2012 USA Election Thread: Obama projected winner

[symphonyx64]

My take on last night's debate:

Obama may have scored more political points, but looking at polls taken right after the debate the same night, Romney destroyed Obama on issues that are going to decide the election such as the economy, taxes, and the deficit. I dont think this changes anything for Obama except that he slowed the bleeding for him.

And can we please quit this evolution talk? Thanks.

 

[JabbaTheGriffin]

My take on last night's debate:

Obama may have scored more political points, but looking at polls taken right after the debate the same night, Romney destroyed Obama on issues that are going to decide the election such as the economy, taxes, and the deficit. I dont think this changes anything for Obama except that he slowed the bleeding for him.

And can we please quit this evolution talk? Thanks.

I don't know how that makes sense when at one point Obama literally said Romney's tax plan doesn't add up and Romney had no answer other than "it adds up." The fact that people can say Romney has the edge on taxes without asking for specifics really astounds me.

 

[Jorgen]

Yeah, I'd say Romney "won" the debate in the sense that he's the one I see getting a poll bump because of it. I really dislike the fascination with "winning" or "losing" a debate, though, because I think it discourages actual discussion and consideration of issues and instead focuses on who seemed more "certain" in a superficial sense when spouting out talking points.

But yeah, if I had no idea who to vote for or what my political stance was, I'd say Romney came across as a lot more confident and pointed in his attacks against the administration whereas Obama and his characteristic "uhhhh"s made him seem uncertain when trying to defend it, especially when he couldn't seem to give a straight answer to Romney's direct (if often off-topic) questions. Say what you like about the tactic of "gotcha" questions, I'd say it worked for Romney last night.

I never would have guessed a month ago that Romney would have been anywhere near as viable a candidate as he seems right now. However, Obama's still got the incumbent's advantage, so he's definitely still favored to win in my eyes, especially when there's over 2 weeks left for the fickle public to forget all about these debates.

 

[J-man]

Do you think that we currently have solid reasons to believe that the civil war happened? No one currently alive witnessed it.

There were people who witnessed the Civil War who wrote what they witnessed down on paper for people to read about. Some people preserved that work and copied it over so that the works could be preserved and future generations would know about it.

Also, there is no need to critique the example, it was just an example. I could add more lines of evidence to make it more robust but that's not the point.

Oh, but there is every need to critique the example from my point because it was terribly flawed. I revealed how flawed your line of reasoning was and rendered useless every sort of reasoning why worldviews are a pathetic criteria for electing officials. The more robust your example, the more difficult it is to link it to your particular worldview because it lacks definitive evidence, just like mine does.

You say it was unnecessary all you want, it doesn't de-legitimize anything I said about how flawed your response was.

The link works for me.

I believe I stated it did... It wasn't working last night, but now it is... Go figure...


You know what? I'm not sorry for breaking what I said about not speaking of this... It's on topic even thought it's as far away from the central topic possible.

 

[elcheeso]

Guys. You need to remember that evolution is observable and has, in fact, been observed. Not just for micro organisms (though they're the usual targets since they reproduce so damn quickly it's easier to see), but also larger animals like insects (the peppered moth experiment comes to mind, and no it wasn't refuted)... and, occasionally, humans. I seem to recall one paper about the skin colour of (I think) Japanese people living in Japan becoming lighter over the course of something like 200 years, believed to be linked to sexual selection. I couldn't tell you how robust the paper was (I saw it something like a decade ago), but yeah. It's like seeing a guy shoot another and say he couldn't possibly be responsible and the crime was in fact caused by wizard magic, or that we could never know it wasn't in fact caused by wizard magic.

You can have stupid-ass worldviews all you want, but science has no place for wizard magic. It's probably also best to not do something like put a guy who doesn't give a shit about scientific evidence and all that good stuff on a science committee, sort of like it wouldn't be a good idea to put a guy on a medical board if he's someone who doesn't believe micro organisms can cause disease. I'm also curious about where he saw all this "evidence" for a young earth as a "scientist" when he was a GP. Do medical doctors do a lot of research in earth sciences?

No comment on the "don't vote Republican" thing over this, but it is important to note that this guy is not a radical within that party for disregarding 140+ years of scientific data and refinement.

 

[lati0s]

There were people who witnessed the Civil War who wrote what they witnessed down on paper for people to read about. Some people preserved that work and copied it over so that the works could be preserved and future generations would know about it.

How do you know they weren't lying? How do you know the copies aren't fakes?

The evidence that we have that the civil war happened is not fundamentally different than the evidence for evolution.

 

[J-man]

How do you know they weren't lying? How do you know the copies aren't fakes?

The evidence that we have that the civil war happened is not fundamentally different than the evidence for evolution.

This is ridiculous. We have PHOTO EVIDENCE of the Civil war confirming beliefs of how the Civil War went about. We don't have photo evidence of the millions and billions of years of Evolution. You are grasping at straws. Just accept that evolution is nothing more than a worldview, as I have been trying to point out, and admit it is a pointless criteria for electing our state officials

 

[popemobile]

yes let's all admit that we disregard an overwhelming amount of evidence and support for the theory of evolution, so much so that it is considered fact by the vast majority of the scientific community, simply because some random fundy on a message board has no idea what he's talking about

 

[J-man]

yes let's all admit that we disregard an overwhelming amount of evidence and support for the theory of evolution, so much so that it is considered fact by the vast majority of the scientific community, simply because some random fundy on a message board has no idea what he's talking about

Would you like to actually contribute something in this debate for once? Oh wait... You never do.

 

[popemobile]

hey you know what we don't have any photo evidence for either? the bible

your move holy man

 

[J-man]

hey you know what we don't have any photo evidence for either? the bible

your move holy man

How about try something on topic for once. OR you could start a thread on the subject. I'll gladly debate you when it's on topic...

 

[lati0s]

This is ridiculous. We have PHOTO EVIDENCE of the Civil war confirming beliefs of how the Civil War went about. We don't have photo evidence of the millions and billions of years of Evolution. You are grasping at straws. Just accept that evolution is nothing more than a worldview, as I have been trying to point out, and admit it is a pointless criteria for electing our state officials

Photos can be faked and doctored they are no more perfect than other forms of evidence.

The evidence from the fossil record, DNA and laboratory experiments all point to the fact that all the different species on this planet have a common ancestor. Evolution is not just a worldview, it is the only reasonable conclusion based on all the available evidence.

 

[Temperantia]

You know what? I'm not sorry for breaking what I said about not speaking of this... It's on topic even thought it's as far away from the central topic possible.

How about try something on topic for once. OR you could start a thread on the subject. I'll gladly debate you when it's on topic...

Please stop calling the kettle black.


On topic, I'm not entirely sure how to take last night's elections. I thought Obama pointed out several major flaws in Romney's platforms, but apparently people think Romney came out ahead? It just didn't come across that way to me.

 

[J-man]

Photos can be faked and doctored they are no more perfect than other forms of evidence.

Once again, you are grasping at straws and even threatening to destroy your own beliefs for the sake of the argument. A hypothesis of a mass doctoring of photos on that scale would be considered nothing more than a lunatic tinfoil conspiracy.

The evidence from the fossil record, DNA and laboratory experiments all point to the fact that all the different species on this planet have a common ancestor. Evolution is not just a worldview, it is the only reasonable conclusion based on all the available evidence.

Citing evidence of fossil records is circular reasoning. I'm not sure what laboratory experiments have proven evolution as a fact. I'm not sure why you want to cite DNA as a fact for evolution when it is a big wrench in the belief system. As you fail to grasp, your beliefs are framed from your worldview. Your worldview claims absolutism, yet you can't prove it. They should mean nothing in electing federal officials in areas where we can actually test things and see results.

Please stop calling the kettle black.

Please stop using strawmen? This is a perfectly on topic discussion. I made the claim that worldviews should not factor into our decisions for picking our leaders. Those who believe Evolution tried to discredit my arguments by claiming it was fact of life, and thus no one who doesn't believe in it should hold important offices, especially in important offices that involve science.

 

[popemobile]

well if anyone was wondering how some of these politicians get elected, here's your answer.

 

[J-man]

well if anyone was wondering how some of these politicians get elected, here's your answer.

Would you care to leave the peanut gallery and actually participate in this debate?

 

[Danmire]

why is it that most christians vote for romney just because he says god more than the other guy and talks about god. it's not even the same belief.

well, lemme go on topic-
it's just my opinion on the debate. obama really ate up romney last night and i'm really glad he was more alive in this debate. can't wait to see the last one.

 

[Tobes]

Citing evidence of fossil records is circular reasoning.

J-man saying this is a lovely bit of irony.

 

[Tayla]

J-man, it looks ridiculous to see another Christian in here droning on about how evolution doesn't exist. If you want to look at it subjectively, the Bible was written by human beings, it wasn't written by God. God could have done anything at all in those "seven days" he spent creating everything, and there is irrefutable evidence that evolution has, and does, occur. There's simply no getting around it, so you either have to adapt your reasoning for your faith or at least start a debate topic about it.

As for the two candidates, I can personally say I dislike both of them. A rock a hard place. Romney flip flops on literally everything, and the only thing that I really like about the guy is he ran a successful business. Obama himself should have focused on the deficit before majorly overhauling healthcare, or at least waited two years.

Got two weeks and I'm still not sure who I'm picking..

 

[lati0s]

Citing evidence of fossil records is circular reasoning.

No it's not. Fossils exist. When we analyze the fossils we see that they are indicative of evolution

I'm not sure what laboratory experiments have proven evolution as a fact.

Laboratory experiments have allowed us to observe speciation in some animals. There have also been experiments that have shown some species changing over time to adapt to their environment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation

I'm not sure why you want to cite DNA as a fact for evolution when it is a big wrench in the belief system.

What? DNA is probably the strongest evidence for evolution.

this video shows one way that DNA gives evidence for evolution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7HBMWfRqSA

As you fail to grasp, your beliefs are framed from your worldview.

No. My worldview is based upon drawing the best possible conclusion from the evidence

 

[v]

jman this is an executive order: shut the fuck up

edit: this extends to everyone discussing evolution. evolution has nothing to do with obama and romney specifically, go whine about it somewhere else

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

hey you know what we don't have any photo evidence for either? the bible

your move holy man

ha ha ha I love you popemobile

Evolution is a fact, there is honestly little you can debate outside of Abiogenesis and other nit picky things like the origin of the eye. Stuff like that will eventually be found out, for example, for years we did know know the origin of the protein that controls the flagellum, but recently research into it has found an evolutionary link. The you simply can't ignore the enormous evidence for it, or worse throw it all away claiming the earth is 7000 years old...

On the debate, I thought Obama did pretty well, he got a bit offensive with the attacks, but that is what we needed, us democrats are tired of him just standing by and letting Romney spout his bullshit. I can't tell you how many times Romney dodged an economic question by just saying "derp derp Obama's plan isn't working derp derp." I don't feel that earned him any points on the opposing side,, but maybe he might of actually persuaded some more moderates. All we can do is hope.

 

[symphonyx64]

I don't know how that makes sense when at one point Obama literally said Romney's tax plan doesn't add up and Romney had no answer other than "it adds up." The fact that people can say Romney has the edge on taxes without asking for specifics really astounds me.

We can debate the specifics later and whether Romney should release more math, but the point is Romney has a framework for a tax reform plan. All I hear Obama talking about is taxing the rich. I believe this is why Romney has the edge.

 

[ndlz]

Once again, you are grasping at straws and even threatening to destroy your own beliefs for the sake of the argument. A hypothesis of a mass doctoring of photos on that scale would be considered nothing more than a lunatic tinfoil conspiracy.

Here's another possible scenario: Perhaps the man had threatened the victim over several emails, as you have said. The man feels remorse and takes the victim out to (Insert fancy restaurant here) and apologizes verbally to him, but forgot to delete all those emails from his draft. Now perhaps the man's identical twin who hated the victim and loathed that his brother never killed said victim did it himself, fled after you saw him, having previously destroyed all documented records of his existence (He is a very advanced hacker) before you figure out that the man had a twin and put the blame on the man?

lol.

 

[iDunno]

We can debate the specifics later.

It looks like Romney has you right where he wants you...