Skip to main content

View Diary: Grow Up Already: You Can't "Win" A Debate By Lying (328 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They don't care to know what we know. If they (7+ / 0-)

    did they would pay more attention, they don't.  The fact they don't is what the R's count on.  Hell, if our electorate was even moderately informed, Fox News would not be possible.

    •  Evidently we don't care to know what we know. (9+ / 0-)

      Or we wouldn't be so pusillanimous about noting it even in discussions amongst ourselves, let alone with people who aren't clued-in.

      And who exactly is it that's supposed to be informing all these other people?  From what I'm hearing around here, we only get our information from the same crap media they do, just under different packing, and think too little of our own innate humanity and intelligence to passionately share our thoughts in mixed company if they differ substantially from some media narrative being dittoed around the cocktail circuit.

      Everything there is to know about the GOP: They're the Bad Guys.

      by Troubadour on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 05:09:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  OK, how's this... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kombema, Vicky

        Romney won the 'presidential personage' aspect of the debate, while Obama clearly won the 'facts and truth' aspect of the debate.

        Romney lied his ass off, but looked quite confident doing it. While Obama struggled to constantly set the record and facts straight.

        But you know what they say about debates, they're 85% perception. That's just the fact of it.

        Fortunately the only thing from the debate that seems to be resonating and lasting is the Big Bird comment. Romney's an insensitive fuckup that can't keep his big mouth shut and his cruel intentions hidden.

        Vote Tea Party Taliban! Bring the Burqa to America.

        by Pescadero Bill on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 07:07:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Presidential? (11+ / 0-)

          Bullying the moderator is Presidential? Telling people you want to fire Big Bird (and the moderator) is Presidential? Smirking? Patronizing? Pandering? Uhhhh....

          Not in my yard. The only person in that debate I saw as Presidential was... the PRESIDENT.

          "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

          by Diogenes2008 on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 07:36:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Dubya proved that many like the cowboy macho (0+ / 0-)

            crap, and see it as "presidential." Glad that you or I don't. But yes, sadly, that resonates with some people. Obama did not have to lie or bully, but he needed to look more confident and assertive and yet he didn't.

            But with any luck, he knows he blew it and will not let it happen again. It was a setback, but it doesn't need to be a big one (and thank the gods for the jobs report).

            "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

            by Kombema on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 10:29:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Dubya proved that pundits (0+ / 0-)

              will say anything to rationalize the existence of power in terms they find more palatable than "His father had five Supreme Court Justices in his pocket, and he terrorized people with terror alerts."

              Everything there is to know about the GOP: They're the Bad Guys.

              by Troubadour on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 04:33:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  ^^^^^^^^^^ (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Troubadour, Diogenes2008

            what he said!!

        •  So the resonating perception is Romney's (5+ / 0-)

          insensitive fuckup.  How is that winning?  It can't be erased.  

          By the way, which doctor do you want.  Jonas Salk or Marcus Welby.

          Hey Ryan, where you goin' with that trans-vaginal probe in your hand

          by 88kathy on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 08:01:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "Facts and truth aspect"? ASPECT? (0+ / 0-)

          Look, I'm beginning to suspect that some of us are just hopelessly enthralled in some Orwellian mind-web of pundit delusions, and it's becoming frustrating trying to argue with this kind of circular-logic nihilism.  

          If Mitt Romney hadn't even shown up for the debate and the media still reported he won, praising his "manly absence," you would be saying he won on the "having better things to do" aspect of the debate but lost on the "physical presence" aspect of the debate.  

          There is no "facts and truth aspect" - THAT IS THE DEBATE.  Everything else are simply flaws in how people judge debates, and when you SEE those flaws and openly acknowledge them, you don't get to hide from your own knowledge by pretending that what really matters is what the most ignorant and uninformed person thinks.

          If 65% of people tell you dog shit tastes like the best meal they've ever had, do you just keep chewing away and saying "Gosh, I sure wish this meal weren't so good so I could stop eating it," or do you spit it out and call it shit?

          Everything there is to know about the GOP: They're the Bad Guys.

          by Troubadour on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 04:31:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site