View Full Version : Debate Predictions
bigshotprof
09-22-2008, 02:37 PM
The first debate is Friday night. In a staggeringly inflexible turn of events, it will be about foreign policy, not about how a year from now we will all be the cast of Dark Angel. What are your predictions?
Who will win?
Who will gaffe?
Will Palin burst in and sing a rousing chorus of "I'm just a girl who won't say no until the people to whom I've been saying yes have been indicted?"
Will Biden grab the mike and tell the one about "Who doesn't belong? the War hero from Arizona, the Mountie from the Yukon or the Agitator from Chicago?"
Will the nation blow the whole thing off and watch "Cults, Religion and Mind Control" on "E"?
Whaddaya think?
comhcinc
09-22-2008, 09:36 PM
Obama will be hard to beat in a debate. His oratory skills are hard to beat.
straylightrise
09-23-2008, 03:37 AM
He's good if he prepares speeches. I think McCain needs to whip out the old Straight Talk express and kick Obama's metrosexual butt
comhcinc
09-23-2008, 03:39 AM
no i have seen him in some town halls taking questions. he (to me ) sounds better off the cuff, but not that matters. i am sure they will know the questions in advance.
hugabear
09-23-2008, 12:44 PM
I really can't wait for these debates. TGIF will be the day!
secret-steve-crumbles
09-23-2008, 01:04 PM
Obama will be hard to beat in a debate. His oratory skills are hard to beat.Hahaha, yea they're not.
Are they allowing room for his teleprompter there too? Obama acts like an idiot without people telling him what to say.
(sorry ahead of time for the all caps, but it's a copy and paste and I'm not about to type all that out again)
Rick Warren: 40 MILLION ABORTIONS SINCE ROE V. WADE. YOU KNOW, AS A PASTOR I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS ALL OF THE TIME. ALL OF THE PAIN AND ALL OF THE CONFLICTS. I KNOW THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. 40 MILLION ABORTIONS. AT WHAT POINT DOES A BABY GET HUMAN RIGHTS IN YOUR VIEW?
Obama: WELL, I THINK THAT WHETHER YOU ARE LOOKING AT IT FROM A THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OR A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE, ANSWERING THAT QUESTION WITH SPECIFICITY, YOU KNOW, IS ABOVE MY PAY GRADE. BUT LET ME JUST SPEAK MORE GENERALLY ABOUT THE ISSUE OF ABORTION BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING OBVIOUSLY THE COUNTRY WRESTLES WITH. ONE THING THAT I'M ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED OF IS THERE IS A MORAL AND ETHICAL CONTENT TO THIS ISSUE. SO I THINK THAT ANYBODY WHO TRIES TO DENY THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES AND GRAVITY OF THE ABORTION ISSUE I THINK IS NOT PAYING ATTENTION. SO THAT WOULD BE POINT NUMBER ONE. BUT POINT NUMBER TWO, I AM PRO-CHOICE. I BELIEVE IN ROE V. WADE AND COME TO THAT CONCLUSION NOT BECAUSE I'M PRO ABORTION, BUT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY I DON'T THINK WOMEN MAKE THESE DECISIONS CASUALLY. THEY WRESTLE WITH THESE THINGS IN PROFOUND WAYS. IN CONSULTATION WITH THEIR PASTORS OR SPOUSES OR THEIR DOCTORS AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. AND SO FOR ME, THE GOAL RIGHT NOW SHOULD BE -- AND THIS IS WHERE I THINK WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND AND BY THE WAY I HAVE NOW INSERTED THIS INTO THE DEMOCRAT PARTY PLATFORM IS HOW DO WE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS BECAUSE THE FACT IS THAT ALTHOUGH WE'VE HAD A PRESIDENT WHO IS OPPOSED TO ABORTIONS OVER THE LAST EIGHT YEARS, ABORTIONS HAVE NOT GONE DOWN.
That is 227 words. Rick Warren then asked if he had ever voted to reduce or limit Abortions and Obama proceeded to say this.
I AM IN FAVOR, FOR EXAMPLE, OF LIMITS ON LATETERM ABORTIONS IF THERE IS AN EXCEPTION FOR THE MOTHER'S HEALTH. NOW FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THOSE WHO, YOU KNOW, ARE PRO LIFE, I THINK THEY WOULD CONSIDER THAT INADEQUATE. AND I RESPECT THEIR VIEWS. I MEAN ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE ALWAYS SAID IS THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, THEN -- AND YOU ARE CONSISTENT IN THAT BELIEF, THEN I CAN'T ARGUE WITH YOU ON THAT BECAUSE THAT IS A CORE ISSUE OF FAITH FOR YOU. WHAT I CAN DO IS SAY ARE THERE WAYS THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNWANTED PREGNANCIES SO THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE REDUCING THE SENSE THAT WOMEN ARE SEEKING OUT ABORTIONS, AND AS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE TALKED ABOUT IS HOW DO WE PROVIDE THE RESOURCES THAT ALLOW WOMEN TO MAKE THE CHOICE TO KEEP A CHILD. YOU KNOW, HAVE WE GIVEN THEM THE HEALTH CARE THAT THEY NEED. HAVE WE GIVEN THEM THE SUPPORT SERVICES THAT THEY NEED. HAVE WE GIVEN THEM THE OPTIONS OF ADOPTION THAT ARE NECESSARY. THAT I THINK CAN MAKE A GENUINE DIFFERENCE.
That is another 218 words, for a total of 445 words to answer that question and Warren still wasn't satisfied.
When responding to the same question.....
McCain: AT THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION. I HAVE A 25-YEAR PRO LIFE RECORD IN THE CONGRESS, IN THE SENATE. AND AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I WILL BE A PRO LIFE PRESIDENT AND THIS PRESIDENCY WILL HAVE PRO LIFE POLICIES. THAT'S MY COMMITMENT, THAT'S MY COMMITMENT TO YOU.
That is 48 words and in reality, whether you agree or not, he could have stopped at 5. 48 words of clarity vs. 245 words of 'nuance'.
Obama better hope his teleprompter shows up.
masherscf
09-23-2008, 02:16 PM
I guess it true what they day about people not being big fans of nuance. It's such sign of weakness to have an intelligent, articulate and deep opinion about things and not just party boilerplate. John McCain doesn't add detail to his pro-life position because he doesn't believe in it, the more he talks, the more people will figure that out.
secret-steve-crumbles
09-23-2008, 03:30 PM
...the more he talks, the more people will figure that out.Funny how people feel the same way about Obama.
masherscf
09-23-2008, 03:57 PM
Funny how people feel the same way about Obama.
Well, Obama certainly talks enough. I suppose if one cared to digest what he said, his genuine opinion would be contained there-in. However, dismissing his opinion on the grounds of an over abundance of verbosity challenges credulity. McCain answered the question with a terse reference to his voting record, a label and a campiagn promise.
The trouble is that abortion is a litmus test for most voters. Conservative voters expect something short and unambiguous. So, McCain gave the shortest and most unambiguous answer his relatively honest nature admits. McCain would have been foolish to do otherwise. He makes a promise, but never admits his personal feelings regarding a woman's right to choose or the enforcement of law.
Liberal voters, on the other hand, require more subtlety. Because abortion is a subtle issue. So, Obama, gives them the answer they require. Since Omaba, fails the litmus test with conservatives, how they feel about the length of answer is irrelevant. Conservatives probably never even read the opinion honestly. And, they attempt to dismiss the man's opinion on the the preposterous grounds that it takes too long to say.
It's subtle slam on academia and intelligentsia. As a reasonably intelligent person (yes, you Crumbles), this should offend you just as much as it offends me.
Look at me, I'm prattling on... I'm assuming I lost you a log time ago.
Funny how people feel the same way about Obama.
if obama is elected we are in for a lot of talking
at least we are not forced to listen
i keep thinking of castro going on and on and people had to show up and listen for hours and hours
Well, Obama certainly talks enough. I suppose if one cared to digest what he said, his genuine opinion would be contained there-in. However, dismissing his opinion on the grounds of an over abundance of verbosity challenges credulity. McCain answered the question with a terse reference to his voting record, a label and a campiagn promise.
The trouble is that abortion is a litmus test for most voters. Conservative voters expect something short and unambiguous. So, McCain gave the shortest and most unambiguous answer his relatively honest nature admits. McCain would have been foolish to do otherwise. He makes a promise, but never admits his personal feelings regarding a woman's right to choose or the enforcement of law.
Liberal voters, on the other hand, require more subtlety. Because abortion is a subtle issue. So, Obama, gives them the answer they require. Since Omaba, fails the litmus test with conservatives, how they feel about the length of answer is irrelevant. Conservatives probably never even read the opinion honestly. And, they attempt to dismiss the man's opinion on the the preposterous grounds that it takes too long to say.
It's subtle slam on academia and intelligentsia. As a reasonably intelligent person (yes, you Crumbles), this should offend you just as much as it offends me.
Look at me, I'm prattling on... I'm assuming I lost you a log time ago.
maybe his genuine opinion would be contained therein
and you certainly can't claim i am against academia and intelligentsia i have sat through many many many lectures
i talk a lot myself but it is hard to follow obama and come away with any clear distinct unequivocal points
i must admit i think that the lack of unequivocal points is either consciously or unconsciously on purpose
if you can't pin down the exact message it is hard to be against it
i think that is obama's 'method'
masherscf
09-23-2008, 04:17 PM
maybe his genuine opinion would be contained therein
and you certainly can't claim i am against academia and intelligentsia i have sat through many many many lectures
i talk a lot myself but it is hard to follow obama and come away with any clear distinct unequivocal points
i must admit i think that the lack of unequivocal points is either consciously or unconsciously on purpose
if you can't pin down the exact message it is hard to be against it
i think that is obama's 'method'
I'm not condemning an honest deconstruction of Obama's possibly empty rhetoric. I'm condemning an outright dismissal on the grounds that any honest opinion could not have been so verbose.
There's a perception in mainstream culture that there is a strangeness or dishonesty with being intelligent. Smart people are dismissed as geeks, nerds and bookworms. I'm looking at everyone on this discussion board. However, the religious right has purloined this popular perception into the idea that thinking too much reason is actually evil and that reason and academic pursuit are contrary to morality.
While, I do concede that immoral acts are more easily perpetrated by people with well reasoned excuses, I do think there is a subtle prejudice against intelligentsia that underlies it all.
I wonder why any person who obviously values there intelligence buys into it.
While, I do concede that immoral acts are more easily perpetrated by people with well reasoned excuses, I do think there is a subtle prejudice against intelligentsia that underlies it all.
oh yes i agree
and i don't think it is all that subtle
people tend to distrust even dislike those more intelligent unless that intelligence is clearly being used for their benefit
for example we don't mind google being rich because they serve our needs well and don't ask for $
maybe people feel subtly as you say that if a person is smart enough to fool them then of course they would
they cannot understand that intelligent people might easily be more aware of ethical principles and include these in their words thoughts and behaviors
Substantively, Obama will win(given that McCain is just another Republican), but I think McCain may win in terms of presentation. Obama was a professor and as such he enjoys giving a full and nuanced description of the policies he wants while McCain knows that you need a soundbite for the media to regurgitate.
bigshotprof
09-24-2008, 01:23 AM
"Who doesn't belong? the War hero from Arizona, the Mountie from the Yukon or the Agitator from Chicago?"
By the way, the answer is: the war hero from Arizona.
Why? The other two spent most of their lives following King. (No one under 50 will get the reference.)
rabidbadger
09-24-2008, 02:50 AM
I think Obama is gonna wipe the floor with Mc Cains sweat stained forehead.
Biden is gonna politely throw Palin a bunch of questions she is incapable of answering.
guytheninja
09-24-2008, 03:00 AM
I think Obama is gonna wipe the floor with Mc Cains sweat stained forehead.
Biden is gonna politely throw Palin a bunch of questions she is incapable of answering.
Are you going to watch the debate Rabid? I'm going to be too busy watching a wall debating with a footstool --- it will be vastly more entertaining and intellectually engaging.
I can't stand political debates.
rabidbadger
09-24-2008, 03:07 AM
I'll have your debates! I love em. /python
yssman
09-24-2008, 06:32 AM
The simple answer will be that Obama will likely topple McCain in these events (really, on any subject), but there are a couple things we need to watch out for:
1) Obama can't bloviate too much. While I do believe he has far-superior content on most issues, you can tell that his brain is thinking the entire time on what to say, and what not to say... It comes off a bit too intellectual, which sadly is a put-off for some Americans.
2) Obama will need to play the cards right to get McCain over the point of no return... Where he gets angry, flustered, and ends up looking like an unhappy child on the TV.
3) McCain will have to avoid freezing in the headlights, and most of all STOP LYING. Its easy to tell when he is caught in a pinch, and my guess is that at any point economics arise (they will), he will freeze like a deer in headlights.
Either way, it will be interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing more ballasts fail on the SS McCain as it sinks slowly in its pool of lies.
speed
09-24-2008, 08:58 AM
I think Obama will win hands-down, but McCain can soften the blow if he actually answers the questions instead of replying "I was a POW for five and a half years" after every question.
bigshotprof
09-24-2008, 03:51 PM
Are you going to watch the debate Rabid? I'm going to be too busy watching a wall debating with a footstool --- it will be vastly more entertaining and intellectually engaging.
I can't stand political debates.
My money's on the footstool. The wall doesn't have a leg to stand on.
rabidbadger
09-25-2008, 12:04 AM
Mc Cain wimps out. Obama wins by default.
masherscf
09-25-2008, 12:10 AM
Mc Cain wimps out. Obama wins by default.
I think the term is "forfeit."
rabidbadger
09-25-2008, 12:15 AM
I think the term is "forfeit."
No. Moose have four feet. That's why the are so hard to dress. Doubles the budget for socks/shoes.
Mc Cain wimps out. Obama wins by default.
If the media frames it as McCain showing cowardice or politicizing the financial crisis, yeah. If they frame as Obama being callous to the needs of Americans, nope.
If the media frames it as McCain showing cowardice or politicizing the financial crisis, yeah. If they frame as Obama being callous to the needs of Americans, nope.
sort of yes
but there are also people having a desperate time financially that might very well have their own thoughts on the matter
no matter how the media frames it
there are people to whom 700 would be life or death or 7000
700 B to them is adding insult to injury
Of course, but the media still plays a large part.
guytheninja
09-25-2008, 02:05 AM
Mc Cain wimps out. Obama wins by default.
I've changed my mind Rabid. I will watch this debate --- for the sake of my insomnia.
guytheninja
09-25-2008, 02:19 AM
Ok, on a more serious note...
Belmont University, in Nashville, will host one of the debates Oct 7th, 2008.
http://www.belmontdebate08.com/
There is a humorous video about the Nashville gas situation and this debate. Please -- do watch.
http://blogs.nashvillescene.com/pitw/2008/09/inside_the_metro_bunker.php
"We have a presidential debate coming here for ... sakes. I supposed Barack Obama and McCain will come in on scooters."