• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Presidential Debate round 2

As a sexy foreigner, I can't see why any sane person would call Obama a socialist. It is a word, it has a definition, Obama comes nowhere close to meeting that definition. Those that insist on using it just make themselves look dumb to those that actually know what socialism is.

That is, I feel, the biggest problem here. In general, too many people don't know what they are talking about. They are not informed with the facts, yet they charge forward with the fervor of a Crusader.

More specifically, for many, Socialism is simply a scary word they grew up with. They don't understand it any more beyond the concept that our enemies during the Cold War were socialists and we should therefore fear anything (and anyone) associated with the word.
 
As a devious foreigner, i can't see why a sane person would vote for romney.

As a sexy foreigner, I can't see why any sane person would call Obama a socialist. It is a word, it has a definition, Obama comes nowhere close to meeting that definition. Those that insist on using it just make themselves look dumb to those that actually know what socialism is.

As a smug foreigner, I'm amused by American political theatre/circus.

As Foreigner I want to know what love is...
Oh, you guys just made my day! :lol:
 
If this was fiction a whole lot of fangirls would be wanting them to kiss.

ghEON.jpg
 
As a devious foreigner, i can't see why a sane person would vote for romney.

As a sexy foreigner, I can't see why any sane person would call Obama a socialist. It is a word, it has a definition, Obama comes nowhere close to meeting that definition. Those that insist on using it just make themselves look dumb to those that actually know what socialism is.

As a relatively sane American, I'm as baffled as you two.
 
wow, both these guys are acting like babies. Fighting over wanting the last word.

Yeah, we get it, you think both candidates are equally terrible. You made that abundantly clear in the last debate thread. Do you have anything constructive, in-depth, or interesting to say about either candidate, or can we just expect another thread full of you whining about how everyone sucks?

Feel like acting like a dick much?

It's a regular Algonquin Roundtable around here...

:lol:

As for debate #2: Obama...by a comfortable margin. Not as big as Romney in debate #1, but a comfortable margin. The President seemed much more in his element. He was (IMHO) more specific, more genuine, and better prepared to counter the fairy tale Romney has constructed around himself over the past several weeks.

And of course, the "Binder Full of Women" is a classic. Basically, he admitted that in all his years of business "leadership", he had no personal contact or relationship with any woman qualified to be in his cabinet. Not one.
 
And of course, the "Binder Full of Women" is a classic. Basically, he admitted that in all his years of business "leadership", he had no personal contact or relationship with any woman qualified to be in his cabinet. Not one.
Unless we're talking about his filing cabinet!



(I know, I'm sorry. Blame it on the Vicodin.)
 
^^^ No and no.

I'm actually quite baffled by this "binder-gate" thing. I heard him say it, but I interpreted it in exactly the way it was intended - these women's groups coming to Romney with three-ring-binders full of names and resumes of women who would be qualified to work on his cabinet. Within 90 seconds the gutter was crowded with all kinds of weirdness over that one small statement. Does anyone REALLY think Mr. Mormon meant anything else by that use of words?

I'm not a big fan of either of these two guys but this whole over-reaction seems a bit infantile. It sounded like an episode of Beavis and Butthead, "huh..huh huh...he said BINDER! huh huh...huh huh"... :confused: :shrug:
 
^^^ No and no.

I'm actually quite baffled by this "binder-gate" thing. I heard him say it, but I interpreted it in exactly the way it was intended - these women's groups coming to Romney with three-ring-binders full of names and resumes of women who would be qualified to work on his cabinet. Within 90 seconds the gutter was crowded with all kinds of weirdness over that one small statement. Does anyone REALLY think Mr. Mormon meant anything else by that use of words?

I'm not a big fan of either of these two guys but this whole over-reaction seems a bit infantile. It sounded like an episode of Beavis and Butthead, "huh..huh huh...he said BINDER! huh huh...huh huh"... :confused: :shrug:

Well, there are a couple of things.

First as I already mentioned, how did Romney go through his whole career without meeting one woman qualified to be on his cabinet? Why did he need "binders full of women"? Didn't he know any? Didn't he hire or mentor any bright young women during his illustrious business career? Even just one?Apparently not. How many of us don't know one woman qualified in our field? That's bizarre, and telling (IMHO).

Second, as has been made clear since the debate, Romney did not reach out to anyone.

“I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’” Romney added. “And they brought us whole binders full of women.”

Romney’s story isn’t entirely accurate.

Those “binders full of women” actually came from a coalition called Massachusetts Government Appointments Project, or MassGAP, that had formed in August 2002 to address the shortage of women in high-ranking government positions. They had started assembling groups of applicants, taking several months to reach out to women’s organizations around the state and preparing to present potential hires to whichever candidate won the election.

So that part of his story, his heroic outreach to disenfranchised women, was a lie. He had nothing to do with it.

And also, the final numbers speak for themselves:

"Midway through his four-year term, 42 percent of his 33 new appointments were women, according to a study done by the UMass Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy using some of the data collected by MassGAP.
But over the next two years, women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office."

So women actually lost ground during his term as Governor.

Source:

http://www.boston.com/politicalinte...ly-accurate/jrKRRGSIPqjvuKX8dgq6gL/story.html

The gender gap is certainly an important dynamic in this election, and Romney did himself no favors.

Lastly, the internet meme...well, that's what the internet does. Takes silly things and blows them up. The fact that it caught on so quick and so big says something resonated there (in a negative way). It was at best clumsy, and at worst, indicative of how little thought he gives to the subject.
 
^^^ No and no.
I would rather not have the debates. They only agree to a moderator who never truly challanges them.

Then what's the point?

Isn't the financial industry generally more male friendly compared to to other industries?

At least thats what i get by looking around on the WallstreetOasis.
 
Last edited:
I'm actually quite baffled by this "binder-gate" thing. I heard him say it, but I interpreted it in exactly the way it was intended - these women's groups coming to Romney with three-ring-binders full of names and resumes of women who would be qualified to work on his cabinet. Within 90 seconds the gutter was crowded with all kinds of weirdness over that one small statement. Does anyone REALLY think Mr. Mormon meant anything else by that use of words?

Everyone understood what he meant.

The fallout is due to the implications that follow from how he expressed what he meant. 1001001 nailed it just upthread:

And of course, the "Binder Full of Women" is a classic. Basically, he admitted that in all his years of business "leadership", he had no personal contact or relationship with any woman qualified to be in his cabinet. Not one.

Yes. The fact that he had to go flip through binders with resumes of people he'd never heard of before implied he couldn't just call up so-and-so. (Of course, that's leaving aside the allegation that the names from these binders were just used to fill positions Romney didn't consider important.)

Additionally, Romney seemed completely oblivious to how ridiculous what he said sounded, just grammatically.

Last night on Hardball, Chris Matthews interviewed James Lipton, who had this to say about Romney [http://www.trendsvid.net/worldwide/2012-10-18/jameslipton.html]:

James Lipton said:
Do you want a President, or a boss?
The "Binders Full of Women" quote underscores just how much the culture of Romney is the latter.
 
Did the Kill List ever get mentioned?

Or civil rights?

^^^ No and no.

I'm actually quite baffled by this "binder-gate" thing. I heard him say it, but I interpreted it in exactly the way it was intended - these women's groups coming to Romney with three-ring-binders full of names and resumes of women who would be qualified to work on his cabinet. Within 90 seconds the gutter was crowded with all kinds of weirdness over that one small statement. Does anyone REALLY think Mr. Mormon meant anything else by that use of words?

I'm not a big fan of either of these two guys but this whole over-reaction seems a bit infantile. It sounded like an episode of Beavis and Butthead, "huh..huh huh...he said BINDER! huh huh...huh huh"... :confused: :shrug:

You don't consider the fight for income equality between genders --the very thing you're referencing above-- a civil rights issue? Or access to healthcare, contraceptives? Or immigration rights? All of those were touched on to varying degrees, and all are civil rights issues.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top