OhIsee.Then
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 1,581
- Reaction score
- 277
- Location
- MI and AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Oh. What should he be selling kids, Koolaid?Big Bird needs to get a job and stop relying on the taxpayers to pay his way.
Its universally agreed mitt romney won...because the moderator couldnt control him
Only a rubber stamp could say that Obama won that debate.
Honestly last time around I thought he wiped the floor with Palin, but obviously that's not saying much. Ryan will indeed be a much more formidable opponent even if I think half of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is complete BS.
Its universally agreed mitt romney won...because the moderator couldnt control him
Whereas everything Biden says is pure gold.
Sorry dude, anyone who thinks Joe Biden is the height of intelligent speech has no standing to criticize Palin. Lol.
Whereas everything Biden says is pure gold.
Sorry dude, anyone who thinks Joe Biden is the height of intelligent speech has no standing to criticize Palin. Lol.
Confirmation bias, I suppose, but I thought Romney came across as sneering and arrogant and disrespectful.
Obama was flat, but I thought he made no offensive remarks.
Obama won.
Sure and like I said, if people are judging it by looks alone, then they are judging them the wrong way. I judge them differently. /shrug
Who "won" a presidential debate should be judged based on the effect that it has on the majority of voters, not on the effect it has on you, the individual.
The majority of voters use superficial measures to decide who won. Ergo, the person who does best in the superficial sense wins the debate. If voters were truly informed on the issues, there would only have been a loser from the debate, and that loser would be the American people.
Since the American people are content with nonsense, however, we are getting what we (collectively) deserve.
To me Romney came across as aggressive without being offensive, which is probably the best outcome for him.
This, pretty much. Debates are won and lost on style, less substance.
only nixon has defied that inclinationelections are won and lost on style, less substance
changed to
only nixon has defied that inclination
Who "won" a presidential debate should be judged based on the effect that it has on the majority of voters, not on the effect it has on you, the individual.
The majority of voters use superficial measures to decide who won. Ergo, the person who does best in the superficial sense wins the debate. If voters were truly informed on the issues, there would only have been a loser from the debate, and that loser would be the American people.
Since the American people are content with nonsense, however, we are getting what we (collectively) deserve.
I think both our confirmation biases are biased, StillBallin. I doubt these debates affect as many as 1% of the vote, though they are interesting.
I agree with your second statement. But on the contrary, Romney performed a hell of a lot better than I thought he would. Obama didn't do poorly, but seemed too laid back and on the defensive. As much as I think that Romney is full of ****, I give credit where it's due - he had a solid stage performance.
no. romney won. because Obama did not show up
the moderator was excellent
he let them have at each other
hell, he even allowed Obama to have four more minutes of debate time than romney
i especially like that he repeatedly narrowed the topics, to keep both from going off on tangents
To me Romney came across as aggressive without being offensive, which is probably the best outcome for him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?