American Presidential Debates Megathread

[The Caldari Union]

Romney has performed better in all debates. Barrack Hussein Obama II has just looked like a foolish escaped mental paitent. Spouting incoherent jibberish.

I'd happily disagree.

then you would be wrong.

[Divair]

I'd happily disagree.

then you would be wrong.

No, you.

[Frisivisia]

I'd happily disagree.

then you would be wrong.

Did you, by chance, watch the debates on Fox News?

[PapaJacky]

I'd happily disagree.

then you would be wrong.

Well, to move things to an objectivist POV, Obama's correct that Romney wants to spend $2 trillion more on Defense despite the military not asking for it. Obama's also correct that Romney wants $5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years (to be paid for by cutting tax expenditures). Romney's correct that Romney wants to cut the deficit. The problem is; why not just end tax expenditures without cutting marginal rates (this would raise $5 trillion over 10 years if Romney's math is correct) and not spend $2 trillion on Defense (this wouldn't increase spending by $2 trillion). The deficit would fall to about $600 billion as a result already, as opposed to growing to about $1.3 trillion if those spending increases were to happen. His plan seems kinda nonsensical in my opinion.

[Vredlandia]

98 % of the Germans would vote for Obama

EDIT: according to a statistic*

Mind sourcing that?

All I can find so far is very high approval (75-85), but not 98%.

Heard it on ZDF today (german television channel)

[Agymnum]

I'd happily disagree.

then you would be wrong.

Prove it, please.

[Not Safe For Work]

It's... fuzzy.

Here in the Bible Belt, I have met people that believe that both the Bible and the Constitution were dictated by God.

I know constitutional philosophy is a deep topic and pertinent to the debates and all...

But you seem like a rational reasonable person...how the hell have you not gone completely mental and engaged in a killing spree as far south of the Waffle House/IHOP line you are by now?!

It isn't always easy. Nationstates has actually been quite an important window on the world. Without it, I might well have believed ALL of America is like this. And that would have been desperate.

[Agymnum]

I know constitutional philosophy is a deep topic and pertinent to the debates and all...

But you seem like a rational reasonable person...how the hell have you not gone completely mental and engaged in a killing spree as far south of the Waffle House/IHOP line you are by now?!

It isn't always easy. Nationstates has actually been quite an important window on the world. Without it, I might well have believed ALL of America is like this. And that would have been desperate.

To be honest I have no faith in America because just the fact Romney is close to Obama indicates a lot of Americans are bat-shit stupid.

The fact I have to associate with that group when I'm on foreign soil shames me. Oftentimes I'll point out that I'm not, in fact, an Asian-American, but an Asian born in America, despite the two technically being synonymous.

[Ashmoria]

then you would be wrong.

Well, to move things to an objectivist POV, Obama's correct that Romney wants to spend $2 trillion more on Defense despite the military not asking for it. Obama's also correct that Romney wants $5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years (to be paid for by cutting tax expenditures). Romney's correct that Romney wants to cut the deficit. The problem is; why not just end tax expenditures without cutting marginal rates (this would raise $5 trillion over 10 years if Romney's math is correct) and not spend $2 trillion on Defense (this wouldn't increase spending by $2 trillion). The deficit would fall to about $600 billion as a result already, as opposed to growing to about $1.3 trillion if those spending increases were to happen. His plan seems kinda nonsensical in my opinion.

that would violate his pledge to grover norquist.

[Des-Bal]

that would violate his pledge to grover norquist.

I'd like to see everyone who signed that pledge tried for treason.

[Ashmoria]

that would violate his pledge to grover norquist.

I'd like to see everyone who signed that pledge tried for treason.

i dont know about treason but it should disqualify them for high office.

[Galborg]

Twilight

Mormonism is all about worshipping sparkly vampires.

[Wikkiwallana]

Romney has performed better in all debates. Barrack Hussein Obama II has just looked like a foolish escaped mental paitent. Spouting incoherent jibberish.

Speaking of incoherent gibberish, I could swear it looks like you said Romney won all the debates.

[Qazox]

Romney has performed better in all debates. Barrack Hussein Obama II has just looked like a foolish escaped mental paitent. Spouting incoherent jibberish.

Speaking of incoherent gibberish, I could swear it looks like you said Romney won all the debates.

I laughed for about 3 minutes reading that.

[Bobbyland420]

No matter who wins the election, the government always gets in.

[Farnhamia]

No matter who wins the election, the government always gets in.

Well, I ... uhm ...

[Greater Phenia]

Romney has performed better in all debates. Barrack Hussein Obama II has just looked like a foolish escaped mental paitent. Spouting incoherent jibberish.

Obama was quite coherent. Romney contradicted himself multiple times, often in the very same debate, such as when he claimed that his plan would create jobs, and then ended by repeating (like a mantra) "government does not create jobs," which is a strawman fallacy even when not directly contradicting himself.

Much of what Romney said was untrue, misleading, or irrelevant. His comment on the number of ships the navy has now compared to 1916 was resoundingly naive and foolish, and contradicted directly by what the Secretary of the Navy himself said April of this year. His repetition of the "apology tour" and the "did not call Bengazi a terrorist attack" myths betrayed either a deliberate pandering-to of the Fox News pundit crowd or a complete buying-in to the blatant and stupid propaganda.

Overall, Romney's views on defense and foreign policy are laughably naive, and his 'experience' blundering around foot-in-mouth from one country to the next only hammers home the point that the man would not make a good President - a fact which is supported by polling of other countries. Obama's record and his words confirm his superiority when it comes to the vital subject of national defense.

And perhaps most compelling of all - Romney supporters, from the top down, can't argue the points. Instead, like you, they focus on silly name-calling. Right now you're taking a cue from the Ann Coulter "Retard" comment where you giggle like a schoolgirl and call the President of the United States a naughty name. If you think Obama's points were "incoherent jibberish" then perhaps political thinking is simply not your forte, and should - as the Republicans have for the past four years - continue to leave the governing of the greatest nation on earth to the adults.

[Westgard]

I have to this date never heard of any US funds being used for European banks whatsoever and I work for a news agency that concentrates primarily on market news. What source do you have for that ridiculous claim?

Man like the tenth time you request sources. For a news guy you seem badly informed. This was ALL OVER the financial news networks, though all of the main internet articles were purged from the news organizations' websites afterwards (since it's so scandalous). It was as a result of a GAO (government accountability office) investigation of the Federal Reserve. They actually found 16.1 Trillion was given to European Banks. So my bad, not 15 trillion. It makes the bailout of US banks look tiny by comparison. And since it's bailing out FOREIGN banks it's all the more treasonous, especially since the entire US debt is less than the 16 trillion we gave to banks (who also loan money back to the US government).

www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO-Fed-Inv ... r_page_144 (worth noting citigroup alone took $2.5 trillion!)

It does appear it's not all foreign based, although I guess since Citigroup and many "US banks" also give loans abroad (citigroup offers loans here in Asia), perhaps it's worth saying it's $16 trillion to banks and much of it goes to Asia/Europe.

98 % of the Germans would vote for Obama

99% of Germans (supposedly) voted for Hitler. Doesn't make him a good candidate. In fact as Hitler pointed out, in democracy, whoever can lie the best generally wins.

[in democracy] "He who knows how most skilfully to make this 'public opinion' serve his own interests becomes forthwith master in the State. And that can be achieved by the man who can lie most artfully" - Hitler

[Westgard]

I have to this date never heard of any US funds being used for European banks whatsoever and I work for a news agency that concentrates primarily on market news. What source do you have for that ridiculous claim?

Man like the tenth time you request sources. For a news guy you seem badly informed. This was ALL OVER the financial news networks, though all of the main internet articles were purged from the news organizations' websites afterwards (since it's so scandalous). It was as a result of a GAO (government accountability office) investigation of the Federal Reserve. They actually found 16.1 Trillion was given to European Banks. So my bad, not 15 trillion. It makes the bailout of US banks look tiny by comparison. And since it's bailing out FOREIGN banks it's all the more treasonous, especially since the entire US debt is less than the 16 trillion we gave to banks (who also loan money back to the US government).

www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO-Fed-Inv ... r_page_144 (worth noting citigroup alone took $2.5 trillion!)

It does appear it's not all foreign based, although I guess since Citigroup and many "US banks" also give loans abroad (citigroup offers loans here in Asia), perhaps it's worth saying it's $16 trillion to banks and much of it goes to Asia/Europe.

98 % of the Germans would vote for Obama

99% of Germans (supposedly) voted for Hitler. Doesn't make him a good candidate. In fact as Hitler pointed out, in democracy, whoever can lie the best generally wins.

[Laerod]

98 % of the Germans would vote for Obama

EDIT: according to a statistic*

According to another statistic, 98% of statistics are made-up bullshit.

Indeed. Deutschlandtrend found that it was 91%, not 98% for Obama and 3% for Romney.

[Laerod]

99% of Germans (supposedly) voted for Hitler. Doesn't make him a good candidate. In fact as Hitler pointed out, in democracy, whoever can lie the best generally wins.

Don't lie. The best Hitler ever got in a free and fair election was 44%.

[AiliailiA]

Thread has been un-stickied. Which makes sense with the debates being over.

Odd how this thread has more posts in it than the "three-ring circus" thread. Perhaps we like debate more than we like a circus.

[PapaJacky]

I have to this date never heard of any US funds being used for European banks whatsoever and I work for a news agency that concentrates primarily on market news. What source do you have for that ridiculous claim?

Man like the tenth time you request sources. For a news guy you seem badly informed. This was ALL OVER the financial news networks, though all of the main internet articles were purged from the news organizations' websites afterwards (since it's so scandalous). It was as a result of a GAO (government accountability office) investigation of the Federal Reserve. They actually found 16.1 Trillion was given to European Banks. So my bad, not 15 trillion. It makes the bailout of US banks look tiny by comparison. And since it's bailing out FOREIGN banks it's all the more treasonous, especially since the entire US debt is less than the 16 trillion we gave to banks (who also loan money back to the US government).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO- ... r_page_144 (worth noting citigroup alone took $2.5 trillion!)

It does appear it's not all foreign based, although I guess since Citigroup and many "US banks" also give loans abroad (citigroup offers loans here in Asia), perhaps it's worth saying it's $16 trillion to banks and much of it goes to Asia/Europe.

98 % of the Germans would vote for Obama

99% of Germans (supposedly) voted for Hitler. Doesn't make him a good candidate. In fact as Hitler pointed out, in democracy, whoever can lie the best generally wins.

Before you leave, I should note that you should have kept your last replies here where you originally made those claims; in your thread about the collapse of America's currency.

Also; IIRC about ~40% of Germans voted for Hitler, maybe more.

[Laerod]

I have to this date never heard of any US funds being used for European banks whatsoever and I work for a news agency that concentrates primarily on market news. What source do you have for that ridiculous claim?

Man like the tenth time you request sources. For a news guy you seem badly informed. This was ALL OVER the financial news networks,...

Doubt it.

though all of the main internet articles were purged from the news organizations' websites afterwards (since it's so scandalous).

Absolute bullshit. I know for a fact that Reuters doesn't purge it's articles. The only news sites I know that do are the German public channels, and then they do it to comply with regulation to keep them from outcompeting private news companies, so the idea that they purge based on content is ridiculous.

It was as a result of a GAO (government accountability office) investigation of the Federal Reserve. They actually found 16.1 Trillion was given to European Banks. So my bad, not 15 trillion. It makes the bailout of US banks look tiny by comparison. And since it's bailing out FOREIGN banks it's all the more treasonous, especially since the entire US debt is less than the 16 trillion we gave to banks (who also loan money back to the US government).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO- ... r_page_144 (worth noting citigroup alone took $2.5 trillion!)

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! XD

No this is too much.... I need a moment to get my breath back.

It does appear it's not all foreign based, although I guess since Citigroup and many "US banks" also give loans abroad (citigroup offers loans here in Asia), perhaps it's worth saying it's $16 trillion to banks and much of it goes to Asia/Europe.

It's worth noting that when you said "give" you mean "loan". And the big takers on that list are American banks. You cannot claim that 16 trillion dollars went to Europe. It's worth noting that Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, JP Morgan Chase, Lehman Brothers, Wells Fargo, and Wachovia are (well, "were", as some don't exist or merged) American banks. Half of the banks asking for money and more than half of the number of dollars you've been touting did not go to European banks. Why the various banks were eligible is explained here:

U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks and U.S. subsidiaries of foreign institutions received over half of the total dollar amount of TAFand CPFF loans made (see fig. 10). As noted previously, such institutions were permitted to borrow under the terms and conditions of the lending programs. For both programs, FRBNY staff explained that as long as participating institutions were eligible to use the program, monitoring whether certain types of institutions accessed a program more than others was not relevant to the programs’ objectives. Federal Reserve Board officials told us the programs sought to support funding markets that were global, and agencies and branches of foreign firms were significant participants in lending to U.S. households and businesses.

Helping American households and businesses: Treason. According to you.

[Westgard]

Before you leave, I should note that you should have kept your last replies here where you originally made those claims; in your thread about the collapse of America's currency.

I don't recall ever starting a thread like that, but I'd agree that America is collapsing (not so much it's currency, though it's losing world reserve status which will mean it can't just print more to solve it's problems in the future).