The Debates!

[StrangeSox]

@BlG_SEAN: Mitt Romneys five point plan 1. To the left 2. Take it back now y'all 3. Right foot let's stomp 4. Left foot let's stomp 5. Cha Cha now yall

I have my own.

 

Step 1: cut a hole in the box

[Jenksismyhero]

I have my own.

 

Step 1: cut a hole in the box

 

[Rex Kickass]

Obama's kicking his ass.

 

Romney did not help himself by basically agreeing with the President on every foreign policy.

 

It was basically - I would do everything that Obama did, but Obama is terrible.

[BigSqwert]

Let's just say that Romney didn't come off as very Presidential.

[Jake]

I will give Romney to credit for one thing: even when he's getting beat, he never shows it in his demeanor. Despite literally offering no substance, he remained confident and calculated...so as to give the illusion that he was talking substantively.

 

When it comes to foreign policy, especially in this age, it is just a tremendous advantage to have been President already. There's no other way to prepare or even know exactly what's going on.

[StrangeSox]

well he could have started with basic geography of the region:

 

 

Iran's potential impact on the Strait of Hormuz, where a good chunk of the world's oil supply floats through, is a serious concern for any policy towards Iran.

[StrangeSox]

I appreciate that the Obama campaign has its own lulz crew:

 

http://cavalrymenforromney.com/

[Y2HH]

[rant]

 

Yesterdays waste of time debate highlights exactly what is wrong with everything political in this country, from the politicians themselves to the media, to the people, and in doing that, highlights why we are where we are as a nation. A nation of consumers, for consumers, by consumers. Beg, borrow, and declare bankruptcy...and then do it all over again.

 

Nobody takes anything seriously anymore. Not even the politicians we elect. It's a joke to them, and while we laugh along with them at home, or on blogs, or Twitter, or Facebook, or by the water cooler, the reality is they're not laughing with us, they're laughing at us. After all, they're all millionaires we keep electing to fix the problems that affect the middle class/poor. Only they never fix them. But all the while they never fix them, this much is true: Every. Last. One. Of. Them. Gets. Richer.

 

All these debates were to 99.999999999998% of the people/media -- including most of us here -- were reality TV events to laugh at.

 

Point 1) What do we all talk about from the first debate? Big Bird.

Point 2) What do we all talk about from the second debate? Binders.

Point 3) What will do we all talk about from the third debate? Bayonets.

 

In other words, 99.9999999998% of rest of the debates are forgotten or outright dismissed, because these three key points are all that matter...and they're all anyone talks about. Because, I don't know, they funny? But if you actually stop to think about it for a second, they're not funny...they're sad. It's sad we have politicians on a pedestal and these are the types of things that come out of their mouths. And we allow it.

 

People making domain names for bayonets, binders, big bird, trend similar hashtags on the Twitterverse, etc...it's so honestly and profoundly sad to me that we all watch our nation crumble around us and all we can do is laugh at the morons that are hammering at the foundation with sledgehammers.

[southsider2k5]

[rant]

 

Yesterdays waste of time debate highlights exactly what is wrong with everything political in this country, from the politicians themselves to the media, to the people, and in doing that, highlights why we are where we are as a nation. A nation of consumers, for consumers, by consumers. Beg, borrow, and declare bankruptcy...and then do it all over again.

 

Nobody takes anything seriously anymore. Not even the politicians we elect. It's a joke to them, and while we laugh along with them at home, or on blogs, or Twitter, or Facebook, or by the water cooler, the reality is they're not laughing with us, they're laughing at us. After all, they're all millionaires we keep electing to fix the problems that affect the middle class/poor. Only they never fix them. But all the while they never fix them, this much is true: Every. Last. One. Of. Them. Gets. Richer.

 

All these debates were to 99.999999999998% of the people/media -- including most of us here -- were reality TV events to laugh at.

 

Point 1) What do we all talk about from the first debate? Big Bird.

Point 2) What do we all talk about from the second debate? Binders.

Point 3) What will do we all talk about from the third debate? Bayonets.

 

In other words, 99.9999999998% of rest of the debates are forgotten or outright dismissed, because these three key points are all that matter...and they're all anyone talks about. Because, I don't know, they funny? But if you actually stop to think about it for a second, they're not funny...they're sad. It's sad we have politicians on a pedestal and these are the types of things that come out of their mouths. And we allow it.

 

People making domain names for bayonets, binders, big bird, trend similar hashtags on the Twitterverse, etc...it's so honestly and profoundly sad to me that we all watch our nation crumble around us and all we can do is laugh at the morons that are hammering at the foundation with sledgehammers.

 

This is probably the best post in the history of filibuster. This board should be closed and every post that comes after it should be deleted, beginning with this one. I am also stealing this post for facebook.

[StrangeSox]

This is probably the best post in the history of filibuster. This board should be closed and every post that comes after it should be deleted, beginning with this one.

 

seconded

 

edit: quick question, why is the buster one of the only subforums that doesn't ever delete anything? I went looking for an older thread on camping/hiking in SLaM and found it only went back several weeks.

Edited October 23, 2012 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

I'll just say that people were talking about Big Bird because that's the only policy specific Romney has actually offered, and it was a dumb one. These debates are largely devoid of substance anyway.

 

Additionally, ridicule and satire have long been powerful political and social tools, and people rushing out to make tumblrs and facebook groups and whatnot shows an active and engaged citizenry.

[Y2HH]

I'll just say that people were talking about Big Bird because that's the only policy specific Romney has actually offered, and it was a dumb one. These debates are largely devoid of substance anyway.

 

Additionally, ridicule and satire have long been powerful political and social tools, and people rushing out to make tumblrs and facebook groups and whatnot shows an active and engaged citizenry.

 

They're not active and engaged for the right reasons. They're not engaged because they want to have civil political discourse, they engaged because they want people to look at them.

 

They want "likes" or "retweets", or hastags used by people that links credit back to them...but they don't actually care about the substance of the matters at hand.

 

...and there's a difference.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

I guess I never expect anything substantive out of these debates to begin with. They're purely entertainment and I actually find it a little depressing that people can be swayed so heavily by 90 minutes instead of what these two candidates have said and done over the past 18+ months.

 

People have always engaged in ridicule and political discourse has rarely been civil.

[southsider2k5]

seconded

 

edit: quick question, why is the buster one of the only subforums that doesn't ever delete anything? I went looking for an older thread on camping/hiking in SLaM and found it only went back several weeks.

 

Nothing is deleted. At the very bottom of the page each of the forums has a box that shows how long a board goes back for. The busier boards are shorter (PHT only shows back 30 days for example), and some of the quieter ones are longer. You can toggle that box and change how far back you want to view, including all threads.

[Y2HH]

I guess I never expect anything substantive out of these debates to begin with. They're purely entertainment and I actually find it a little depressing that people can be swayed so heavily by 90 minutes instead of what these two candidates have said and done over the past 18+ months.

 

People have always engaged in ridicule and political discourse has rarely been civil.

 

...and that was the basic point in that rant. They're not supposed to be entertainment. We've simply accepted them as such. Like I said, while we laugh with them, they're laughing at us. Because we allow it.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

Well like I said, we have literally years worth of their campaigning now and 24/7 access to their campaign and surrogates' websites. A grand total of 4-1/2 hours weeks from the election really shouldn't matter much given the amount of information out there.

[GoSox05]

Last night wasn't a debate. It was two guy spending 90 minutes agreeing with each other.

 

 

The only thing they debated was who loved Israel more and who would impose the most awesome sanctions against Iran.

 

 

 

[Y2HH]

Well like I said, we have literally years worth of their campaigning now and 24/7 access to their campaign and surrogates' websites. A grand total of 4-1/2 hours weeks from the election really shouldn't matter much given the amount of information out there.

 

The vast majority of voters don't vote based on information, they vote based which party they arbitrarily relate themselves too...in many regards it's inherited.

 

Look at Bridgeport (Chicago), where I grew up. Primarily blue collar democratic...and *still* surprisingly racist/bigoted (something people generally relate to republicans). And most kids that grew up there? Democratic, because their parents were.

[Rex Kickass]

[rant]

 

Yesterdays waste of time debate highlights exactly what is wrong with everything political in this country, from the politicians themselves to the media, to the people, and in doing that, highlights why we are where we are as a nation. A nation of consumers, for consumers, by consumers. Beg, borrow, and declare bankruptcy...and then do it all over again.

 

Nobody takes anything seriously anymore. Not even the politicians we elect. It's a joke to them, and while we laugh along with them at home, or on blogs, or Twitter, or Facebook, or by the water cooler, the reality is they're not laughing with us, they're laughing at us. After all, they're all millionaires we keep electing to fix the problems that affect the middle class/poor. Only they never fix them. But all the while they never fix them, this much is true: Every. Last. One. Of. Them. Gets. Richer.

 

All these debates were to 99.999999999998% of the people/media -- including most of us here -- were reality TV events to laugh at.

 

Point 1) What do we all talk about from the first debate? Big Bird.

Point 2) What do we all talk about from the second debate? Binders.

Point 3) What will do we all talk about from the third debate? Bayonets.

 

In other words, 99.9999999998% of rest of the debates are forgotten or outright dismissed, because these three key points are all that matter...and they're all anyone talks about. Because, I don't know, they funny? But if you actually stop to think about it for a second, they're not funny...they're sad. It's sad we have politicians on a pedestal and these are the types of things that come out of their mouths. And we allow it.

 

People making domain names for bayonets, binders, big bird, trend similar hashtags on the Twitterverse, etc...it's so honestly and profoundly sad to me that we all watch our nation crumble around us and all we can do is laugh at the morons that are hammering at the foundation with sledgehammers.

 

I'm sorry but this is a total crock of bulls***. There actually was some definite substantive things being discussed in that debate, and I think it gave people who paid attention a good idea about the differences between the two candidates. The foreign policy debate is likely to be the most substantial in all the debates on a general sense, because there is a less of an opportunity for posturing.

 

What does anyone remember from the 80 debates: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

What does anyone remember from the 84 debates: "My candidate's youth and inexperience"

What does anyone remember from the 88 debates: "You are no Jack Kennedy"

 

We remember one liners because they are one liners, and just because we remember a specific quote, it doesn't mean that people who watch debates don't take away things of value, or even a general sense of where the candidates stand.

 

The problem isn't the debates, its the fact that over the last twenty plus years that the reporting has become all about the horserace and not about the policy differences themselves. How do we fix it? Start consuming the media that focuses on the substance and not the style.

[Y2HH]

I'm sorry but this is a total crock of bulls***. There actually was some definite substantive things being discussed in that debate, and I think it gave people who paid attention a good idea about the differences between the two candidates. The foreign policy debate is likely to be the most substantial in all the debates on a general sense, because there is a less of an opportunity for posturing.

 

What does anyone remember from the 80 debates: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

What does anyone remember from the 84 debates: "My candidate's youth and inexperience"

What does anyone remember from the 88 debates: "You are no Jack Kennedy"

 

We remember one liners because they are one liners, and just because we remember a specific quote, it doesn't mean that people who watch debates don't take away things of value, or even a general sense of where the candidates stand.

 

The problem isn't the debates, its the fact that over the last twenty plus years that the reporting has become all about the horserace and not about the policy differences themselves. How do we fix it? Start consuming the media that focuses on the substance and not the style.

 

Sorry we disagree that it's a crock of bulls***.

 

But, we agree on the bolded part -- which is exactly WHY my post isn't bulls***, but truth. There IS substantive issues to discuss from these debates, and my entire point of that post was simple: nobody is f***ing discussing them, because they're too busy discussing Big Bird, etc.

 

So, while trying to dismiss my post as bulls***, you actually proved it was true.

[southsider2k5]

I'm sorry but this is a total crock of bulls***. There actually was some definite substantive things being discussed in that debate, and I think it gave people who paid attention a good idea about the differences between the two candidates. The foreign policy debate is likely to be the most substantial in all the debates on a general sense, because there is a less of an opportunity for posturing.

 

What does anyone remember from the 80 debates: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

What does anyone remember from the 84 debates: "My candidate's youth and inexperience"

What does anyone remember from the 88 debates: "You are no Jack Kennedy"

We remember one liners because they are one liners, and just because we remember a specific quote, it doesn't mean that people who watch debates don't take away things of value, or even a general sense of where the candidates stand.

 

The problem isn't the debates, its the fact that over the last twenty plus years that the reporting has become all about the horserace and not about the policy differences themselves. How do we fix it? Start consuming the media that focuses on the substance and not the style.

 

Of those three, only the 88 one fits in the pattern of what we got this year. I don't see how Binders compares to either experience, or are you better than foru years ago. Those are real election issues. Bayonets are not.

[Jenksismyhero]

Well like I said, we have literally years worth of their campaigning now and 24/7 access to their campaign and surrogates' websites. A grand total of 4-1/2 hours weeks from the election really shouldn't matter much given the amount of information out there.

 

But this is the only opportunity to see them engage with each other, that's the key. You want to see how they compare on the same stage. Yes, you shouldn't ignore the prior year or 2, but I think there's some value there.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Sorry we disagree that it's a crock of bulls***.

 

But, we agree on the bolded part -- which is exactly WHY my post isn't bulls***, but truth. There IS substantive issues to discuss from these debates, and my entire point of that post was simple: nobody is f***ing discussing them, because they're too busy discussing Big Bird, etc.

 

So, while trying to dismiss my post as bulls***, you actually proved it was true.

 

There is substantive criticism behind mocking Mitt's Big Bird and binders and "we have less ships than 1916!"

[southsider2k5]

Sorry we disagree that it's a crock of bulls***.

 

But, we agree on the bolded part -- which is exactly WHY my post isn't bulls***, but truth. There IS substantive issues to discuss from these debates, and my entire point of that post was simple: nobody is f***ing discussing them, because they're too busy discussing Big Bird, etc.

 

So, while trying to dismiss my post as bulls***, you actually proved it was true.

 

I tuned in to about 30 seconds of the second debate, and caught Romney talking about workforce participation rates in 2008 vs 2012, which was a great point. If we had the same participation rates now, the unemployment rate would be 10.7% instead of 7.8. Did that ever come up again? BINDERS!!!!

[StrangeSox]

But this is the only opportunity to see them engage with each other, that's the key. You want to see how they compare on the same stage. Yes, you shouldn't ignore the prior year or 2, but I think there's some value there.

 

Why should I really care how they engage with each other? I've enjoyed the entertainment of having Mitt's bulls*** called out to his face, but I certainly didn't need that to decide what their policies are and whether I support them or not. I gain far more information from endless hours of pointless interneting than from watching the debates.