VP debate game thread

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by rjd970

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.

Do you still think she's a moron?

[volsforever27]

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.

[TennTradition]

Originally Posted by allvol123

Biden - "Humans are fully responsible for global warming". LOL.

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...

[VolDad]

Originally Posted by emainvol

It boils down to public perception again, I think the edge will probably go to Biden.

Geraldine Ferraro and the folks on NBC disagree with you.

[emainvol]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Geraldine Ferraro and the folks on NBC disagree with you.

Edit: I'll be nice, Geraldine Ferraro is worthless

[allvol123]

Originally Posted by TennTradition

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.

How do you think he meant it?

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by TennTradition

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.

Shocking. You do realize he said man was responsibile for all of it?

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by rjd970

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.

the 3 weeks in Iraq garbage is very much about the type of troops, the geography and limited war focus.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[TennTradition]

Originally Posted by allvol123

How do you think he meant it?

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...

[TennTradition]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

Shocking. You do realize he said man was responsibile for all of it?

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....

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by TennTradition

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.

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.

[TennTradition]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

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.

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.

[TennTradition]

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.

[rjd970]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

the 3 weeks in Iraq garbage is very much about the type of troops, the geography and limited war focus.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

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.

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by TennTradition

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.

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.