Throbbing Member
While Mitt took lots of zingers, he defended them well. Looked presidential and played the moderate well. Though he's basically lying in the middle.
This election will still be close.
EDIT:
Why because he didn't visit Israel?Originally Posted by 50 Volt Phantom
I don't get this argument at all.
Last edited by PooPooMeowChow; 10-22-2012 at 09:46 PM.
Active Member
Thought it was funny how he tried to use Detroit as his hometown for an excuse. On CNN, the undecided voters didn't go for it.
Every time Mittens says he LOVES anything, I can't help but laugh. Its desperate. Just because you "love" teachers and your country, it doesn't help make you plausible. If he wasnt spewing out BS, he was rewording Obama's words, but somehow try to pass it off differently as an disagreement.
Fact-checkers are going to have another field day.
Not even a copy of a
Aircraft Carriers and Nuclear Submarines - How did Romney have no knowledge of these things?
Throbbing Member
He never used the word apologize, he ADMITTED that the US had made mistakes. And thats not all he talked about. Do you think us a God above self-criticism?
Administrator
Flop sweat.
Active Member
I'm ok with apologies. I think there are a LOT of dead Iraqis we owe apologies to. For starters.
Throbbing Member
That's because Romney doesn't know the first thing about fp. Those open threats against Russia and China made it blatantly clear that he has absolutely no clue what he's talking about, whatsoever.
edit: Okay, watching the debate, and I prefer the sitting setup. The townhall thing was really weird.
edit 2: Fout minutes in: The greatest threat of all is Iran... Yes, because that's the country in the Middle East currently exporting most radical jihadist fighters (Saudi Arabia) and killing most people (Israel). Also a
edit 3: I can already see this is going to be an epic list of edits. Six minutes in, and Romney describes his strategy in dealing with the Middle East (and I presume, global islamist terrorism) as to go after the bad guy, to interrupt them, to kill them... to get the muslim world to reject extremism on their own.
Yes, there's no contradiction there.
Also: comparing the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood with Al-Qaeda displays a painful lack of understanding of "the muslim world".
Also: Barack Obama's reply to this was SPOT ON.
edit 4: I was really honestly hoping he would go back on Russia. Calling it a geopolitical foe is slightly retarded but mostly pretty dangerous.
edit 5: Syria is Iran's route to the sea? WTF? Also: I really don't understand how after making this mistake over and over again since the last Russian defeat in Afghanistan, both Obama and Romney seem to think that they can somehow decide right now who is going to be moderate and 'on our side'.
Last edited by Elke; 10-23-2012 at 10:38 AM.
Throbbing Member
Romney really is all over the map, I've been following this race pretty closely and I can't even tell you what he'll say sometimes. No one is even talking about his major change from the 2nd debate to the 3rd: the 2014 withdrawal date in Afghanistan. In the 2nd debate he argued vehemently that we should only withdraw if conditions on the ground were right, last night he switched to 'we are DEFINITELY getting out in 2014, no question about it!' It's as if everyone's so used to him changing position that they're just taking a 'yeah, but that's his thing' attitude and passing it right by.
Administrator
My comment on Facebook was that Romney's position on Afghanistan is a pretty clear indicator that he at least believes in evolution :b
Throbbing Member
When the president of Iran... says our debt makes us not a strong country, that's a frightening thing. No, it's fearmongering.
Romney is seriously getting on my nerves. I'm trying to imagine the sort of person who looks at this debate and thinks: Yeah, that's right. It's someone without an atlas, who never had geography and history at school and who only watches Fox.
edit: Elections, because when there are elections people vote for peace. Yeah Mitt, I'm sure Hitler agrees with you. Besides, elections can only elect friends of the USA, right?
The HYPOCRISY! It's blinding.
edit 2: I'm not digging Obama calling America the one indespensible nation. That implies all other nations are dispensible.
edit 3: The stuff on education was interesting. I can follow Obama's reasoning, because I'm from a country where the intellectual economy is the most important kind, and I especially liked his comment on class sizes.
I thought Romney's emphasis on test results was rather disappointing, because national or regional tests make people teach to the test, which is never a good thing.
edit 4: lol @ the horses and bayonets comment
edit 5: Crippling sanctions is a good idea? For whom? How is boycotting diplomatic conversations a solution at all?
Last edited by Elke; 10-23-2012 at 11:11 AM.
Throbbing Member
Calling them a geopolitical foe was a good out and actually closer to the truth. While the Cold War is over Russia and China are the only countries who can stand up to America. Russia is clearly trying to stop any American intervention in Syria and Iran as they are the last two middle east countries that don't sell oil in US dollars.
Though in a televised debate calling them a "foe" was a bad idea. Rival or competitor would have been better.
Active Member
Nice, are you saying he's an angry black man?
Bite me
China is not going to care one tiny bit if we call them a "foe." They believe they are the Middle Kingdom, the center of the universe, Tianxia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianxia
They need absolutely nothing from anyone else outside of the Middle Kingdom, nor do they care about the affairs of those outside of the Middle Kingdom.
To understand China, you have to study China's history. It's a pretty big long history. I highly recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/East-Asia-Cent.../dp/0231101090
Throbbing Member
What I meant was, It was a bad idea because it sounds like he's going to act aggressive toward a country that isn't seen as an enemy by the American people. Creating unneeded tension, even though in reality the Russians/Chinese could care less.
I know next to nothing about Chinese history. Never really got into it, probably due to it's sheer size. I've read a lot about Russian history though.
Bite me
But China IS seen as a financial enemy to a LOT of American people.
I think a lot of Americans think of "war" with China in terms of arms and boots-to-ground combat, but a LOT of Americans know we are already losing a financial war to China. And, really, there is zero we can or will do about it. Nearly every single American president has kowtowed to China. Even back when we were in bed with Chang Kai-Shek. Even Reagan, who initially took a hard line against China but whose administration convinced him that he, too, had to Kowtow. We need nearly everything they export, and they need hardly anything of ours (except our oil and a ton of machinery).
https://www.uschina.org/statistics/tradetable.html
Their undervaluing the yuan pisses a lot of people off, but we haven't used Bretton Woods for many years and China refuses to use the U.S. dollar as the basis of their own economy since we're unstable and no longer beyond the control of a global market.
See this: http://articles.economictimes.indiat...cy-yuan-dollar
Last edited by allegro; 10-23-2012 at 05:25 PM.
tempus est umbra in mente
...and none of this even gets into China's troubling relationship with North Korea
Bite me
Not troubling. Again, if you study Chinese history and what it has had to do to defend its borders, it's typical. North Korea must kowtow.
http://chinaperspectives.revues.org/806
Administrator
Reading Twilight of the Elites, by Christ Hayes, which is an excellent book and this excerpt stood out for me. The segment was about social distance between politicians and its citizenry:
Somehow, I don't see Romney making such a gesture as president.In practice, the many layers of representation mean that decision-makers can be quite remote from the citizenry, something the White House of Barack Obama seems particularly attuned to. Every weeknight, before he goes to bed, the President read ten letters from ordinary citizens carefully screened by his correspondence outfit. They often feature people in distress, family members out of work, in the midst of foreclosure or losing their health insurance. The President's advisers say Obama views it as one small way to make sure that he does not get too out of touch. "They help him focus on the real problems people are facing," the President's adviser David Axelrod said. "He really absorbs these letters, and often shares them with us. . .He did it because his greatest concern is getting isolated in the White House, away from the experiences of the American people. . .The letters impact him greatly."
Throbbing Member
I'd more concerned with Pakistan than N. Korea. Pyongyang knows that it wouldn't last long if it were to strike the South. They could level Seoul but that's about it, then they'd be finished. Same with Iran, one strike then they're finished.
Active Member
It's not too bad, diplomatic cables show that China is fed up with Pyongyang and would rather deal with a unified peninsula run from Seoul. Beijing also opposes NK weapons programmes because they don't want neighbouring countries to enter some kind of arms race. NK is only a danger to SK
Pakistan, Israel and Iran/strait of Hormuz are the big dangers to world peace. People talk about Taiwan, but I don't think anything will happen & it would all be done through talks if it did
Last edited by Sutekh; 10-25-2012 at 04:15 AM.
Bite me
Yeah, China has been keeping Taiwan fat and happy, and the Shek generation is pretty much dead.
Throbbing Member
Whats the chance the island disputes between China and Japan could heat up into something?
Bite me
That's a good question.
Japan still hasn't recovered from the Asian contagion, and the tsunami made it worse. They're in no position to stir up China. Taiwan is a part of the PRC, plain and simple. Shek is dead, and the old hardline Shek supporters are dead, too. Without China, Taiwan would sink.
China gets REALLY pissed at the U.S. for selling arms to Taiwan when we've said we wouldn't and broke our agreements a bunch of times, but we always seem to work that out. We have to. We need China. BUT, we're also Japan's ally. We have to stay neutral.
We try to look like we're supporting Taiwan, but we're really full of shit. If push came to shove, Japan can't afford to battle China and we can't afford to battle China, either.
I don't think anybody, including Taiwan, should fuck with China over those islands, though.
http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/column...spute-1.161772
Last edited by allegro; 10-25-2012 at 12:45 PM.
Throbbing Member
Well, who cares about China and stuff, here's the real news:
Axl Rose leans toward Obama but wouldn't probably vote anyway...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/...99.html?hp=r16
Active Member
China has a big standing army but not much capability, they have one aircraft carrier under construction & its a second hand ukrainian hull. US has 11. Not sure about these islands though. Could end up like the falklands
Throbbing Member
China sooner or later is gonna have to come to terms with its people's will. A social and political crisis will most likely follow and social and political stability go hand to hand with economic stability. China, while a force to be reckon with, its not the hegemon most people seem to portrait them as. They've got problems and issues like anyone else.
The communist party is obviously aware of this, and they are trying to slowly reform their political system, but all it takes is a small crisis and all hell breaks lose. We might be seeing a "chinese spring" in the years to come.
Bite me
Maybe you're too young to remember Tienanmen Square? The PRC will NEVER reform their political system; they are learning how to develop stronger state-run capitalism while controlling corruption (inherent part of capitalism).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
One air craft carrier, but they have hacked into our Fed computers on numerous occasions. In the future, wars won't be fought with conventional weapons of war; computers and drones is all you need.
But, don't be mistaken: The PRC has a HUGE military. It's main purpose? Defense. Not only to protect its significant borders (which they've been doing for THOUSANDS of years) but also to control power struggles in their own state (again, something they've done for THOUSANDS of years).
All China has to do to put Taiwan in its place is take away its influx of Chinese cash and investments. Checkmate. Taiwan fights back? See Tiananmen Square (June Fourth Incident).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananm...otests_of_1989
Anyway, neither American party is seriously discussing climate change, bringing criminal charges against the mortgage and securities companies responsible for the 2007 financial meltdown, Gitmo, water boarding (have you seem the Romney Memo?), the Patriot Act ... you know, the important stuff.
[god, posting from my iPad sucks]
Last edited by allegro; 10-25-2012 at 09:51 PM.
Throbbing Member
Statistical proof that the primary elections were rigged in Romneys favor.
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/20...ns-for-romney/
the pdf
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp...alies_V2.0.pdf
tempus est umbra in mente
Active Member
They weren't really that happy with Romney at first though. He certainly wasn't who they originally wanted anyway. Even when he started leading in the polls and the primaries, they were still more enthusiastic about Santorum and Perry.
That was great. And who cares about college records? Obviously Trump does enough to try with extortion tactics. 5 million to charity. Or he is trying to justify donating to charities at all and using Obama as a catalyst? Either way, he's an idiot, and it amazes me how some people take this guy seriously.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 