|
Dexo posted:Well that's because Joe Biden was figuratively debating with both hands tied behind his back in order to not come off as menacing against a woman who was way out of her depth. Even with both hands behind his back Biden destroyed Palin because she very poorly decided to attack him on 'not knowing what a single parent goes through' when Biden knows all too well what it's like to be a single parent after his first wife died in an auto accident. Palin should have been coached to never get near the topic of Biden's dead first wife but word salad have no brakes.
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:10 |
|
|
Nosfereefer posted:I wouldn't be so sure Hillary butchering Trump in a debate would mean anything. If memory serves, the people who would be voting for him will just ignore it or even make up a new reality where Trump did all the owning. If anything, the media turning on Trump will just confirm the ancient "liberal-media" meme that's always thrown around. Correct. Remember, Paul Ryan "won" this debate: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Correct. Remember, Paul Ryan "won" this debate: The only place I really remember pushing Ryan as winning that debate was fox news which was going to say that no matter what. Otherwise it was standard media horserace hogwash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Correct. Remember, Paul Ryan "won" this debate: Bullshit he did. Fox News and the usual right wing sources might have claimed that, but the overwhelming takeaway was that Ryan got beaten badly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
I'm still sad that "a bunch of stuff" never became a lasting meme.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The problem with this is the no-fly list is an extra-judicial process. If the president wants to put in an evidence based judicial process to remove constitutional rights, that's one thing; letting the president just take away constitutional rights by fiat, with no due process, is another. The broader point there is that there isn't the massive pushback against things like the no-fly list that there is when it comes to guns. Which ultimately is a negative thing, that there's a great deal of support for absolutist interpretations of the 2nd but not any of the other amendments. It says a lot about how a substantial portion of the population values things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Bullshit he did. Fox News and the usual right wing sources might have claimed that, but the overwhelming takeaway was that Ryan got beaten badly. Wrong. While CBS did, in fact, claim Biden won, CNN called it a tie, with Ryan ahead. The best you can say is that results were inconclusive, almost as if opinions were baked in and resembled the nearly tied opinion of the broader American public.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Wrong. While CBS did, in fact, claim Biden won, CNN called it a tie, with Ryan ahead. Those were viewer polls, not really relevant when discussing the news narrative. NY times - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/us/politics/biden-takes-off-gloves-in-vice-presidential-debate.html?_r=0 Slate - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/10/vp_debate_foreign_policy_joe_biden_mopped_the_floor_with_paul_ryan.html Plenty of places were saying that Biden kicked Ryan's rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The broader point there is that there isn't the massive pushback against things like the no-fly list that there is when it comes to guns. Which ultimately is a negative thing, that there's a great deal of support for absolutist interpretations of the 2nd but not any of the other amendments. It says a lot about how a substantial portion of the population values things. Absolutist? I appreciate wanting to slow or stop gun violence, i really do, i support expanding background checks wholeheartedly, but reading a legal document as it is written in black and white should not be called absolutist, no matter how sad you are about dead children. If you want to change the interpretation of this specific right you need to change the words, because "The rights of the people [...] shall not be infringed" is pretty drat cut and dry. "Shall not be" is a loaded phrase in legalese, it means things that 'Will not' or "should not" do not. Cut the crap and start work on repealing the second amendment, instead of this wishy washy "This is an old document" or "A milita doesnt mean "Armed civilian force" half-measure. MattD1zzl3 fucked around with this message at 16:25 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:[R]eading a legal document as it is written in black and white should not be called absolutist, no matter how sad you are about dead children. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of absolutist, dude.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Cut the crap and start work on repealing the second amendment, instead of this wishy washy "This is an old document" or "A milita doesnt mean "Armed civilian force" half-measure. I'm fer it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:"The rights of the people [...] shall not be infringed" I really like how you had to ellipsis out the stuff that might give any nuance to the 2nd amendment in your spiel about reading a document in black and white. "Well-regulated? What does that mean?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Those were viewer polls, not really relevant when discussing the news narrative. Media sources with partisan leanings declare their preferred candidate wins the debate. Every media source has partisan leanings. You saw more "Biden won" than "Ryan won" because you select sources you agree with. You're aware of poo poo like FOX because it's a big blaring bag of poo poo that can't be ignored if you pay attention to American Politics, but you're probably not going to bother paying attention to The Daily Caller, Breitbart, etc. Debates really don't matter at all in Presidential elections (and veep debates matter even less). Short of Trump literally making GBS threads himself on stage or Hillary going "I did Benghazi. Whatever you think Benghazi was, I totally did it," a Trump/Hillary debate isn't going to change anything. Won't stop a million breathless articles and news segments from being created, obviously, but there really are no "winners" or "losers" in debates when it comes to outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I really like how you had to ellipsis out the stuff that might give any nuance to the 2nd amendment in your spiel about reading a document in black and white. It's weird how that part never makes it onto bumper stickers. FairGame posted:Won't stop a million breathless articles and news segments from being created, obviously, but there really are no "winners" or "losers" in debates when it comes to outcomes. While I agree that winners are completely subjective based on who people support, you absolutely can lose a debate. Basically they aren't a discussion of policies as much as a test of if you can talk about issues for 20 minutes without completely torpedoing your campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Absolutist? I appreciate wanting to slow or stop gun violence, i really do, i support expanding background checks wholeheartedly, but reading a legal document as it is written in black and white should not be called absolutist, no matter how sad you are about dead children. If you want to change the interpretation of this specific right you need to change the words, because "The rights of the people [...] shall not be infringed" is pretty drat cut and dry. "Shall not be" is a loaded phrase in legalese, it means things that 'Will not' or "should not" do not. Actually, I'm in favor of a political compromise, like every single other country on Earth, where hunters and sport shooters can do what they do but the kind of people who write posts like these are disarmed, honky.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The broader point there is that there isn't the massive pushback against things like the no-fly list that there is when it comes to guns. Which ultimately is a negative thing, that there's a great deal of support for absolutist interpretations of the 2nd but not any of the other amendments. It says a lot about how a substantial portion of the population values things. If a couple more orders of magnitude of people were directly affected by the no-fly list and what bullshit it is, it would probably get a lot more pushback. As it is, most people don't meaningfully encounter it whether they know it's there or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282104-sanders-could-skydive-into-california-rally quote:Bernie Sanders could make quite the entrance at his rally Friday in Cloverdale, Calif.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
zoux posted:
Sure, you can lose. But the bar for losing is insanely low. Palin and Ryan (especially the former, who wasn't even forming coherent sentences to support nonsensical policies) both got worked, but neither of them "lost" in any meaningful sense. And if Sarah Palin 2008 "credibly" talked about issues for a while, it'd literally take a complete pants-making GBS threads meltdown to get below that bar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:If a couple more orders of magnitude of people were directly affected by the no-fly list and what bullshit it is, it would probably get a lot more pushback. As it is, most people don't meaningfully encounter it whether they know it's there or not. People are directly affected by the TSA bureaucracy which is necessary to support the no-fly list, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I really like how you had to ellipsis out the stuff that might give any nuance to the 2nd amendment in your spiel about reading a document in black and white. quote:reg·u·late Sounds like something the government does now and has done for centuries. "No you cant have a cannon, No you cant have a fighter jet, no you cant have a guided missile, by "arms" we assume they meant personal weapons that you can carry". So this could be re-worded in more modern language as "The right of the people to own guns must be supervised and regulated by the government (at least 4 government agencies do this now), but can never be taken away while this amendment is a thing", right? Thats not too absolutist?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
"Ahem, Webster's dictionary defines liberty as," began the extremely good and smart political thinker.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Sounds like something the government does now and has done for centuries. "No you cant have a cannon, No you cant have a fighter jet, no you cant have a guided missile, by "arms" we assume they meant personal weapons that you can carry". So this could be re-worded in more modern language as "The right of the people to own guns must be supervised and regulated by the government (it is), but can never be taken away while this amendment is a thing", right? Thats not too absolutist? Okay, fine, people can own air-guns and black-powder arquebuses, then. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Holy poo poo. Not as good as arriving with a twirl in a backless dress, but still a good way to make a splash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
So do we have any hard data on whether debate gaffes and the like have affects on polling or not? And not polling on who 'won' the debate, polling that shows whether support for candidates has changed in the aftermath of a debate?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
Xanderkish posted:So do we have any hard data on whether debate gaffes and the like have affects on polling or not? And not polling on who 'won' the debate, polling that shows whether support for candidates has changed in the aftermath of a debate? I can think of three, "There you go again", "Read my lips" and, uh, uhm...... Dick Morris is finally home everyone. https://twitter.com/aterkel/status/738757289142816768
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
If Hillary really want the Bernie base why not just have him as VP? Or Biden again. Forever Biden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
zoux posted:I can think of three, "There you go again", "Read my lips" and, uh, uhm...... Don't forget "proceed governor"
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:"The rights of the people [...] shall not be infringed" I prefer to read it as "[...] [...] [...]" Much more concise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Okay, fine, people can own air-guns and black-powder arquebuses, then. "Arabs should lose rights first" --Effectronica
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:"Arabs should lose rights first" --Effectronica If people don't want lawyering, they shouldn't lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Arrgytehpirate posted:If Hillary really want the Bernie base why not just have him as VP? Or Biden again. Forever Biden. Bernie isn't a good fit as Hillary's VP, and I doubt that he would agree to it. And Biden's ready to retire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
smg77 posted:I don't understand why you guys keep talking about all these random VP picks. Joe Biden is the vice president. Turns out both Hillary and Trump announce Biden as their running mate. Hypothetical question, cuz I know it is a thing that will never happen, but is it possible for two candidates to pick the same running mate? hangedman1984 fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Holy poo poo. This reeks of desperation, holy gently caress. It's not a bad idea, it'll get some news and cool points, but 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:I prefer to read it as "[...] [...] [...]" 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
zoux posted:I can think of three, "There you go again", "Read my lips" and, uh, uhm...... For some reason, I feel that the Enquirer got the poo poo end of the stick on that deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Boon posted:This reeks of desperation, holy gently caress. I'd switch my vote in the general if he does it while eating a burrito and taking a selfie. Bonus points if you get this reference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Arrgytehpirate posted:If Hillary really want the Bernie base why not just have him as VP? Or Biden again. Forever Biden. It's funny because Biden is basically everything people hate about Clinton except a man. Biden has even been caught lying multiple times, is tough on crime, and in no meaningful way is left of Obama.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:It's funny because Biden is basically everything people hate about Clinton except a man. Biden has even been caught lying multiple times, is tough on crime, and in no meaningful way is left of Obama. It's amazing that being a male and not being the focus of a 20+ year hit job by the Right, allows you more leeway and ability to have fun and joke around with the media.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:"The rights of the people [...] shall not be infringed" First Amendment posted:Congress shall make no law respecting [...] the freedom [...] of the people Oh poo poo, the Bill of Rights mandates 1984 and we've been reading it wrong all this time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:10 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:It's funny because Biden is basically everything people hate about Clinton except a man. Biden has even been caught lying multiple times, is tough on crime, and in no meaningful way is left of Obama. Biden is the most likable person in Washington, and possibly the most likable person on the East Coast. Being a genial, affable dude who knows how to talk to people counts for an awful lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:07
|
|