• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

So why did Obama lose

I think all of this focus on gay marriage is pretty silly in the context that it is being discussed here. In the pecking order of issues relevant to voters right now it probably rates about 15 on a list of 15. Nobody in their right mind that supports gay marriage would ever vote for Romney to begin with.
 
Vallista said:
I'm sorry, there are many reason. Make an argument on why citizens should have access to military grade weapons for civilian use. If you can, then let me buy a nuke so I can defend myself.
Click to expand...

Military grade weapons are meant to kill people. I do not intend to maim you or scare you if you enter my house unwelcome and unannounced.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I thought Obama performed much better than he did the first time but I wouldn't say that he had any sort of decisive victory. I would probably give it to him about 8-7 mostly because his stage presence was better than Romney. As far as substance goes I think the President set himself up to get hammered in the next round over Libya. The administration was CLEARLY trying to advance the narrative that the attack was because of the video and when he tried to say that he was clear from day one that it was an act of terror it was *shocking* to me. I was disappointed that Romney let it go so easily but maybe it is strategic to save it for the next round which will center on foreign policy?
Click to expand...

The Moderator stepped in on the Libya discussion and ****ed up. She showed she was a shill for Obama, and she got the facts wrong. Obama admitted he knew more than we though, making Biden a liar. Romney should get props for forcing Obama out into the open.
 
I thought both men laid out their differences, I still don't see much of how Willard was going to put the middle class back to work, he was long on claiming he has a track record of that, very short on just what he would do now. I don't think he calmed any concern over who will pay for the deficit. Who is going to pay more in taxes.

As an aside one of my Senators is launching an attack of sorts on corporations not paying taxes. Sen. Colburn isn't a tax and spend liberal by any stretch of the imagination. Who pays how much in taxes will be quite a battle in the next term.

The economy ran off a cliff and I am not sure most people feel 4 years of deadlocked Washington DC was long enough to make it all better. But they want something done.

Pretty sure a lot of folks feel not much was done to make sure it doesn't happen again, more a case of Wall Street isn't quite ready to run wild with ponzi schemes to inflate profits.

I thought President Obama held a slight edge in the debate, have no idea what that means three days from now.
 
I'm not sure it how it happened but it seems to me that people are throwing points at Obama and Biden simply for not sucking.

Its like the whole "Low expectations are easy to exceed" line of thinking.

I suppose it makes sense though when
 
American said:
The Moderator stepped in on the Libya discussion and ****ed up. She showed she was a shill for Obama, and she got the facts wrong. Obama admitted he knew more than we though, making Biden a liar. Romney should get props for forcing Obama out into the open.
Click to expand...

Your just pissed your guy was wrong.
 
I am surprised that Obama let his ideas for more gun control out last night. The gun stores around here should now be getting an increase in sales of AR-15s and other weapons like that. I may have to go get one myself just in case he gets re-elected. I have an AK-47 and an AR-10, but I don't have an AR-15 yet.

But with all that said, gun control is a relatively small issue. This election is mostly about the economy and the current irresponsible government spending going on, and Romney clearly wins in this area since he comes across as a person that can deal with all that effectively. Obama’s actions speak louder than words from his record, so it is clear we need to elect a new President before the damage gets irreversible.

Overall, the debate was very annoying to watch since it didn't flow smoothly at all. Obama wasn't horrible like he was in the first debate, but I don't think this debate helped him. Romney is no McCain, so he was strong on substance and held his own, even with Candy trying to help Obama out no matter what the facts are.
 
TurtleDude said:
was it because he was so far behind after the last debate

or was it that most of the debate was on economics and domestic policies

or was it because even when Romney stumbled on Libya and was tripped up by a moderator who got the facts backwards, the record is so bad for Obama he cannot make it up
Click to expand...

This debate was a draw. Guess our next president is just going to be the shiniest of two turds....again. Gee, I'm so happy that we're pushing for the destruction of the Republic and loss of our liberty.
 
Jetboogieman said:
I call bull**** on this.

There is an acute, concetrated hatred towards homosexuals from far right Christians.

And this "hate the sin not the sinner" crap is such a cop out it boggles the imagination because when it comes to sin... if all sin is equal and it's all disainful then why are there so many double standards?

I'm thinking of selling my daughter into slavery as sanctioed by Exodus 21:7... what would a good price for her be?

Unfortunately I have to work on sundays... Exodus 35:2 clearly says I should be put to death now am I morally obligated to kill myself for my own transgressions against god or is someone else obligated to call the police?

Here's an important one because there's alot of football fans in America, touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

You know, when it comes to far right Christians and Homosexuality I gotta give a point to the racists of this world because at least they have the balls to admit that they hate the people that they do.

The "I find the action evil but not the people" is a cop out, a cowards way out, a smoke screen to hide their prejudice and their hatred which I don't hold against them in the sense that I just feel sorry for them, that growing up they were lead to believe these things about their fellow man.
Click to expand...

Well then you've got it wrong. Instead of making assumptions based on rhetoric from the opposition intended to create a divide you might instead talk to Christians. I'm pretty far right and a Christian and I don't hate homosexuals. In fact we had our wedding reception at the home of a gay couple who were our friends and one of them was my boss and gym partner. They are people just like the rest of us with different preferences that we perhaps can not understand, but this is far from hate. What you are suggestion is pure misguided bigotry, making an assumption based on something you do not understand. The left repeating it over and over will not make it true. Christians as a group do not hate homosexuals any more than those on the left believe in manditory abortion, a supposition pushed by SOME evangelicals. A majority of Christians denounce both hatred of homosexuals and the claim on forced abortion. It's all crap, and is designed to cause divide for the gain of those who would be elected. Don't buy it. You (and the rest of us) are being lied to.
 
American said:
He gets no props for showing up, WTF are you talking about? Everyone knew he'd show up. Romney showed up too, and didn't back down from Obama either, especially on Libya. Crowley ****ed that up big time, trying to come to Obama's rescue, and getting it wrong.
Click to expand...

Given Obama's performance during the first debate, when he DIDN'T show up, I didn't have any confidence that he'd show up for the second one...so, yes, he gets props from me for doing so.

There was more to the whole debate than that one topic. Romney could have done better in other areas and Obama, while he did show up, really did nothing more than repeat his campaign talking points.

Even if Crowley hadn't stuck her nose in the Libya thing, it still would have been a draw.
 
Rokkitsci said:
This is silly - Romney said nothing relative to SSM. He was referring to the lack of parental guidance that marriage and children are supposed to provide for the youth of a culture. What we have now is a wholesale assault on the family unit that has guided civilization for 10,000 years. The violence being discussed in the question over 'guns' is centered in inner city ghettos where an intact family with a strong father image is hard to find.

The number of 'families' represented by SSM is a drop in the ocean. And they have an even less effect on the subject of violence - with or without guns.

The problem with non-traditional family advocates is that they see every issue as a reason to interject their version of family onto everyone else. Mostly we don't care. Live with who you want to. Do whatever you want to do with them. Don't expect those who believer the traditional family is still the best model for advancing and protecting civilization to be losing sleep over the fact that you don't get all the attention you crave.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you think its an issue not getting worked up over or putting a bunch of attention into, now if we can agree that both types of families if thats how you want to see it should have equal rights then there won't be a problem.

Also " What we have now is a wholesale assault on the family unit that has guided civilization for 10,000 years" seriously? Do you know anything about history? Hell I'm sure you read the Bible at least, do we have family units like that anymore? No of course not, unless you can tell me to what clan of what tribe you belong to? Also please don't tell me your silly enough to think that all throughout history and even in the present day, that families units are the same across the world.

Lastly I wasn't talking to or about Romney, I was talking to the writer of the post I orginally quoted.
 
Jetboogieman said:
I call bull**** on this.

There is an acute, concetrated hatred towards homosexuals from far right Christians.

And this "hate the sin not the sinner" crap is such a cop out it boggles the imagination because when it comes to sin... if all sin is equal and it's all disainful then why are there so many double standards?

I'm thinking of selling my daughter into slavery as sanctioed by Exodus 21:7... what would a good price for her be?

Unfortunately I have to work on sundays... Exodus 35:2 clearly says I should be put to death now am I morally obligated to kill myself for my own transgressions against god or is someone else obligated to call the police?

Here's an important one because there's alot of football fans in America, touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

You know, when it comes to far right Christians and Homosexuality I gotta give a point to the racists of this world because at least they have the balls to admit that they hate the people that they do.

The "I find the action evil but not the people" is a cop out, a cowards way out, a smoke screen to hide their prejudice and their hatred which I don't hold against them in the sense that I just feel sorry for them, that growing up they were lead to believe these things about their fellow man.
Click to expand...

What you are doing here is called "slinging scripture". It is a deplorable tactic used by both sides of the religious argument. Nonbelievers use extreme and overly literal interpretation ( as you did here) to discount the relevance of all things biblical, believers us it to support their own views whether or not they are correct. I saw a Tea Party preacher go in to a long session of slinging scripture to "prove" that Jesus was not a socialist, which is only partially true. He in fact did not belong to any government ideology. He didn't need to. Government structures are of man, not God. The Bible is a long and complex series of documents and does not lend itself to sound bite interpretation. There are verses that refer to the evils of lenders and borrowing, clearly stating that indebtedness is slavery. Do you have any credit cards? How about a car payment or mortgage? Because if this tactic is to be used the majority of Americans live in slavery by their own choice.

There is an important point to Christian faith that is difficult for those who have yet to discover true faith (even Christians) that behaviors do not lead to faith, but that faith will lead to a change in behavior. The concept of "fake it until you make it" simply does not apply. You can study, you can pursue faith, you can even try to deny yourself in order to appear faithful, but when it happens there is an "ah ha" moments of understanding, and for myself and many others I've talked to it is nothing like what we expected it to be. I'll tell you a little secret. I used to believe that Christians were supposed to hate homosexuals too. The Catholic church told me they would all go to hell. Growing up attending a Catholic church I didn't even know what real faith was, although I thought I did. I did all the stuff we were supposed to do even though I hated it. When I found real faith 20 some years later I found that all those things I was taught were wrong, and that in real faith there is joy. We don't behave the way we do because we are told to, we do it because we understand why we should. And one thing we do is love those we don't understand or agree with. It's not up to us to change other people, that is between them and God.
 
Last edited:
Vallista said:
as if you were voting for him anyway.
Click to expand...

You know nothing about me or who I'm voting for, presumptuous one.

I'm glad Obama will revisit "Assault Weapon" Ban for good.
Click to expand...

May posterity forget you were my countryman.

What good did that ban do? What did it do at all but ban semi-autos that aren't assault rifles? What lives did it save given the incredible rarity of violent crime being committed with an assault rifle? Do you have a grasp, or even a concern for the second amendment?

Vallista said:
I'm sorry, there are many reason. Make an argument on why citizens should have access to military grade weapons for civilian use. If you can, then let me buy a nuke so I can defend myself.
Click to expand...

Name one. Also the assault weapons ban includes the civilian semi-automatic versions of "military grade" weapons. But if you need an argument as to why I shouldn't at least be as armed as the criminals who'd burst into my home, often in numbers greater than one, you seriously have not researched the subject of home invasions in America.
 
Last edited:
I see it as more of a disgusting, cleverly hidden behind a joke, call for murder.
 
Romney won with respect to the facts, but President Obama won in terms of avoiding the facts and perpetuating the myths.
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, I didn't like either of their answers on that one either....But as far as the way one goes about obtaining full auto's, or even weapons in the first place, I thought that Romney had within his long answer the best one line that summed it up...."Enforce those laws already on the books, we don't need more...."
Click to expand...

Is that what you learned from the "fast and furious" operation? That a law that makes you sign a paper that says you are buying the gun for yourself and then allows you to change your mind as you go out the door is enough to prevent strawman purchases?
 
iguanaman said:
Is that what you learned from the "fast and furious" operation? That a law that makes you sign a paper that says you are buying the gun for yourself and then allows you to change your mind as you go out the door is enough to prevent strawman purchases?
Click to expand...
Keeping in mind that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, how do you propose that the federal government prevent straw purchases?
 
Jetboogieman said:
I call bull**** on this.

There is an acute, concetrated hatred towards homosexuals from far right Christians.

And this "hate the sin not the sinner" crap is such a cop out it boggles the imagination because when it comes to sin... if all sin is equal and it's all disainful then why are there so many double standards?

I'm thinking of selling my daughter into slavery as sanctioed by Exodus 21:7... what would a good price for her be?

Unfortunately I have to work on sundays... Exodus 35:2 clearly says I should be put to death now am I morally obligated to kill myself for my own transgressions against god or is someone else obligated to call the police?

Here's an important one because there's alot of football fans in America, touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

You know, when it comes to far right Christians and Homosexuality I gotta give a point to the racists of this world because at least they have the balls to admit that they hate the people that they do.

The "I find the action evil but not the people" is a cop out, a cowards way out, a smoke screen to hide their prejudice and their hatred which I don't hold against them in the sense that I just feel sorry for them, that growing up they were lead to believe these things about their fellow man.
Click to expand...

Well, I call bull **** on your statement because there is no way in the world that you are capable of "knowing" that about enough people to place them all in a group together and make it sound like everyone who believes homosexuality is wrong, hates the ones who commit it. There are evil conservatives and evil liberals alike. You can't place the entire group into one category and pretend to know their true feelings. That would be humanly impossible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom