2012 Debates

[Toontown]

It seemed like Biden was angry with Ryan and Romney for calling half the country essentially takers. I think it's amazing so many people think they deserve the benefit of the doubt after learning that they actually said these things.

I never in a million dog years would have thought a candidate could get away with that.

Well, since no one else seems to have the guts or the political honesty to say it, I will.

I am a member of the 47% who receive some kind of government assistance, and I am neither ashamed nor offended by Romney's remarks. I got my government assistance the old fashioned way - I earned it.

It is, however, factually unlikely that many of the 47% will vote for Romney, which was what Romney said, and which was his point.

Am I, as an atheist, fond of the idea of having a Mormon president? No.

Am I, as a loyal atheist, fond of the idea that the sitting president apparently sat and listened to Reverend Wright's sermons for 10 years? No.

Will, I, as a loyal atheist, settle for whatever the voters stick me with, without whining like a little bitch for the next 4 years? Yes.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

I assume you're referring to the fact that Biden's wife and one-year-old daughter were killed in a car accident. I'd probably be peeved at that, too, feeling it was a bit too personal.

That was a deliberate low blow by Ryan.

The real question is this. . . did he know about Biden's wife and daughter?

I bet not. I bet he was told to tell that story by one of his debate prep people, who DID know about it.

 

[R.Mackey]

I don't buy it. Biden's family history is well known. He also brought it up unprompted in his 2008 debate with Palin, and I have to assume Ryan watched that as part of his prep.

Biden has used that example as a way to humanize himself, to demonstrate his compassion. It's his right, and if he feels he should, then why not? It is a remarkable story. Ryan's story about Romney the Santa Claus wasn't bad either, but it suffers somewhat in being oblique, told second-hand, and framed into a somewhat clumsy attack.

 

[Cain]

"Can you believe this $#!@ malarky?"

 

[MattusMaximus]

It's amazing how all I hear constantly from the right is umbrage over Biden's smiles and laughter, but Romney's constant smirking and his constant tone of "no, don't you see?" was a commanding and confident presence.

To be fair, I engaged in a fair amount of carping about Romney's smirk in the first debate. So I shall not throw any stones

 

[Halfcentaur]

Well, since no one else seems to have the guts or the political honesty to say it, I will.

I am a member of the 47% who receive some kind of government assistance, and I am neither ashamed nor offended by Romney's remarks. I got my government assistance the old fashioned way - I earned it.

It is, however, factually unlikely that many of the 47% will vote for Romney, which was what Romney said, and which was his point.

Am I, as an atheist, fond of the idea of having a Mormon president? No.

Am I, as a loyal atheist, fond of the idea that the sitting president apparently sat and listened to Reverend Wright's sermons for 10 years? No.

Will, I, as a loyal atheist, settle for whatever the voters stick me with, without whining like a little bitch for the next 4 years? Yes.

He called you a taker who basically felt unjustly entitled to a hand out. it seems to me you're somehow spinning this into you feeling like you earned your entitled hand out.

Mind explaining to me what you think Romney actually said and not how you feel about yourself?

 

[Cain]

To be fair, I engaged in a fair amount of carping about Romney's smirk in the first debate. So I shall not throw any stones

Everybody loves the smirk when it's their guy beating the crap outta the other guy. ****-eating grins are for winners.

 

[KwamiFabu]

I didn't like Ryan's responses to foreign-policy questions, such as our posture toward Syria and Iran. What would a President Romney do differently? We still don't know. The Obama administration is certainly vulnerable on Libya, and the conflicting accounts between the State Department and the White House following the Benghazi raid, but Ryan seemed to pull his punches there, too.

On the domestic front, Ryan was the clear winner, but only if you knew the score. Biden's attacks were not only over-the-top cosmetically, but factually wrong substantively. The administration's Medicare actuary, for example, confirms that 15 percent of hospitals will take on operating deficits as a result of Obamacare's cuts in payments to Medicare providers. The AEI study Biden cited does NOT say that Romney's plan will raise taxes on the middle class. And Ryan's Medicare plan does NOT raise costs for seniors by $6,400. And, oh yes, GM did go bankrupt -- only this way Obama got to reward his campaign contributors at the UAW and stick the American people with a $32B lemon.

But of course none of this will matter by Tuesday, when Obama and Romney meet again at Hofstra U.

 

[ProbeX]

I might watch the next Obama-Romney debate, since those two were at least able to behave in a civilized manner.

Romney, like the Biden, was aggressive and cut people off. That you harbor righteous indignation re: Biden's behavior while calling Romney's behavior "civilized", indicates your bias may be getting the best of you.

 

[SezMe]

There is also the talk about the corporate tax rate which the US holds the highest in the industrialized world at 39.2% which he roughly cited while discussing the need to reform the tax code.

That's actually a good example of Ryan NOT telling the truth. The actual USA corporate tax rate is low compared to other OCED countries. See the bar graphs here.

 

[Travis]

locked away... stick probes in their brains... sniveling weasels like him...

But Ryan is the psychopath full of vile contempt. Do you ever actually read what you write?

Are you insinuating I am a psychopath?

Interesting. Especially since I am capable of empathy, do not like lying and can form real relationships. Things Ryan cannot do.

One thing that didn't work for Ryan:

He tried to score points with his anecdote about Romney's generosity toward car crash victims. He probably should have done a little bit of background research before choosing that particular anecdote.

I'm not sure, but Biden's tone might have turned a bit more aggressive after that. He was smirking and laughing right from the beginning, but during the middle portion of the debate he seemed downright angry and lecturing.

My wife is usually a much better judge of who "won" debates than I am. She's a psychologist and much more of a "people person" than I am. She thought Biden was too condescending. She felt that Biden probably thinks he's smarter than everyone around him, and it looked like he was offended that he had to share the stage with Ryan. On the other hand, she felt Ryan looked both immature and overwhelmed, like he didn't know what to do next. Overall, she thought it was a bit of a tie.

My own opinion, and this might be seeing through blue colored glasses, is that means the Democrats got the upper hand. The previous baseball metaphor seems really appropriate. The winning run is at second base and Obama is stepping up to the plate.

But I'm even more optimistic than that. I think it's a tie game and there's only one out.

Why is being condescending considered a bad point for Biden? Condescending means you are both right and you are letting others know it. So long as you are right who cares how you articulate it? Better to be right than well liked I always say.

As I told you before, this election is not life and death. I'll say the same thing to you as I would to someone who is afraid that Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim socialist: get a grip.

Well it seems two posters articulated my views on this:

Life or death?

Why yes, yes it is about life or death.

Because what do you think happens to people who are very sick and have no insurance?

Those of us who have followed Travis's posting history know that for him it is indeed a life or death issue, as it is for some members of my own family.

 

[Meadmaker]

That was a deliberate low blow by Ryan.

The real question is this. . . did he know about Biden's wife and daughter?

I bet not. I bet he was told to tell that story by one of his debate prep people, who DID know about it.

My guess is that he, and his handlers, were sufficiently clueless that they didn't make the connection.

I don't know if it had any effect on Biden or not. It certainly didn't immediately send him off the deep end or anything. However, I found myself thinking that there was a period of time during the debate where he was not just sneering at Ryan, but he was genuinely angry or disgusted at the man's presence, more so than I've ever seen him. It was during the middle section of the debate, and I later wondered if there was a connection.

I'm sure that there are experts in body language and tone that could analyze Biden's mannerisms and speech patterns for stress indicators and such, and see if there were any connection. I'm sure that there are even more self proclaimed experts who will do so at no charge, and reach whatever conclusion most suits their own emotional needs at the time.

 

[leftysergeant]

Ryan knows Biden's history. He's just an insensitive little baboon who wanted to push Biden's buttons.

Good idea if you are debating a moron. Here, not so much.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Right, but "after the dust has settled" means "after they see their perceptions were not confirmed by the population at large" and they stopped claiming Obama won (or even tied) the debate. You have to look at the comments from before the assessments and polls are released.

And just for clarity, here was your assessment...

Oh, I agree... I should've included the embarassed smiley in my post, as I was confessing to an error - I was making the same mistake that I made in the analysis of Obama/Romney I. I was looking at the initial content/reactions and not letting the dust settle a bit.

 

[Foolmewunz]

He was talking about the Supreme Court in relation to Roe v. Wade, which was in context of the question the mod had asked.

His answer was EXACTLY spot on because it is the intent of the far right to use the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade (even though they blame everyone else for using judges to create legislation from the bench).

So, your point about Biden being a whacko in this instance is completely unfounded.

Actually, I checked the transcript and you're right - it was a follow up question in the portion on their Catholicism. I was still mentally in the previous question.

 

[not_so_new]

Actually, I checked the transcript and you're right - it was a follow up question in the portion on their Catholicism. I was still mentally in the previous question.

Fair enough, I know how that goes.... I lose my place all the time unfortunately....

 

[not_so_new]

This is an interesting take...

I know the source is "biased" but I do think these are all valid points.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Fair enough, I know how that goes.... I lose my place all the time unfortunately....

Thanks, bu ya know... not really "fair enough". I used to avoid the politics sub-forums because this is the least skeptical area. Everything's opinion and bombast, and that's really fair game as it is, after all, specifically about politics, which on a skeptics forum is pretty much like having a thread where one actually attempts to prove which pie tastes best (because everyone knows it's peach pie, anyway).

But when we cite facts, we should be a little more careful. I was just being lazy and not just a little flippant and commenting from an impression I got at the moment.

 

[Foolmewunz]

This is an interesting take...

I know the source is "biased" but I do think these are all valid points.

Access Denied

You don't have permission to access "http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/the-vice-presidential-debate-joe-biden-was-right-to-laugh-20121012" on this server.
Reference #18.f3fda46e.1350099882.160a3458

Apparently Rolling Stone doesn't give access to Thailand?

ETA: s'okay - I read what I believe is the same article on another site earlier. And I agree. I've always pointed that out on these forums. Ridicule is a fair reaction to the ridiculous. Sometimes it seems the only option available is that you either go postal on them and get arrested or you laugh in their faces.

 

[RandFan]

His answer was EXACTLY spot on because it is the intent of the far right to use the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade (even though they blame everyone else for using judges to create legislation from the bench).

Yeah, well, the GOP are no strangers to hypocrisy.