Let Freedom Reign!


 
HomeHome  PublicationsPublications  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Debate

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/6/2012, 1:02 pm

Scorpion wrote:
No diagnosis, "I'm just sayin..." I really do think that you should take the time to watch the debate, in any case.

[

Yeah, been too busy. I will watch it soon, if only to see if I see the same thing you see.
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/7/2012, 6:34 am

And we have found even more goats to scape:



http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7424430n

From CBS's "This Morning":

Norah O'Donnell: "Some Democrats say [Obama's] campaign needs a wake-up call. Bill Plante is here with that part of the story. Bill, you've been talking to your sources; what are they saying?

Correspondent Bill Plante: "Well Norah, they're simply upset and really outraged. They blame the President's team, first of all, for not preparing him to meet the challenge of an aggressive Mitt Romney. They say that nobody in the room challenged him, including the guy that he was debating with, John Kerry, because, as they say, he wants to be Secretary of State so he's not going to get in the President's face. And Presidents are used to deference; they're not used to people challenging them like that. So they think that the debate prep was terrible, but they also fault the President himself for not understanding that Romney was going to be more aggressive."
Back to top Go down
Heretic

avatar

Posts : 3114

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/7/2012, 7:18 pm

Are they not allowed notes or anything?
Back to top Go down
Heretic

avatar

Posts : 3114

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/7/2012, 9:33 pm

happy jack wrote:
.... just when I thought that the bottom of the excuse barrel had been all but scraped....

And if the majority of assessments declaring Romney the winner did so on substance rather than style, that might actually be true. Sorry, but just like denialists tend to do, Romney "won" the debate simply because he looked good selling bullshit. Not sure how that can be an "excuse" if it's an accurate description of what transpired.

Honestly, we should all be deeply embarrassed by the fact that such a feat is even possible, and recognize that the media declaring "winners" on anything other than substance is part of the problem:

Quote :
If you look at Romney’s exaggerations (I would call them lies), they are much more severe. They include doubling the amount of jobless, repeating the 50% lie about jobless college grads, exaggerating bankruptcies in an energy investment program (less than 10% went bankrupt like Solyndra, not “half” as Romney claimed), he repeated the “death panels” trope, he repeated the often debunked “716 billion cut” from medicare lie, he claimed Obama doubled the deficit (it barely changed at all from Bush), and he doubled the amount of income loss during Obama’s term.

I don’t understand how these sets of inaccuracies are comparable. Obama, at worst, seems to have used the wrong word “premiums”, during his most inaccurate statement, committed a rounding error, and is being punished for applying arithmetic to Romney’s vague proposals. Whereas Romney doubles every statistic, fabricates others, and misrepresents fundamental facts about the state of the country and laws that are passed and on the books, all the while never providing details as to how he’s going to do anything he proposes. . . .

I find it very upsetting when a presidential candidate addresses a national audience with such falsehoods, and they should be addressed appropriately as such by the media. Until then these races will always be between people who will say whatever is necessary to get elected and those who are trying to make an honest effort (if we’re lucky – eventually we won’t even have that). I could never vote for a global-warming denying (or in this case minimizing), pro-choice before he was pro-life, quackery-promoting etch-a-sketch candidate like Romney. I hope for a day when we actually have an alternative vision provided by a candidate, a true conservative, with a small government vision, but one that’s based on details, facts, and personal responsibility. I don’t want tax cuts for the sake of tax cuts, I want a government that will pay it’s bills, and Romney’s tax plan is insane. Most importantly I want a candidate that believes in facts. Don’t tell me pre-existing coverage will exist in your program then have your minions the next day clarify pre-existing conditions won’t be covered. Own up to it! Say, “I’m a conservative, in my vision of America, you’re on your own.” Be honest about it for once, and consistent, and maybe the message would be more appealing. If your vision of limited government also meant no more unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound laws, no more anti-gay bigotry, no more interfering in the doctor-patient relationship, etc., people might be able to get behind it.

How anyone can declare Romney a "winner" after that is beyond me.
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/7/2012, 11:06 pm

Heretic wrote:
Are they not allowed notes or anything?
They can take notes but they can't bring their own.
Back to top Go down
Heretic

avatar

Posts : 3114

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/8/2012, 7:42 am

That seems really dumb. Suspect
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/8/2012, 3:51 pm

Heretic wrote:
That seems really dumb. Suspect

It does, doesn't it? I would think that a carefully considered response would better illustrate the candidate's views than would the candidate's ability to speak off the cuff.
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/8/2012, 4:03 pm

Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/11/2012, 10:25 am

These people will grasp at any available straw, no matter how flimsy, won't they?
What an asshole.


http://harpers.org/archive/2012/10/hbc-90008926

The Man Who Would Be Ex-President

By Kevin Baker
………
Who would have thought that Barack Obama would come off as the candidate with a hollow core?
Yet there he was, giving a presentation devoid of substance, vision, principle, or even basic coherence. He didn’t show a spark of anger, even when Romney slyly found a way to call him a boy, comparing Obama’s statements to the sorts of childish lies his “five boys” used to tell.
How the right’s hard-core racists must have howled at that!
Mitt, at long last, has secured his base.

………
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/12/2012, 8:20 am

Sorry, Republicans, Joe Biden is still smiling
Quote :
The Republican brain trust has coalesced around an official response to last night's vice presidential debate: Joe Biden laughed and smiled. A lot. Oh, and he was rude. That's all they've got. But considering their other option was that Paul Ryan had his ass handed to him, it's probably the best they can do.

And the Democratic response? Fired up, ready to go.
I loved watching little Eddie Munster get his clock cleaned by Joe Biden. Best line? Biden:"So now you're Jack Kennedy"? Laughing
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/12/2012, 11:03 am

Artie60438 wrote:
Best line? Biden:"So now you're Jack Kennedy"? Laughing

Still at it, are you, Joe?
Let us know when you manage to come up with something on your own.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

In September 1987, the campaign ran into trouble when he was accused of plagiarizing a speech that had been made earlier that year by Neil Kinnock, leader of the British Labour Party.[130] Kinnock’s speech included the lines:
"Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? [Then pointing to his wife in the audience] Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Was it because all our predecessors were thick?"
While Biden’s speech included the lines:
"I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? [Then pointing to his wife in the audience] Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college? Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? Is it because I'm the first Biden in a thousand generations to get a college and a graduate degree that I was smarter than the rest?"



http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/biden-ryan-oh-now-jack-kennedy-015910917--election.html

"It is mathematically possible. ... Jack Kennedy lowered tax rates, increased growth," Ryan said.
"Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy," Biden said, rolling his eyes and continuing to evoke memories of the '88 debate, during which Bentsen told Quayle, "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."




All in all, though, a pretty clever comeback for someone whose facial expressions made it appear as if he had a declawed gerbil frolicking in his underpants.
Back to top Go down
edge540

avatar

Posts : 1166

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/12/2012, 1:13 pm

happy jack wrote:
All in all, though, a pretty clever comeback for someone whose facial expressions made it appear as if he had a declawed gerbil frolicking in his underpants.
The way Ryan sat there with that goofy smile on his face looking at Biden, it looked to me like the gerbil just got done with Ryan and he was ready to light up a cigarette.
Anyway...
So jack, do you agree with Ryan when he makes the absurd claim that the "math adds up"?

Quote :
During Thursday evening's debate, vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) did not offer new details on the Romney campaign's promise to slash taxes without losing the government a ton of revenue.

The centrist Tax Policy Center has analyzed the plan and concluded that it would create wide budget deficits unless the Romney administration hiked taxes on the middle class. The Romney campaign has insisted that it would not.

"What we are saying is lower tax rates across the board and close loopholes, primarily to the higher-income people," Ryan said on Thursday. "We have three bottom lines: Don't raise the deficit, don't raise taxes on the middle class and don't lower the share of income that is borne by the high-income earners."

Among other things, the plan would cut all individual income tax rates by 20 percent.

"Let's talk about this 20 percent," debate moderator Martha Raddatz said to Ryan. "You have refused yet again to offer specifics on how you pay for that 20 percent across-the-board tax cut. Do you actually have the specifics, or are you still working on it, and that's why you won't tell voters?"

Ryan said that his plan would deny loopholes and deductions for higher-income earners, but he didn't specify whether the plan might target deductions for mortgage interest or charitable giving, for instance. "We want to work with Congress on how best to achieve this," he said.

Raddatz asked, "You guarantee this math will add up?"

"Six studies have verified that this adds up," Ryan said, repeating a claim Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney made in last week's debate against President Obama.

The claim is debatable. As HuffPost has reported, three of the studies are blog posts or op-eds, and one was paid for by Romney for President Inc. (And the author of two of the pieces highlighted by the Romney campaign suggested the tax plan only works by eliminating tax preferences for people making more than $100,000.) But the supporting research for Romney's plan argues that the Tax Policy Center ignores the way the Romney tax reform would boost the economy, resulting in additional revenue.

The Tax Policy Center's William G. Gale responded that TPC's models accounted for potential economic growth. Gale stands by the original conclusion that the Romney proposal inevitably "would provide large tax cuts to high-income households, and increase the tax burdens on middle- and/or lower-income taxpayers."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/12/paul-ryan-taxes-mitt-romney_n_1961233.html
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/12/2012, 9:05 pm

edge540 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
All in all, though, a pretty clever comeback for someone whose facial expressions made it appear as if he had a declawed gerbil frolicking in his underpants.
The way Ryan sat there with that goofy smile on his face looking at Biden, it looked to me like the gerbil just got done with Ryan and he was ready to light up a cigarette.
The spanking that Joe Biden gave to Lyin Ryan was getting so bad that For a while there I was thinking about calling Child Protective Services Laughing
edge540 wrote:
Anyway...
So jack, do you agree with Ryan when he makes the absurd claim that the "math adds up"?
Do we even know if he watched the debate? His short attention span kicked in after only 10 minutes of last week's debate.
Back to top Go down
Scorpion

avatar

Posts : 1917

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/13/2012, 5:33 pm

I thought that Martha Raddatz was a stellar moderator. She didn't let either of the two candidates get away with much, and that's how it should be...

Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/13/2012, 8:35 pm

Scorpion wrote:
I thought that Martha Raddatz was a stellar moderator. She didn't let either of the two candidates get away with much, and that's how it should be...
She was great and it looks like Candy Crowley will be up to the task as well this Tuesday.
CNN's Candy Crowley: Debate moderators 'need to take control' sometimes
Quote :
CNN’s Candy Crowley said Friday that debate moderators “need to take control” at some points because “you want the conversation to move.”

Crowley, who will be moderating the Oct. 16 presidential debate, said this week’s debate showed that Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama “are both going to take whatever time they feel they can get to put their views out.”

“The interesting thing to me is that everybody was talking about Jim when it was over and I paid no attention to him simply because I’m sitting there writing down where I saw holes in their arguments thinking, ‘Oh, this would be good. This would be a good follow up. Oh, what happened here?’ That kind of thing,” Crowley said on CNN Friday. “So I wasn’t as sort of tuned in. And I was in the debate hall, so that’s kind of a wholly different thing.”

Crowley added that “there are times when the time structures drive people crazy, but it’s kind of what they agreed on.”

“So obviously, at some point, you need to take control, but I don’t think you take control because you can or you should. But I think you take control because you want the conversation to move and not kind of be stuck on it,” Crowley told CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux
.
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/13/2012, 9:15 pm

Artie60438 wrote:
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.


You know damn well that if Barry had resoundingly won the debate, you would have been parading Lehrer around on your shoulders (and in all likelihood, he would have been naked and seated backward).
Don’t even pretend otherwise.




http://wtvr.com/2012/10/06/debate-organizers-defend-lehrer-despite-negative-reviews/

Debate organizers defend Lehrer, despite negative reviews

By: CNN’s Dan Merica

Washington (CNN) – The organizational body that has put on every presidential debate since 1987 defended Jim Lehrer after many criticized his performance as Wednesday night’s debate moderator.
In a written press release, the Commission on Presidential Debates pivoted to the debate format they implemented, stating that Lehrer “implemented the format exactly as it was designed.”
“The Commission on Presidential Debates’ goal in selecting this format was to have a serious discussion of the major domestic and foreign policy issues with minimal interference by the moderator or timing signals,” reads the statement. “Jim Lehrer implemented the format exactly as it was designed by the CPD and announced in July.”





http://www.mediaite.com/online/jim-lehrer-responds-to-his-debate-moderation-critics-i-was-effective/

Jim Lehrer Responds To His Debate Moderation Critics: I Was ‘Effective’

by Andrew Kirell | 12:33 pm, October 5th, 2012

………
The PBS vet told Byers he believes he sufficiently fulfilled his duty as moderator and that the widespread criticism does not bother him much.
“Based on what the goal was, I saw it as successful,” said Lehrer. “I’ve always said this and finally I had a chance to demonstrate it: The moderator should be seen little and heard even less. It is up to the candidates to ask the follow-up questions and challenge one another.”
………
“The goal of the new format was to have the candidates talk directly to one another, in an extensive way, about things that matter,” he told POLITICO. “One of the problems is that everybody is used to the old-fashioned debate system, which is very controlled, and where the moderator plays a more active role. But from the very beginning, everybody has been saying that what we really want is to have a real debate, not to have a moderator conducting a pseudo-interview.”
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/14/2012, 10:19 am

happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.
[b]You know damn well that if Barry had resoundingly won the debate, you would have been parading Lehrer around on your shoulders (and in all likelihood, he would have been naked and seated backward).
Don’t even pretend otherwise.
Once again you engage in your usual silly speculation and then proceed to fantasize about what my opinion would have been had Obama won.

The simple fact is that since you didn't even watch the debate past the first 10 minutes you're pretty much clueless,and as a result,your opinion is worthless. Sleep
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/14/2012, 11:06 am

Artie60438 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.
[b]You know damn well that if Barry had resoundingly won the debate, you would have been parading Lehrer around on your shoulders (and in all likelihood, he would have been naked and seated backward).
Don’t even pretend otherwise.
Once again you engage in your usual silly speculation and then proceed to fantasize about what my opinion would have been had Obama won.

The simple fact is that since you didn't even watch the debate past the first 10 minutes you're pretty much clueless,and as a result,your opinion is worthless. Sleep

That's not my opinion; that's the opinion of the Commission on Presidential Debates - the ones who orchestrated and set the standards for the debate. They might know a bit more about these things than you or I do.
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/14/2012, 3:47 pm

happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.
You know damn well that if Barry had resoundingly won the debate, you would have been parading Lehrer around on your shoulders (and in all likelihood, he would have been naked and seated backward).
Don’t even pretend otherwise.
Once again you engage in your usual silly speculation and then proceed to fantasize about what my opinion would have been had Obama won.

The simple fact is that since you didn't even watch the debate past the first 10 minutes you're pretty much clueless,and as a result,your opinion is worthless. Sleep

That's not my opinion; that's the opinion of the Commission on Presidential Debates - the ones who orchestrated and set the standards for the debate. They might know a bit more about these things than you or I do.
Oh yeah,let's just take the word of the people who chose him. Rolling Eyes Like a Fox guarding the Henhouse.
From your link:
Quote :
The format of the debate consisted of six, 15-minute segments on the economy, healthcare, the role of government and governing. [b]Due to the fact that Lehrer continually allowed the two candidates to go over the allotted 15 minutes, there were only three minutes left for the last category.
Clearly he lost control and the last category suffered as a result. When you have commentators on both sides of the aisle like Chris Wallace from Fox News and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow agreeing that Leher lost control of the debate,I'll take their word over the politicians that serve on the Commission trying to save face.
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/14/2012, 4:13 pm

Artie60438 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:
Jim Leher should be put out to pasture after the horrible job he did in the POTUS debate. And no,I'm not blaming him for Obama's defeat. He let both candidates ramble on when he should have stopped them thus insuring that they would run short of time before all topics were addressed sufficiently.
You know damn well that if Barry had resoundingly won the debate, you would have been parading Lehrer around on your shoulders (and in all likelihood, he would have been naked and seated backward).
Don’t even pretend otherwise.
Once again you engage in your usual silly speculation and then proceed to fantasize about what my opinion would have been had Obama won.

The simple fact is that since you didn't even watch the debate past the first 10 minutes you're pretty much clueless,and as a result,your opinion is worthless. Sleep

That's not my opinion; that's the opinion of the Commission on Presidential Debates - the ones who orchestrated and set the standards for the debate. They might know a bit more about these things than you or I do.
Oh yeah,let's just take the word of the people who chose him. Rolling Eyes Like a Fox guarding the Henhouse.
From your link:
Quote :
The format of the debate consisted of six, 15-minute segments on the economy, healthcare, the role of government and governing. [b]Due to the fact that Lehrer continually allowed the two candidates to go over the allotted 15 minutes, there were only three minutes left for the last category.
Clearly he lost control and the last category suffered as a result. When you have commentators on both sides of the aisle like Chris Wallace from Fox News and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow agreeing that Leher lost control of the debate,I'll take their word over the politicians that serve on the Commission trying to save face.

Although the format/structure of the debate was announced in July, you somehow managed to refrain from whining about it, and from vilifying the moderator, until after Barry’s ass was solidly handed to him.
May I ax why?
And I would think that someone as astute Laughing as you would have long ago recognized the members of the Commission on Presidential Debates as the despicable bunch of face-saving political hacks they are.
Yet you said nothing.
Again, may I ax why?
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/15/2012, 10:41 am

happy jack wrote:
Artie60438 wrote:

Oh yeah,let's just take the word of the people who chose him. Rolling Eyes Like a Fox guarding the Henhouse.
From your link:
Quote :
The format of the debate consisted of six, 15-minute segments on the economy, healthcare, the role of government and governing. Due to the fact that Lehrer continually allowed the two candidates to go over the allotted 15 minutes, there were only three minutes left for the last category.
Clearly he lost control and the last category suffered as a result. When you have commentators on both sides of the aisle like Chris Wallace from Fox News and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow agreeing that Leher lost control of the debate,I'll take their word over the politicians that serve on the Commission trying to save face.

[b]Although the format/structure of the debate was announced in July, you somehow managed to refrain from whining about it, and from vilifying the moderator, until after Barry’s ass was solidly handed to him.
May I ax why?
Because it hadn't taken place yet,dumbass. Rolling Eyes The fact is that Leher was unable to manage the time of the debate,resulting in the last topic not being able to be discussed fully.
I don't blame Leher for Obama's loss and I never did. I blame him for not exercising proper control. Now excuse me,I have no more time to waste on you on this Sleep
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/15/2012, 11:13 am

happy jack wrote:

[b]Although the format/structure of the debate was announced in July, you somehow managed to refrain from whining about it, and from vilifying the moderator, until after Barry’s ass was solidly handed to him.
May I ax why?


Artie60438 wrote:
Because it hadn't taken place yet,dumbass.



Yes, because it hadn’t yet taken place, which makes my point, which is:

Lehrer and the commission allowed the candidates to go man-to-man, as was the original plan.
Unfortunately, only one of the candidates was man enough.
You had no objection whatsoever to the format of the debate until you saw the results.
Back to top Go down
Artie60438

avatar

Posts : 9393

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/15/2012, 2:07 pm

happy jack wrote:
happy jack wrote:

[b]Although the format/structure of the debate was announced in July, you somehow managed to refrain from whining about it, and from vilifying the moderator, until after Barry’s ass was solidly handed to him.
May I ax why?


Artie60438 wrote:
Because it hadn't taken place yet,dumbass.
Yes, because it hadn’t yet taken place, which makes my point, which is:

Lehrer and the commission allowed the candidates to go man-to-man, as was the original plan.
No dumbass,this was the original plan...
Quote :
Quote:The format of the debate consisted of six, 15-minute segments on the economy, healthcare, the role of government and governing.
And this is what happened as result of Leher's failure to control the discussion...
Quote :
Due to the fact that Lehrer continually allowed the two candidates to go over the allotted 15 minutes, there were only three minutes left for the last category.
It has nothing to do with who won or lost.
Back to top Go down
happy jack

avatar

Posts : 6026

PostSubject: Re: Debate   10/15/2012, 4:54 pm

Artie60438 wrote:
Now excuse me,I have no more time to waste on you on this Sleep


My, my.
I thought you had no more time to waste on this.
Wha’ happen?


Artie60438 wrote:
happy jack wrote:
happy jack wrote:

[b]Although the format/structure of the debate was announced in July, you somehow managed to refrain from whining about it, and from vilifying the moderator, until after Barry’s ass was solidly handed to him.
May I ax why?


Artie60438 wrote:
Because it hadn't taken place yet,dumbass.
Yes, because it hadn’t yet taken place, which makes my point, which is:

Lehrer and the commission allowed the candidates to go man-to-man, as was the original plan.
No dumbass,this was the original plan...
Quote :
Quote:The format of the debate consisted of six, 15-minute segments on the economy, healthcare, the role of government and governing.
And this is what happened as result of Leher's failure to control the discussion...
Quote :
Due to the fact that Lehrer continually allowed the two candidates to go over the allotted 15 minutes, there were only three minutes left for the last category.
It has nothing to do with who won or lost.


http://wtvr.com/2012/10/06/debate-organizers-defend-lehrer-despite-negative-reviews/

“The Commission on Presidential Debates’ goal in selecting this format was to have a serious discussion of the major domestic and foreign policy issues with minimal interference by the moderator or timing signals,” reads the statement. “Jim Lehrer implemented the format exactly as it was designed by the CPD and announced in July.”




And, Artie, can you for once be honest?
You know that your objection to the format has everything to do with who won or who lost, so don't pretend otherwise.
Because we all know what is most important to you, don't we?:

Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!i]Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win![/i]Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!Scorpion said it was my best post ever!!! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win! So as usual, I win!




Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Debate   

Back to top Go down
 
Debate
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Let Freedom Reign! :: Nation/Other :: Nation/World-
Jump to: