VP debate game thread

#252
#252
Over on CNN, Soledad O'Brien just did a quick head count and it looked like it was Biden by a few hands. . . she referred to it as an overwhelming win for Biden. :crazy:
 
#253
#253
OrangeEmpire said:
Where is rdj.... the fool is not doing to bad.
Click to expand...


I decided to watch the debate without any distractions.

Real quick, I give a slight edge to Biden (which I am seeing just agreed with the Ohio voters), but some fact checking may even it out at a draw. Not sure I believe every statistic he threw out. I didn't realize the several orders of magnitude in difference between the costs of Iraq in Afghanistan. 3 weeks in Iraq is equal to all 7 years in Afghanistan? That is an amazing statistic if true, and shows where the priority has been between actually getting Bin Laden and pursuing an Iraq agenda.
 
#256
#256
rjd970 said:
I decided to watch the debate without any distractions.

Real quick, I give a slight edge to Biden (which I am seeing just agreed with the Ohio voters), but some fact checking may even it out at a draw. Not sure I believe every statistic he threw out. I didn't realize the several orders of magnitude in difference between the costs of Iraq in Afghanistan. 3 weeks in Iraq is equal to all 7 years in Afghanistan? That is an amazing statistic if true, and shows where the priority has been between actually getting Bin Laden and pursuing an Iraq agenda.
Click to expand...

Do you still think she's a moron?
 
#257
#257
Of couse I'm biased, I think Palin won. Biden just didn't need to screw up. I think it made people feel a little better about McCain, and there'll be a bump, but 4 weeks is a long time away.
 
#258
#258
allvol123 said:
Biden - "Humans are fully responsible for global warming". LOL.
Click to expand...

In a sense, I will agree with your LOL...but only depending on how one defines "global warming." Obviously man doesn't play A IOTA of a role in the large scale global cooling and global warming periods (as in glacial to interglacial glacial transitions).

Some of the warming we've seen recently, on the other hand (inside the standard 10-20 year solar cycles), is likely at the hand of man. If this is the warming that they speak of when they say "global warming," then I'm not going to "LOL." And, I personally think that is the warming he is speaking of. I'll listen to debate on it, but I don't think it is laughable at all.

But...I think that words are important in this debate...and those are the wrong words to use. For the very reason you point out...
 
#261
#261
TennTradition said:
In a sense, I will agree with your LOL...but only depending on how one defines "global warming." Obviously man doesn't play A IOTA of a role in the large scale global cooling and global warming periods (as in glacial to interglacial glacial transitions).

Some of the warming we've seen recently, on the other hand (inside the standard 10-20 year solar cycles), is likely at the hand of man. If this is the warming that they speak of when they say "global warming," then I'm not going to "LOL." And, I personally think that is the warming he is speaking of. I'll listen to debate on it, but I don't think it is laughable at all.
Click to expand...

How do you think he meant it?
 
#262
#262
TennTradition said:
In a sense, I will agree with your LOL...but only depending on how one defines "global warming." Obviously man doesn't play A IOTA of a role in the large scale global cooling and global warming periods (as in glacial to interglacial glacial transitions).

Some of the warming we've seen recently, on the other hand (inside the standard 10-20 year solar cycles), is likely at the hand of man. If this is the warming that they speak of when they say "global warming," then I'm not going to "LOL." And, I personally think that is the warming he is speaking of. I'll listen to debate on it, but I don't think it is laughable at all.
Click to expand...

Shocking. You do realize he said man was responsibile for all of it?
 
#263
#263
rjd970 said:
I decided to watch the debate without any distractions.

Real quick, I give a slight edge to Biden (which I am seeing just agreed with the Ohio voters), but some fact checking may even it out at a draw. Not sure I believe every statistic he threw out. I didn't realize the several orders of magnitude in difference between the costs of Iraq in Afghanistan. 3 weeks in Iraq is equal to all 7 years in Afghanistan? That is an amazing statistic if true, and shows where the priority has been between actually getting Bin Laden and pursuing an Iraq agenda.
Click to expand...

the 3 weeks in Iraq garbage is very much about the type of troops, the geography and limited war focus.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#264
#264
allvol123 said:
How do you think he meant it?
Click to expand...

I think that he meant it as a form of emphasis to assert that man plays a role in the global warming that extends beyond the standard warming the sun does on its own. In other words...within the context of the greenhouse effect and man's impact on that effect.

I would also wager that he probably doesn't understand all that much about it...and if he were sufficiently aware of the issue, he wouldn't make a blanket statement like the one you quoted because it sounds kind of dumb. It's too easy to misinterpret...
 
#265
#265
volsforever27 said:
Shocking. You do realize he said man was responsibile for all of it?
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I was walking in and out of the room during some of the debate..but during the parts that I heard (and I think that I heard all of the discussion on global warming)...I didn't get that impression at all. By saying man is fully responsible, I think he is trying to say that man can't shake our responsibility....that he feels there is a direct link and that while Palin was questioning just how responsible man was (maybe he is maybe he isn't), he was countering that.

The difference is that "global warming" in the context of a political debate has a very specific definition - it is man's addition of greenhouse gases or depletion of cooling mechanisms that lead to an increase in average temperatures greater than that which would occur under normal solar cycles without man's influence.

Did the issue come up again after the question that was asked early on about it? Maybe I missed something....
 
#266
#266
TennTradition said:
I'll be honest, I was walking in and out of the room during some of the debate..but during the parts that I heard (and I think that I heard all of the discussion on global warming)...I didn't get that impression at all. By saying man is fully responsible, I think he is trying to say that man can't shake our responsibility....that he feels there is a direct link and that while Palin was questioning just how responsible man was (maybe he is maybe he isn't), he was countering that.

The difference is that "global warming" in the context of a political debate has a very specific definition - it is man's addition of greenhouse gases or depletion of cooling mechanisms that lead to an increase in average temperatures greater than that which would occur under normal solar cycles without man's influence.
Click to expand...


But the point is TT, he knew exactly what he was saying, and many like him honestly believe that. You're getting into sematics here. He believes man is to blame, and is appealing to the the far left of his party. Sometimes things are exactly as they seem.
 
#267
#267
volsforever27 said:
But the point is TT, he knew exactly what he was saying, and many like him honestly believe that. You're getting into sematics here. He believes man is to blame, and is appealing to the the far left of his party. Sometimes things are exactly as they seem.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to obfuscate the point by delving into semantics, I'm trying to define the point, which I think is important. I, too, believe that Biden was saying man is to blame...and he isn't just appealing to the far left of his party in saying that. The point is man is to blame...for what?

And, as I said, I think that the what in this instance is the extra warming that man has caused (or some of the cooling that we may not see in downward cycles due to man's influence). That isn't an outrageous claim at all. McCain supports that claim.
 
Last edited:
#268
#268
And to add to my post above about global warming...I don't like Palin's position on this at all. She basically argued that man's impact is negligible in her first TV interview, then went on to say that the climate is changing though - as they've seen in Alaska, and therefore she and John McCain are going to do everything in their power to reverse those effects. If man isn't causing the damage, then how are we going to turn it around? She's basically blurring over her opinion and going with McCain's...which is OK...but there are always glaring inconsistencies when she talks about it.
 
#269
#269
BigPapaVol said:
the 3 weeks in Iraq garbage is very much about the type of troops, the geography and limited war focus.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Maybe, but no way that accounts for all of it. I would say a good portion of that is spent on contractors, mercenaries (blackwater types), and waste where we have no idea where it went.

Do you realize that works out to 8/1000th the amount of money we are spending in Afghanistan compared to Iraq? I find it hard to believe that even if we redirected only a tenth of the resources in Iraq to Afghanistan we couldn't have hunted down Bin Laden sometime in the last 7 years. Hell, we could have bought Pakistan's cooperation with those kind of resources.

...of course, if it is really true.
 
#270
#270
TennTradition said:
I'm not trying to obfuscate the point by delving into semantics, I'm trying to define the point, which I think is important. I, too, believe that Biden was saying man is to blame...and he isn't just appealing to the far left of his party. The point is man is to blame...for what?

And, as I said, I think that the what in this instance is the extra warming that man has caused (or some of the cooling that we may not see in downward cycles due to man's influence). That isn't an outrageous claim at all. McCain supports that claim.
Click to expand...

The fact that McCain supports anything doesn't make it correct. He didn't mention anything that man may be partially to blame, or that there are cyclical changes, he said man was to blame. Period. Nothing else. And yes, it is an outrageous claim to me and many other people.
 
#271
#271
Yea I can't see the leeway you are giving him TT. I think he meant what he said and said what he meant, seems a foolish position to me. The adjusting what people owe on their house thingy was full blown crazy to.
 
#272
#272
volinbham said:
Do you still think she's a moron?
Click to expand...

My opinion hasn't changed on either. I wish she would have actually answered some of the questions posed to her and I wish Biden would have toned down the Bush referendum attacks some.
 
#273
#273
volsforever27 said:
The fact that McCain supports anything doesn't make it correct. He didn't mention anything that man may be partially to blame, or that there are cyclical changes, he said man was to blame. Period. Nothing else. And yes, it is an outrageous claim to me and many other people.
Click to expand...

Maybe I overestimate the knowledge of those who believe in man-made global warming. His point was clear to me...that man has does indeed have responsibility for changes in our climate...and full responsibility for (man-made) global warming. Of course many factors affect climate. Man does not bear full responsibility for the climate. Obviously. But "global warming" means mans impact on the environment inside a political debate...does (man-made) global warming exist or does it not. Biden says man does. That is how I took it. I'm willing to give you that might not be how certain members of his party may take it.

As for the McCain reference, I only brought that up to serve as a data point for my assertion that Biden is appealing to more than just the far left of his party in making that statement (and that it is viewed as plausible and not outrageous by more than just the far left).
 
#274
#274
rjd970 said:
Maybe, but no way that accounts for all of it. I would say a good portion of that is spent on contractors, mercenaries (blackwater types), and waste where we have no idea where it went.

Do you realize that works out to 8/1000th the amount of money we are spending in Afghanistan compared to Iraq? I find it hard to believe that even if we redirected only a tenth of the resources in Iraq to Afghanistan we couldn't have hunted down Bin Laden sometime in the last 7 years. Hell, we could have bought Pakistan's cooperation with those kind of resources.

...of course, if it is really true.
Click to expand...

at the time Bin Laden got away, we were still debating about Iraq. There was plenty of resources and not enough guts.

The disparity in force types makes an extreme difference in cost. SF types just aren't that expensive.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#275
#275
allvol123 said:
Yea I can't see the leeway you are giving him TT. I think he meant what he said and said what he meant, seems a foolish position to me. The adjusting what people owe on their house thingy was full blown crazy to.
Click to expand...

Fair enough...I can't truly claim I know exactly what he means. I think that I know what he meant, but I could be wrong. Maybe he means that man was responsible for every degree of average temperature increase from 1950 to 1998. He would be wrong in that claim. Man has attributed at most about 0.5 °C of that rise, according to most experts.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top