By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - 2nd debate, who won? Obama or Romney?

 

Who won the 2nd debate?

President Barack Obama 299 57.72%
 
Governor MItt Romney 149 28.76%
 
Nobody/tie 70 13.51%
 
Total:518
theprof00 on 17 October 2012
killerzX said:
theprof00 said:
killerzX said:
theprof00 said:
killerzX said:


i already posted the transcipt of his speech. its clear he didnt call it a terror attack. words and context matter like you say.

"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

"exactly so you agree with me. he didnt call it an act of terror. he said acts of terror wont shake our resolve" soo, he just saying acts of terror wont shake us. he wasnt calling the bengazi thing a terrorist attack."

"Crazy republicans all think the worst of Obama.
It was a pleasure speakign with you, as always."

"me, a republican?"

 

english.

 

something apparrently foreign to you. as i have posted what obama said. and people with basic understandings of english can see at no point did he call the attack on the embessy a torror attack. In fact he alludes to the anti-muhammed video being to blame. and ommits the word terror every time he he mention the libyia attack.

That was AFTER this first statement.

There is only one thing you are right about here, that he did not specifically say "this was an act of terror".

What he did say was "we will not tolerate acts of terror. Today we bury four of our best. We will not let this stop us from prsuing justice, and finding the people responsible".

If he was talking about a riot, why would he refer to the people as if they were an entity? If he was talking about a riot, why would he say, tonight, that he said he called it an act of terror. He allowed Romney to say other things that weren't true. Why would he vehemently be against what Romney said if he didn't say it? Was he TRYING to make himself look like a liar? No. He said tonight that he called it an act of terror because he himself believed to be implying it when he said it.

no in his speech he alludes to it before he even says the word terror. i bolded it in the transcript. and in a press release the same day (which i posted too) makes no mention of terror (as this one doesnt talk about 9/11, which is the context of his speech use of "terror"), but again alludes to the video. and this all makes more and more sense after watching the days following and seeing them blame the video, and not mention terror. 

I will admit he was likely bridging his mention of the 9/11 terror attack with calling what these people did was "an act of terror" but not in the sense that it was a planned cordinated terror plot perpertraited by the likes of al queda. In more of a general sense that killing people is "an act of terror".

but its still quite clear that obama was not calling it cordinated terror attack, but a spontaneous mob attack. which is consistant in his follwong statements by him and his adminastration. 

and its definetely something Candy had no business throwing her opinion in, throwing a flag so to speek. and it certainly isnt something Romeny got justifably called out on as the media (like msnbc) whats the narrative to be. and unfortunately it likely will be the narrative.

so a can agree with you to an extent, that they were both right. but not in the way that obama in his speech admitted it being a plotted cordinted terrorist attack plotted by a terrorist cell,( which is what romney was calling it), but a spontaneous mob terror attack, random, and due to a youtube video. 

I am for sanity prevailing.

In one point he refers to it in the same context with terror attacks. In a second statement, he alludes to the video.

As for whether he is right or wrong in either assesment is IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW because we don't have the facts, and for example calling it terror could result in diplomatic problems, or as another example, could be giving away information to the terrorists, telling them we're on to them, etc etc etc. This is, of course, me being nice, and giving him the benefit of the doubt, but whether he was right or wrong about what happened is not up for debate.

What IS up for debate is whether or not he said it, and the answer is a resounding, yes he did, otherwise the reference to 9/11 in teh same sentence, and talking about not faltering to acts of terror are complete non-sequitors. It is ridiculous to assume that's what they were...random comments in between sentences.

Obama said he called it an act of terror. I think he did.
Romney said he called it a demonstration. I also know he did this AFTER he said the previous statement.
Romney also just said tonight that Obama never said it was an act of terror. I don't think this si true.

In these three statements, two can be true and non-contradictory.

 

Most importantly, this is really really just a distraction. This was hardly the big event at the debate.



Around the Network
theprof00 on 17 October 2012
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Are you not going to respond to what I said killerx?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

don't care, kasz.

I read the transcript, and it appears to me that in English, while not specifically calling it that, the context provides that he was referring to it, otherwise there was no point to bring up terrorism or trangressors save for brining up the anniversary of 9/11 which just so happened was in no way related to what he was talking about except for sharing the same date.


Well... you'd be wrong on that context.

to quote the Washington Post.

(Note: we added this statement to the timeline after Josh Gerstein of Politico asserted that the phrasing “acts of terror” showed Obama acknowledged “terrorism” was behind the attack. From our many years of covering diplomacy we would say there is a world of difference, but readers can draw their own conclusions.)

 

Killer phrased it awfully, but the term "act of terror" has never been an exclusive term for terrorism and generally has been used to mean "fucked up shit."   Things like Assad using helicopters on his own citizens are seen as "acts of terror" but clearly aren't terrorism because  Assad is the state.

>_>

My only complaint is that this is going to be the only thing talked about, when Obama literally pulled down romney;s pants and spanked him tonight :D



chriscox1121 on 17 October 2012
gergroy said:
theprof00 said:
gergroy said:
theprof00 said:
literally impossible.


what is?

2:1


feel free to prove me wrong, but the two polls I can remember off the top of my head were CNN 67 to 25 and CBS 44 to 21.  I remember seeing more, but I don't remember the exact numbers.  I just remember that Romney was considered the winner by at least a 2 to 1 margin in all of them.  


try almost 4 to 1...it was the biggest debate win in history

http://gop12.thehill.com/2012/10/gallup-romney-scored-biggest-debate-win.html




theprof00 on 17 October 2012
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Are you not going to respond to what I said killerx?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

don't care, kasz.

I read the transcript, and it appears to me that in English, while not specifically calling it that, the context provides that he was referring to it, otherwise there was no point to bring up terrorism or trangressors save for brining up the anniversary of 9/11 which just so happened was in no way related to what he was talking about except for sharing the same date.


Well... you'd be wrong on that context.

to quote the Washington Post.

(Note: we added this statement to the timeline after Josh Gerstein of Politico asserted that the phrasing “acts of terror” showed Obama acknowledged “terrorism” was behind the attack. From our many years of covering diplomacy we would say there is a world of difference, but readers can draw their own conclusions.)

 

Killer phrased it awfully, but the term "act of terror" has never been an exclusive term for terrorism and generally has been used to mean "fucked up shit."   Things like Assad using helicopters on his own citizens are seen as "acts of terror" but clearly aren't terrorism because  Assad is the state.

I can't wait for a statement to come out saying the president was under a strict deny policy in order to let the troops work without alerting the terrorists to military operations.



gergroy on 17 October 2012
theprof00 said:

>_>

My only complaint is that this is going to be the only thing talked about, when Obama literally pulled down romney;s pants and spanked him tonight :D


Romney got some spanks in as well.  I think they mostly took turns pulling down each others pants.... nevermind, I won't finish that sentence...



Around the Network
gergroy on 17 October 2012
chriscox1121 said:
gergroy said:
theprof00 said:
gergroy said:
theprof00 said:
literally impossible.


what is?

2:1


feel free to prove me wrong, but the two polls I can remember off the top of my head were CNN 67 to 25 and CBS 44 to 21.  I remember seeing more, but I don't remember the exact numbers.  I just remember that Romney was considered the winner by at least a 2 to 1 margin in all of them.  


try almost 4 to 1...it was the biggest debate win in history

http://gop12.thehill.com/2012/10/gallup-romney-scored-biggest-debate-win.html

yeah, I said it was the biggest debate win in my original post.  I also said at least, I think that CBS poll might have been the smallest margin of all the polls I saw.



theprof00 on 17 October 2012
gergroy said:
theprof00 said:

>_>

My only complaint is that this is going to be the only thing talked about, when Obama literally pulled down romney;s pants and spanked him tonight :D


Romney got some spanks in as well.  I think they mostly took turns pulling down each others pants.... nevermind, I won't finish that sentence...

They always look like they're going to kiss at the beginning too *o*



Kasz216 on 17 October 2012
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Are you not going to respond to what I said killerx?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

don't care, kasz.

I read the transcript, and it appears to me that in English, while not specifically calling it that, the context provides that he was referring to it, otherwise there was no point to bring up terrorism or trangressors save for brining up the anniversary of 9/11 which just so happened was in no way related to what he was talking about except for sharing the same date.


Well... you'd be wrong on that context.

to quote the Washington Post.

(Note: we added this statement to the timeline after Josh Gerstein of Politico asserted that the phrasing “acts of terror” showed Obama acknowledged “terrorism” was behind the attack. From our many years of covering diplomacy we would say there is a world of difference, but readers can draw their own conclusions.)

 

Killer phrased it awfully, but the term "act of terror" has never been an exclusive term for terrorism and generally has been used to mean "fucked up shit."   Things like Assad using helicopters on his own citizens are seen as "acts of terror" but clearly aren't terrorism because  Assad is the state.

>_>

My only complaint is that this is going to be the only thing talked about, when Obama literally pulled down romney;s pants and spanked him tonight :D

That's really only due to the fact that you kept pressing and highlighting a point in which you pretty demonstratably wrong on.

Like, I haven't even seen the debate... and this is the only thing I get out of this thread because you kept going on about something you were just wrong on... I mean, even the Atlantic has no problem admitting that Obama didn't call it a terrorist attack and even went so far as to be behind his own administration in doing so.

"Elsewhere in the Sept. 20 interview, Obama made the startling statement that "you can't change Washington from the inside, you can only change it from the outside." He blamed the deadly storming of the Benghazi consulate on reaction to an incendiary American-made video even though other members of his administration had already begun describing it as a preplanned terrorist attack"

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/why-we-shouldnt-be-surprised-obama-is-falling-behind/263644/

Cnn etc... the fact checkers go against obama and you on this one.  Surprisngly.  Since usually they would just stick to such a quick mention, but actually dug deeper on the issue.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57533862/fact-checking-the-second-presidential-debate/

 

If you want to focus on the parts where Obama beat Romney... focus on those points.  Rather then trying to defend the points where he lost.



killerzX on 17 October 2012
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Are you not going to respond to what I said killerx?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

don't care, kasz.

I read the transcript, and it appears to me that in English, while not specifically calling it that, the context provides that he was referring to it, otherwise there was no point to bring up terrorism or trangressors save for brining up the anniversary of 9/11 which just so happened was in no way related to what he was talking about except for sharing the same date.


Well... you'd be wrong on that context.

to quote the Washington Post.

(Note: we added this statement to the timeline after Josh Gerstein of Politico asserted that the phrasing “acts of terror” showed Obama acknowledged “terrorism” was behind the attack. From our many years of covering diplomacy we would say there is a world of difference, but readers can draw their own conclusions.)

 

Killer phrased it awfully, but the term "act of terror" has never been an exclusive term for terrorism and generally has been used to mean "fucked up shit."   Things like Assad using helicopters on his own citizens are seen as "acts of terror" but clearly aren't terrorism because  Assad is the state.

>_>

My only complaint is that this is going to be the only thing talked about, when Obama literally pulled down romney;s pants and spanked him tonight :D

while i disagree that obama spanked him, actually i think romney did slightly better (shocking, i know)

but this is actually a good thing for obama, as it looks like romney was flat out wrong, and a doofus. because candy wrongly corrected him, and the audience cheered.

 

i read this too i thought it was funny: "if they were truly undecided voters, they were apparetnly undecided between president obama and the green party"



theprof00 on 17 October 2012
chriscox1121 said:
gergroy said:


feel free to prove me wrong, but the two polls I can remember off the top of my head were CNN 67 to 25 and CBS 44 to 21.  I remember seeing more, but I don't remember the exact numbers.  I just remember that Romney was considered the winner by at least a 2 to 1 margin in all of them.  


try almost 4 to 1...it was the biggest debate win in history

http://gop12.thehill.com/2012/10/gallup-romney-scored-biggest-debate-win.html

According to Gallup, Republicans gave him a 95% win over Obama, Independents picked him, 70%-19%, and even Democrats thought Romney won, 49%-39%.

 

The problem, is that your link has republicans, liberals, and undecided voters as evenly split thirds. That is why these numbers don't add up. the undecided are like 12% of voters.