit schools. they really do need to tighten the lending standards.

your second point is bullshit. it has nothing to do with being "smart enough" to understand what you're getting into, and contracts are broken all the time. the federal government hands out money to assholes all the time; it's only when the assholes can't afford their own lobbyists that we start hearing the line about being concerned about "taxpayer dollars..."

when the banks wanted a handout we were being told a different story by the people in DC (both the GOP and the Dems) and the mainstream media.

a student loan bailout would be a huge boost to the economy; that money would be spending money for a LOT of people, a boon to business, and much of it would go back into the local, state, and federal treasuries as taxes.

I don't care what some crotchety old goon claims: there is no 18-year-old kid on the planet smart enough to understand what sort of burden they are taking on when they take out student loans, nevermind the fact that from day one they're constantly being told to stress education and go to college. even if some child prodigy tried to step back at age 17 and decide if attending college was worth it, there's so much misinformation out there being pushed on them about their job prospects, potential salary, etc., that they wouldn't succeed.

 

[Michchamp]

we CAN afford to not give higher eduation. college degrees are not required to be successful in life. there are plenty of businesses out there that were created by people without college degrees. several of those resulted in amazing success. by having to go out and hustle instead of having it handed to them, they developed amazing companies.

...

bla bla bla pull yourself up by your bootstraps.

the vast majority of the population has neither the inclination nor the ability to start their own business and even if they did, there is only so much room for successful start-ups, so most would fail. then what?

you're trying to shoehorn policy into your own preconceived ideas of how the world should work