VP DEBATE TONIGHT

[JetGirl]

Let me guess, facts have a liberal bias?

Political leanings within a debunking organization mean much less than the actual "fact finding" methods they employ. Much of Snopes' 'research' is made up of member contributions to discussions on their message board. Whatever the group opinion is on a subject, becomes their judgement. Even though there's a plethora of documentation on several Obama lies out there, tough questions in the search box get "Sorry, no matches" when clearly a few minutes of searching any ".gov" site is full of facts straight from the horse's mouth.
Don't take my word for it...go read through the Snopes discussion forum yourself to see how they operate. Dissenters who bring opposing information often have their findings edited out.

 

[Mad Macs]

For most, whatever side they support was the winner. If your side won, congratulations. If your side lost, I'm sure they will make adjustments and let those be seen in the next Presidential debate.

Don't you DARE bring logic and reason to a debate about a debate.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I fell asleep 10 minutes into it. Who won? The people? Anybody?

 

[Mad Macs]

I fell asleep 10 minutes into it. Who won? The people? Anybody?

Why YOUR candidate won of course.

 

[Denny347]

Both were guilty of stretching the truth/lying to support their arguments. Has it come to the point that the better man is the one who lies less ?

Vice presidential debate fact check - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

 

[Que]

Don't you DARE bring logic and reason to a debate about a debate.

Cerainily didn't mean to be a buzz-kill.

I think they both did their jobs.

Ryan - defended the 47% quote and made the common man understand how it could be taken the wrong way. However, I didn't like the way he said "my best friend is in a FOB..." not taking into account that his statement could put him in danger.

Biden - very stong and aggressive, although a bit annoying and over-the-top. Did well makng the tax issue a point of extended discussion, with Ryan not having a clear answer. He also did well bringing out the fact that Ryan contacted him for some of that stimulus money. However, Biden should definitely stay away from attempting to explain military tactics.

As for the "my friend" thing, those guys (politicians) are friends. They eat meals together, play golf, email and attend each other's family events. They are a very small fraternity and do very well putting political differences aside in their personal lives, when the cameras aren't on.

 

[melensdad]

Biden - very stong and aggressive, although a bit annoying and over-the-top. Did well makng the tax issue a point of extended discussion, with Ryan not having a clear answer.

I agree. Biden's answer sounded better. But Biden was technically wrong. Ryan was technically correct, the problem is our tax code is 70,000 pages long and Ryan could not give a simple answer that was easy to understand between Biden interrupting him and the moderator changing the subject. Its very complex and last night he could not distill it into a sound-byte.

1) Joe started out aggressively, just like Mitt did. Funny how when Mitt did it the GOP fanbois were cool with it, but when Joe does it, he's a jerk.

But just was disrespectful in the way he did it, which is why, even the lefties at POLITICO, HUFFINGTON POST and THE HILL all say he came off badly. I think Joe MIGHT have been the winner, but the fact that he acted like a jerk, diminished his win to a tie or even a loss.

2) He called out Ryan's lies right then and there. He didn't pull an Obama and just let the bombs keep dropping.

The problem was that he LIED about what Ryan was saying. He lied about Iran not having missels to deliver a nuke. He lied about the $5 Trillion cuts. He lied about the taxes on the middle class. . . .

3) This is the most important part, he said he was religious but that he would NOT force his beliefs on another person. Ryan came out and stated flat out that abortion WOULD be illegal as per his beliefs. I cannot stand religious doctrine being forced upon us, so Ryan automatically loses because of this.

Biden actually VOTED to repeal Roe v Wade. Biden's record is different than his words.

 

[Denny347]

These 2 sources do a pretty good job of reviewing the debate and it's outcome. Very fair and with little bias.

BBC News - Joe Biden and Paul Ryan face off in high-stakes debate

Biden edges Ryan in lively bout - Al Jazeera Blogs

 

[Expat]

The Today show coverage was pretty poor. They had Chuck Todd analyze it. Of course he thought Joe did well. They had the angry Rachel Maddow... guess what, Joe was a clear winner and Ryan is a bad person. Then they had some guy I had never heard of say that it was a tie. Then the quoted one tweet... just one and that was Bill Maher. Hardly an even handed piece of coverage.

 

[Mad Macs]

Biden actually VOTED to repeal Roe v Wade. Biden's record is different than his words.

Look, they're all lying. Obama and Biden lie, Ryan lies, and Romney just can't remember what he said 20 minutes ago.

Looking at their voting history I'm sure they ALL have contradicted their current stances, some of them even contradict themselves in the same day.

 

[Tsigos]

Ah yes, fairness. I can't help but go back to your logic. You define the 1% based on wealth and then comment on taxes paid. Are you arguing for a wealth tax now?

Again, define your terms and stick with them. We can't debate a moving target.

How typical. You are the one who replied with an arbitrary definition of the wealthiest 1% limited to income. A definition that might not include Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or other billionaires who don't generally earn income or are wealthy despite whether or not they earn income. Then you blame me for changing the terms.

I am not arguing for any new tax. My original post simply stated that the GOP in MY opinion seems only concerned with the well-being of the wealthiest 1% to the detriment of all else. It is silly that YOU wish to limit MY statement by telling ME that I have to limit MY definition of the wealthiest 1% to one based on income.

Hard to debate someone who tries to stick words in your mouth.

 

[melensdad]

Both were guilty of stretching the truth/lying to support their arguments. Has it come to the point that the better man is the one who lies less ?

Vice presidential debate fact check - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Funny, but there are factual errors in the 13 WTHR fact checking!!! They clearly don't understand the tax plans from either party.

 

[88GT]

Don't you DARE bring logic and reason to a debate about a debate.

Que is projecting his own opinion onto others. I don't think that's logic.

Both were guilty of stretching the truth/lying to support their arguments. Has it come to the point that the better man is the one who lies less ?

Vice presidential debate fact check - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Come to the point? It's always been that way.

 

[Expat]

CNN Poll: Debate watchers split on who won VP debate – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Ryan 48
Biden 44
in the CNN poll.

 

[DragonGunner]

I think one thing will overshadow the entire debate by tomorrow morning... 'Joe behaved like an @$$hat.'

Yup...thats what they been talking about, even the libs are talking how rude he was an interupted 82 times....Biden tried to hard an pushed too much an said TOOO much because Newt was on the news this a.m. an the libs did not like him talking about how Biden said WE didn't know (related to the terrorsit killing the ambassder) or have ANY knowledge that they wanted help...Newt flat out called Obama a LIAR, that he knew an was told an asked to put Marines in place for protection. Would of liked seeing Newt debate Biden myself....

 

[DragonGunner]

CNN Poll: Debate watchers split on who won VP debate – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Ryan 48
Biden 44
in the CNN poll.

Good Lord....are you watching CNN again......

 

[Mad Macs]

Yup...thats what they been talking about, even the libs are talking how rude he was an interupted 82 times....Biden tried to hard an pushed too much an said TOOO much because Newt was on the news this a.m. an the libs did not like him talking about how Biden said WE didn't know (related to the terrorsit killing the ambassder) or have ANY knowledge that they wanted help...Newt flat out called Obama a LIAR, that he knew an was told an asked to put Marines in place for protection. Would of liked seeing Newt debate Biden myself....

That would have been GREAT, maybe Newt could have offended another minority?

 

[halfmileharry]

That would have been GREAT, maybe Newt could have offended another minority?

We have a great country. Newt will never run out of people to offend. And it's not just the minorities. Whatever that may be. I'd been raised to believe we're all Americans.
Politics suck and I expect little more than the "Dog and Pony show" to sell more advertising and raise more cash. Sure, I've become very sceptical over our country's division.

 

[Survivalcookie]

I found it very interesting that Joe lied over and over and then said Ryan was lying...Biden was rude and an embarrassment to our country...

 

[hoosierdoc]

I think this is a fair summary of our conversation so far. You're saying I'm sticking words in your mouth, but you are the one whining about how wealthy the "1%" are and then you're tired of being presented with the fact that they pay a hugely disproportionate portion of their income in taxes compared to the average joe.

If you want to level the playing field against the wealthy, I assumed you want to do it through taxation as a legal form of wealth redistribution. BUT, when I suggest you want to tax wealth you say I'm putting words into your mouth.

I admit I may be making a straw man argument with you. I assumed your position was typical of those who bring up the 1% in that they are unfairly given opportunities at the expense of the poor and need to be punished to "level the playing field". Are you simply observing something and not suggesting that there is something wrong with some having considerable wealth?


The GOP focuses on Americans. The Dems focus on subgroups at the expense of other subgroups. Any focus on the 1% has been placed there by the left. You are correct when you say the government spends a lot
Of money to maintain status quo. They spend a trillion dollars a year ensuring the poor remain in poverty.

In 2009 the top 1% of income earners paid 38.7% of all taxes. They had an average income of $1.2 million and paid $353,000 in federal taxes. They earned 13% of the nation's income yet paid 38.7% of all the income taxes (steadily increaed since the Bush tax cuts BTW). The top 1% pays 23 TIMES (2300%) as much in taxes as the average household.

The 1% is fluid as can be. Simply look at the Forbes richest list. There are new people every time (20 of the 400 this year) and people drop off. Life does not only deal harsh financial hits to the lower income people (lower class as you'd probably call them).

86% of current millionaires in this country are self-made first-generation wealthy. That is due to the beauty of our capitalist system. You seem to think they are the robber-barons of old who stole their money from others or obtained illegally (Kennedys, cough, cough) (http://www.fidelity.com/inside-fidelity/individual-investing/fidelity-2012-millionaire-outlook)

It's clear you are set to hate wealth and I pity you for that. It will forever cloud your wisdom and likely cause you to be more unhappy than me. Steve Wynn donated 120% of his salary to charity last year. Want to compare that to the typical household? Oh, he's a billionaire who has created 250,000 direct or indirect jobs as well. What a jerk.

I see it the opposite way. I don't think the GOP cares about anyone other than the 1% and will lie as much as necessary to convince the 99% to fight against their own interests. It wasn't always this way but it is now. The Rupert Murdocks and Kochs control the message and the legislators and use their media empire to brainwash rural America.

can you support your feeling with fact? BTW, do you know what percent of income taxes the top 1% pays?

Also... the top 1% is fluid, not made up of the same people. it's not a caste system

Do you really think the top 1% is that fluid? Name one person that has entered the top 1%. I'm sure you know more than 100 people. How many are in the top 1% that didn't start there? By cutting education grants, the GOP is sending the message that only the rich should be able to go to college. The lower classes should not have opportunities to move ahead.

Do you know how much wealth the top 1% controls? Do you know that most tax dollars (like government in general) are spent to preserve wealth and the status quo?

I know a ton of 1%ers actually. Most of them are self-starters. The VAST majority of milliionares are self-made, first-generation wealth. Have you ever read "The Millionare Next Door"?

the top 1% I'm sure controls less wealth than the percentage they pay in taxes. 1% refers to income, not wealth. You have yet to answer my question btw.

Romney referred to groups as "middle income americans", Obama referred to them as "middle class". Repubs see our society as fluid as moving up and down the financial system. Dems see them as immobile groups.

Is this your own arbitrary qualification. No one cares about income when defining the wealthiest Americans. Bill Gates doesn't even draw a salary. Is he not in your top 1%?

The top 1% have an average net worth of $8.4 million. That is 69 times higher than the net worth of the average American.

No but I am tired of hearing about how much taxes the 1% pay. If you look at it from a comparative wealth percentage, it is not unfair.

How typical. You are the one who replied with an arbitrary definition of the wealthiest 1% limited to income. A definition that might not include Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or other billionaires who don't generally earn income or are wealthy despite whether or not they earn income. Then you blame me for changing the terms.

I am not arguing for any new tax. My original post simply stated that the GOP in MY opinion seems only concerned with the well-being of the wealthiest 1% to the detriment of all else. It is silly that YOU wish to limit MY statement by telling ME that I have to limit MY definition of the wealthiest 1% to one based on income.

Hard to debate someone who tries to stick words in your mouth.