It's 90 minutes of curb stomping.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Vice-Presidential Debate |OT| The Big F$@*ing Deal vs. The Randian from Dairyland
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
It's 90 minutes of curb stomping.
Sigh, a psychiatrist. They're trained in Freud's outdated unscientific bullshit.
nhlducks35
Member
From my facebook
The comments on that article are so salty.
Biden won if that's all they've got.
Might as well as say "Biden won, and that makes me uncomfortable".
I'm pretty sure at one point he brings out a flame thrower.
You mean the part where he reminds us that Congressman Ryan sent two letters asking for some of dat sweet sweet stimulus money?
That's the one. Just remembering it makes me grin like...well like Biden does lol
Something Wicked
Member
So how do currency traders measure "value" of a specific currency?
Countries have always needed something to "back" their currencies with something of perceived value to allow people in other countries to accept such currencies. In the past, it used to be mainly gold and military force, though today it's more so a country's GDP (with a tinge of military force), which currency traders value for any given country. However, if a country issues more currency or debt than what traders perceive the country's GDP value to be, such traders en masse will likely force the value of that country's currency to decrease. For any country that relies on resources and products from other countries, having a tanking currency is generally not good, particularly for a non-manufacturing based one.
Despite being one the most self-sufficient nations, the US still needs resources from the rest of the world and thus must play by the currency trading rules of the world, unless you believe the US government holds absolute control over global currency markets. On the other hand, by being the world's largest economy, having the world's most powerful military, and having the world's de facto reserve currency, the United States does have immense leeway in terms of total debt levels and debt-to-GDP ratio versus other countries.
However, the world is changing- and this change is inevitable and ultimately, a good thing. The developing world is becoming richer every year and thus the relative power of the United States, Europe, and the rest of the "developed world" is decreasing every year. Such power will continue to decrease and in a couple decades the power difference between the current developed and developing worlds will be almost negligible. Currency traders in other countries, which such traders appear to have a propensity for siding with their own nation's interests, will be able to essentially, as I say, call "bullshit" on American, Japanese, British, German, French, etc. debt and deficit spending.
Assuming people in other countries will accept another country issuing debt well beyond that country's economic perceived value is... a very arrogant train of thought and completely undiplomatic. Not only that, but such massive spending/debt issuing of one country can dramatically increase global income inequality.
So yeah, there are consequences for high deficits- quite severe ones. And no, Japan is absolutely not in a desirable position with its very high debt levels, though most of it is internal. Excessive external debt can be more dangerous, yet currency traders can hit a currency's value for either type of debt.
For the US, our entitlement program spending is projected to skyrocket in the coming years. Also, we're approaching the upper end of a technological "S" curve, in which no major increase in new industries will occur during this period. The US will never see the GDP growth rates of the '50s again; thus we must be much more careful with debt spending from now on. Relying on for history to exactly repeat itself is absolutely foolish given new global dynamics. The policies Paul Krugman or these MMT disciples will not save us. However, I'm not all too worried, as I think in the end, the individualistic spirit and suspicion of government promises which most develop while living the US will lead most Americans to accept concessions for entitlement benefits to mitigate our debt/deficit problems.
Hey, I was at a bar last night watching the Yankees and Steelers choke, which being from Boston, was awesome.
OK, I tuned in for the presidential debate. I saw Obama getting his ass kicked live. I posted as much on here.
I tuned in last night. I saw fake and flacid Ryan trot out terrible talking points over and over ("They shouldn't have called him a reformer!") in meter that makes Jindal sound like the smoothest talking guy in the world, while Biden controlled the entire debate from go, countered every falsehood presented, was in control of both figures and flow, and spoke directly to the audience.
I'm just trying to figure out, how, in any reality, Biden "lost" the debate. Can someone, conservative or otherwise, elucidate this for me? What is the narrative of a Ryan win? Is it simply "Biden laffed 2much, TKO Ryan."? What's going on?
I tuned in last night. I saw fake and flacid Ryan trot out terrible talking points over and over ("They shouldn't have called him a reformer!") in meter that makes Jindal sound like the smoothest talking guy in the world, while Biden controlled the entire debate from go, countered every falsehood presented, was in control of both figures and flow, and spoke directly to the audience.
I'm just trying to figure out, how, in any reality, Biden "lost" the debate. Can someone, conservative or otherwise, elucidate this for me? What is the narrative of a Ryan win? Is it simply "Biden laffed 2much, TKO Ryan."? What's going on?
Synth_floyd
Banned
Apparently Biden lost the debate because he smiled too much.
except biden was never "raging"
nhlducks35
Member
For shits and giggles, let me quote some of the comments on that pic
smokeandmirrors
Banned
biden was rude and disrespectful. ryan played it cool and played it presidential, like jfk.
NullPointer
Member
I haven't seen anything yet besides calling Biden mean.
Only because the guy next to him had the audacity to tell blatant lies to millions of Americans, often contradicting his own work from just the last 2 years.
Far more rude to lie to the masses.
Yeah I don't know why lying every single fucking step of the way into the White House gets a pass, but treating a bullshitter like a bullshitter is some grave offense.
Ask that person why they're voting for someone that's clearly not religious because of Ayn Rand's philosophy that he worships, and a Mormon which with all respect for religious beliefs is not at all mainstream Christianity.
Besides the craziness that is vanilla fundamentalism.
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
Did Biden really say that the government didn't know there was lack of security at the US embassy in Benghazi?
The context he "lost" in, is that he was, in some viewers' eyes, condescending and rude to Congressmen Ryan. There's a case to be made for that, as a similar criticism was lobbied at Gov. Romney last week.
However, the difference between the two gentlemen however is both context and content. While VP Biden did make a few errors in presentation, the Libya discussion for example, the majority of the time Biden's remarks and demeanor are representative of his frustration with the fact that Ryan, well, isn't speaking facts.
So, because Biden was so fucking direct and so fucking on point, the GOP has no way to spin this positively. However, they can point out that he was so fucking direct in contrast to Ryan, drilling this point home to the base easily translates into "Ryan made tonnes of great points, Biden was just to rude to let him finish!"
Thus, Biden lost in their minds due to him not rolling over. Remember, battered GOP syndrome? Note, there's no speaking of the overall content of the debate. Just Biden's attitude. Shit, I don't even think the media picked up on the Libya shit. Which, honestly, is about the only thing they could criticize and sound legit about.
Yes. Either A. the White house at the time really did have different information than the state department or B. he's toting the White House line. Take your pick. Ryan was correct about that one point.
Angelus Errare
Banned
OH So he's John Kennedy now?!
Consulate
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
I was watching the post analysis today on msnbc. One analyst said that swing voters might be put off by Biden's enthusiasm. They went on to say swing voters didn't matter in this stage of the campaign.
What?
What?
H_Prestige
Banned
I loved Biden's tone towards the other guy. That's what debating is, not reciting pre-rehearsed lines for two minutes at a time. The hell is the point of that? Call each other out on bullshit. Ryan could have attacked Joe the same way if he thought he was BS'ing. But he didn't because he can't. He doesn't fucking know anything, and can't stand up to someone who obviously knows what the fuck he's talking about.
It's really pathetic how he didn't answer a straightforward question put to him, twice, on specifics of his tax plan. Isn't that way more disrespectful than Biden laughing and facepalming the whole time?
It's really pathetic how he didn't answer a straightforward question put to him, twice, on specifics of his tax plan. Isn't that way more disrespectful than Biden laughing and facepalming the whole time?
You have to keep in mind that a large portion of our population treats this as they might American Idol.
I fully expected a firestorm over that one. That was the one instance Joe Biden floundered. Ryan was perfectly right to call him on it. But all I keep hearing is "boo hoo, Joe's such a meanie pants."
Reuters/Ipsos debate poll
Biden 42
Ryan 35
Biden 42
Ryan 35
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/12/us-usa-campaign-debate-poll-idUSBRE89B1AK20121012
Sirpopopop
Member
Seems like that also applies to Mitt Romney.
This polls clocks in right around the average result of a high single-digits win for Biden.
There's probably a better bible verse you could put up for Romney. Perhaps "A righteous man hates lying" or "A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies" or "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth" or "Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron."
Any one of those, really.
Damon Bennet
Member
while I disliked the amount of grinning and interrupting that biden did, he absolutely destroyed ryan. I cannot even comprehend how anyone could say it was a draw. Ryan got schooled and had nothing to show in return.
Pretty funny how pundits are saying that Ryan was quiet and dignified. Some even said that he looked presidential. Meanwhile, Obama did the same thing, yet he looked weak and unsure.
Our media is bullshit.
I was thinking the exact same thing earlier. Only one of them was lying nearly the entire debate. Fucking hypocrites.
exactly and the Republican strategy is to give them just that sort of campaign. All fluff no substance.
Try to win on style points and then do whatever the hell they want to pay back their donors if they win
Yep its about what I expected.
Escape Goat
Member
As of today facts matter at Fox News.
As of today facts matter at Fox News.
Wonder if they had the same story when Romney's campaign had to correct some of his facts after that debate...
ThatCrazyGuy
Member
Its the victim card being played. Kinda sad really.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins
Banned
False equivalency ftw.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
I agree. Romney's actually a liar.
Are you finally moving on from pretending that your man didn't get his asshole demolished onstage?
Red Blaster
Member
Your face is a false equivalency
You're right, it isn't equivalent. Mitt lied waaaaaay more than Biden could have dreamed of.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked