• 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.

Who won the Veep Debate tonight? [W:47]

Who won? Vote now!


  • Total voters
    112
I'll most likely be voting for the Romney/Ryan ticket in November, and I thought Biden massacred Paul Ryan. I was really surprised (pleasantly so) to see how many people did not seem to see it this way, and how the narrative of this debate did not turn into an outright victory for Biden. I'm still scratching my head on it to be quite honest.

Yeah, I'm obviously an Obama supporter, but I was surprised when the talking heads came on and essentially called it a draw.
 
Wow... talk about no integrity with yourself... I mean to the point where you even cut your own quote to act igonrant of your own self. "consider the source"... that addressed me directly. That's what you are ignoring. And being that you intentionally cut that from your quote... that's where you lack any integrity.

Since you don't seem to have a basic understanding of what was said, the first and second comments stood on their own. You can not combine them to say I said YOU were ignorant, unless you just make stuff up, which clearly is what you want to do. But the irony of you complaining about a 'personal attack', when you have attacked just about everyone that does not politically agree with you is very much noted. Thanks for calling yourself out on that one.
 
Yeah, I'm obviously an Obama supporter, but I was surprised when the talking heads came on and essentially called it a draw.

I'm about sick of the media being bullied by the GOP into fearing to report objectively causing them to pre-filter everything out of fear from being accused of being bias. Cowards.
 
Yeah, I'm obviously an Obama supporter, but I was surprised when the talking heads came on and essentially called it a draw.

I'm guessing you aren't going to ask the question about what lies Obama and his administration have told?

Figures... go collect that paycheck.
 
Paul Ryan Pressed For Details On Tax Plan During Debate (VIDEO)

Perhaps your definition of "across the board" is different than mine.

This is just stupid. You make 100k and are paying 30k in taxes based on a 30% rate. It then changes to you pay 30k based on a 20k poll tax and a 10% rate. Are you telling me that in your universe that counts as a "tax cut" "paid for" by the poll tax on the 100k income earner?

The democrat framing of this issue has everything to do with demagoguery and nothing to do with reality.
 
Yeah, I'm obviously an Obama supporter, but I was surprised when the talking heads came on and essentially called it a draw.

So did the polls. It isn't a talking heads issue.
 
Stating things that aren't true = lies ... at least when you know or should know that the statements aren't true.

Like "It's not a tax" and "I'll close GITMO in a year." Those kind of things that aren't true?
 
First off, the $716 Billion.

That amount -- $716 billion -- refers to Obamacare’s reductions in Medicare spending over 10 years, primarily paid to insurers and hospitals. But the statement gives the impression that the law takes money already allocated to Medicare away from current recipients. It does not.

No more so than the Feds give "Big oil" money, and yet the left insist on calling it a subsidy. To me cutting funding is more "taking" than a tax break is a "subsidy". :shrug:
 
Biden will have one in the minds of the Democratic Faithful.


It will be a short term draw in the minds of most Independents. But the more air time and discussion it gets, the more Biden's behavior will turn off independents. Independents are where they are because they generally don't like partisianship.


Ryan won in the minds of the Anyone-but-Obama segment.


But in the long run election outcome picture, it was a clear win for Romney, in that Biden's insulting behavior will do more to motivate the Republican vote, than the boost given to the Democratic Vote.


The 2012 Election is and has been for months, all about Base Turnout.


-
 
Honestly, I don't know if I'm just too tired for this or what.... I thought this debate was boring and they both sucked equally.

Overall both sides were embarrassing. I don't think there was quite a "winner". Biden maybe smells the least worse, but that's not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Ryan lied a lot, tried to cover up a lot of motivation, Biden pointed out correctly the obstructionist nature Ryan and the Republicans in general have taken. But he wasn't necessarily a shining example of intellectual debate.
 
I'm guessing you aren't going to ask the question about what lies Obama and his administration have told?

Figures... go collect that paycheck.

Nice drive-by hacking! :lamo
 
Nice drive-by hacking! :lamo

You are the one that suggested 'politicians' lie, so I'm asking you to provide examples of lies from the people you support. It's really quite an easy request.

Let's see if you are capable of intellectual honesty..
 
In all fairness, AdamT tends to meet snark with snark...I have found as of recent times that when I open a true dialogue he tends to have a true conversation. Heck recently I even got heard him say that I was right, and he was mistaken in the same post....:shrug:

PS. Sorry if that steps on your liberal creds Adam....heh, heh...
 
You are the one that suggested 'politicians' lie, so I'm asking you to provide examples of lies from the people you support. It's really quite an easy request.

Let's see if you are capable of intellectual honesty..

In the post you responded to I was talking about the media reaction to the debate. It had nothing to do with lying. :roll:
 
He didn't lie. He said that they initially reported that it was related to the video because that's what the early intelligence reports said, and that is true. Rice was also relying on those intel reports.

If that's true, he's inept.

April 6: IED thrown over the fence of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

April 11: Gun battle erupts between armed groups two-and-a-half miles from the U.S. Consulate, including rocket-propelled grenades.

April 27: Two South African contractors are kidnapped by armed men, released unharmed.

May 1: Deputy Commander of U.S. Embassy Tripoli’s Local Guard Force is carjacked, beaten, and detained by armed youth.

May 1: British Embassy in Tripoli is attacked by a violent mob and set on fire. Other NATO embassies attacked as well.

May 3: The State Department declines a request from personnel concerned about security at the U.S. Embassy in Libya for a DC-3 plane to take them around the country.

May 22: Two rocket-propelled grenades are fired at the Benghazi office of the International Committee of the Red Cross, less than 1 mile from the U.S. Consulate.

June 6: A large IED destroys part of the security perimeter of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Creates hole “big enough for 40 men to go through.”

June 10: A car carrying the British ambassador is attacked in Tripoli. Two bodyguards injured.

Late June: The building of the International Red Cross attacked again and closed down, leaving the U.S. flag as the only international one still flying in Benghazi, an obvious target.

August 6: Armed assailants carjack a vehicle with diplomatic plates operated by U.S. personnel.

September 8: A local security officer in Benghazi warns American officials about deteriorating security.

September 11: Protesters attack the U.S. Cairo embassy. U.S. Embassy releases statement and tweets sympathizing with Muslim protesters/attackers.

September 11: U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is attacked, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans are killed.

September 12: Secretary Clinton and President Obama issue statements condemning both the video and the attacks.

September 12: U.S. intelligence agencies have enough evidence to conclude a terrorist attack was involved.

September 13: Press Secretary Jay Carney condemns video and violence at a news conference.

September 14: Carney denies Administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

September 14: The bodies of slain Americans return to Andrews Air Force Base. President Obama again blames the YouTube video.

September 16: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appears on Sunday talk shows and says the attacks were provoked by the video, exclusively.

September 16: Libyan President Mohamed Magarief says, “no doubt that this [attack] was preplanned, predetermined.”

September 17: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refuses to call attacks an act of terror.

September 19: CNN reports having found Ambassador Stevens’s diary, which indicates concern about security threats in Benghazi.

September 19: Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Matthew Olsen tells Congress the attack in Libya was “terrorism.”

September 20: Carney tries to back up Olsen, says it was “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

September 20: Obama refuses to call attack terrorism, citing insufficient information.

September 21: Secretary of State Clinton, at meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister, says, “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

September 25: On ABC’s “The View,” Obama says, “we don’t have all of the information yet so we are still gathering.”

September 25: To the U.N. assembly, Obama blames “A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”

September 26: Libya’s Magarief on the “Today” show says, “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens.”

September 26: Published reports show U.S. Intel agencies and the Obama Administration knew within 24 hours that al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist were involved.

September 27: Innocence of Muslims filmmaker Mark Basseley Youseff (aka Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is arrested and denied bail on the charges of “probation violation.”

September 28: Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr., issues a statement backing the Obama Administration’s changing story about the Libyan attack. Says facts are evolving.

October 2: Carney declines to comment on reported requests from diplomats in Libya for additional security, citing the State Department’s internal investigation.
 
If the President was unaware of the security situation in a country who's government we had just recently been instrumental in overthrowing, then he surely is paying ZERO attention to intelligence.
 
Need I go to Rice's testimony, where she stated that she was going entirely on the intelligence reports that had been provided to her?

Adam, who do our intelligence services work for? Do they work for the commander in chief? Does the buck stop at the CIC? If our intelligence services suck, then so does obama.
 
Adam, who do our intelligence services work for? Do they work for the commander in chief? Does the buck stop at the CIC? If our intelligence services suck, then so does obama.

Wow. I'm absolutely sure there was just as much CiC intel responsibility concern from you somewhere around 9/12/2001.
 
Adam, who do our intelligence services work for? Do they work for the commander in chief? Does the buck stop at the CIC? If our intelligence services suck, then so does obama.

He is ultimately responsible for them, that is true. But again -- let's get real. No president directly oversees regional intelligence gathering services.

The attacks on Obama have just become Kafkaesque.
 
Wow. I'm absolutely sure there was just as much CiC intel responsibility concern from you somewhere around 9/12/2001.

you and adam need to get your stories staight. when 9/11 hit, Bush has been in office for 8 months, the intel breakdowns were the results of Clinton's actions to castrate our intelligence people and keep the CIA and FBI from sharing information. But, having said that, it happened on Bush's watch and its ultimately on him. He had 8 months to fix the mess but did not do it.
 
He is ultimately responsible for them, that is true. But again -- let's get real. No president directly oversees regional intelligence gathering services.

The attacks on Obama have just become Kafkaesque.

It happened on his watch, its on him. Thats the way life works. Did he fire anyone for screwing up the intel? Did he fire Hillary?
 
What debate were you watching? Ryan came off professional? Wow.....he had a deer in headlights look throughout the whole debate. Biden made him look like an incompetent student.

Biden acted like a 3 yr old. One would think we would have someone more presidential for VP.
 
Biden did a little better. More importantly is it disgusts me how much Ryan lied.

And it doesn't disgust you that the VP of the US doesn't even understand how to act professional? You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a liar.
 
And it doesn't disgust you that the VP of the US doesn't even understand how to act professional? You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a liar.

I didn't find it unprofessional, rather he found Ryan's lies laughable. Which they were.
 
Back
Top Bottom