The VP Debate
Archived22 replies · 309 views
Who won?
Closed-
Halliburton 2 (40%)
-
Senator Edwards 3 (60%)
5 votes · voting closed
Originally posted by Grahame Ferguson I thought this thread was gonna be about ladies kinickers. Very dissapointed.
Imagine my disappointment. ;)
Cheney did very, very well tonight. He is exceptionally skilled at making his points, and he has a commanding grasp of facts and policies.
Obviously the reason Cheney wowed audiences when he drank a glass of water while Bush was speaking.
Edwards also did very, wery well tonight. He is also exceptionally skilled at making his points, and he also has a commanding grasp of facts and policies.
Cheney unleashed some scathing attacks against Edwards; Edwards gave as good as he got.
It was really too close for me to say with certainty that one was the better debater. I'm going with Edwards, because everytime Cheney launched into his smoke & mirrors routine, Edwards pointed out that it was smoke & mirrors. ![]()
Originally posted by Tristan Nearly half an hour through and Edwards is getting a whoopin'
Is that a Village People avatar? ![]()
Originally posted by Aleph > Originally posted by Tristan> Nearly half an hour through and Edwards is getting a whoopin'
Is that a Village People avatar? ![]()
You wish!
Kids in the Hall
The results are in:
According to an ABC poll, 43 percent of registered voters said Cheney won, 35 percent gave the win to Edwards, and 19 percent called it a tie. Thirty-eight percent of the viewers were Republicans, 31 percent Democrats, the rest independents. The phone survey was conducted among a random sample of 509 registered voters who watched the debate.
CBS News' poll specifically focused on uncommitted voters and found 41 percent deemed Edwards the winner, 28 percent chose Cheney, and 31 percent said it was a tie. CBS based its poll on a "nationally representative sample of 178 debate watchers ... who are either undecided about who to vote for or who have a preference but say they could still change their minds."
So, Republican voters said Cheney won, while undecided voters said Edwards won. Yeah, I know Tristan, "Facts are stupid things," as your favorite President was wont to say. ![]()
Two of my favorite Vice-Presidential lies from the debate:
(1)
CHENEY: Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.
The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.
REALITY: Edwards' campaign later provided a transcript of a February 2001 prayer breakfast at which Cheney began his remarks by acknowledging the North Carolina senator. The campaign said the two also met when Edwards accompanied the other North Carolina senator, Elizabeth Dole, to her swearing-in ceremony. Source: CNN.com.
(2)
CHENEY: We've made enormous progress in Afghanistan... they're making significant progress. We have President Karzai, who is in power. They have done wonders writing their own constitution for the first time ever.
REALITY: Previous Afghan Constitutions inlude the 1964 Constitution and the 1990 Constitution. Source: Constitutions of the Countries of the World, Gisbert H. Flanz, Oceana Publications (2002).
Now, can anybody fill me in on the details of the ladies knickers debate?
I thought polls were useless? That's what the Dems said when Bush was in the lead before the first debate. 
Best part of the debate is when Cheney slammed Edwards on the 200 billion dollar remark of Edwards.
I was just waiting for it to lead to the bitch-slapping in the tub of chocolate fudge that we all hoped was coming...![]()
Well, I have to register that Edwards won, but slightly. Cheney is a tough, mean SOB, and anyone who thought he'd roll over is drinking too much of the hippie juice...whatever that means ![]()
Anyway, I almost broke my right big toe at work that night (typical goofing off in the name of slapstick, no worker's comp for that), so my judgement may have been made through the haze of the incredible pain I was going through, but again I think Edwards carried it off slightly. Cheney seemed at times to almost want to jump across the table and rip Edwards apart physically, so I think that doesn't count in his favor. Also, he held on the Big Lie about Iraq (WMDs, ties with 9/11) even as we now know no such things were real. If I were a Republican (and I used to be, until the whole presecution of Clinton made me reconsider my beliefs), I would be asking myself why this nutjob is still on the ticket.
Oh, and my toe still hurts, but I've got it wrapped up and cushioned against anything painful (like a gust of wind) brushing up against it ![]()
You're right, Tristan-- biased polls are useless. Scientifically valid polls are another thing...
The interesting thing about this particular poll is that it reflects the impressions of undecided voters immediately following the debate. And they clearly thought Edwards had won.
This is huge-- both campaigns need the undecided vote to win the election. Going in to the first debate, polls had put Bush about 5% ahead of Kerry. Post-debate, Bush and Kerry were tied. Cheney needed a win here with the undecided voters. He didn't get a win; he didn't even get a tie. First debate: Kerry wins. Second debate: Edwards wins. Next two deates are on domestic policy, Bush's weak points.
Bush is going down in flames. Nothing (well, almost) I like better than to see a Bush go down in flames. Deja vu and all that. ![]()
Originally posted by bLuE oRdEr You're right, Tristan-- biased polls are useless. Scientifically valid polls are another thing... The interesting thing about this particular poll is that it reflects the impressions of undecided voters immediately following the debate. And they clearly thought Edwards had won. This is huge-- both campaigns need the undecided vote to win the election. Going in to the first debate, polls had put Bush about 5% ahead of Kerry. Post-debate, Bush and Kerry were tied. Cheney needed a win here with the undecided voters. He didn't get a win; he didn't even get a tie. First debate: Kerry wins. Second debate: Edwards wins. Next two deates are on domestic policy, Bush's weak points. Bush is going down in flames. Nothing (well, almost) I like better than to see a Bush go down in flames. Deja vu and all that.
Well the polls that favored Bush were scientific polls, and I don't think the Gallup, Newsweek and many other polls should be taken too lightly. Anyways we should all vote for Bush in order to see the New Yorkers in '08 Hillary versus Rudy.
You know one thing that I'm sick of the Repubs saying? (among countless other things)...that Bush is "resolute", "a strong leader", a "man who sticks to his guns"...
Let's put this in perspective: Before the Civil War, Lincoln was on the fence about slavery, but basically had not much of an intention of actually freeing them. If he had stayed "resolute", even after the war, would I be fanned right now by my Negro maids as my big stud Jim works in the field, producing the tobacco products that I need to maintain my outrageous fortune? ![]()
If JFK hadn't been so busy getting head from Marilyn Monroe while the Soviets shipped missles to Cuba, then decided not to waver from the position of going toe-to-toe with the Russkies, would I now be writing this from an underground layer where the resistance to our mutated overlords plans a glorius uprising on the last pristine spot of above-ground earth still livable (New Jersey)?
Anyway, I love how the Repubs say "polls don't matter" then start looking to them immmediately to see if they did good or not. That's like when I say "my drunken ramblings don't matter", then sit anxiously awaiting a response to them....:p
Originally posted by Tristan > Originally posted by bLuE oRdEr> You're right, Tristan-- biased polls are useless. Scientifically valid polls are another thing... The interesting thing about this particular poll is that it reflects the impressions of undecided voters immediately following the debate. And they clearly thought Edwards had won. This is huge-- both campaigns need the undecided vote to win the election. Going in to the first debate, polls had put Bush about 5% ahead of Kerry. Post-debate, Bush and Kerry were tied. Cheney needed a win here with the undecided voters. He didn't get a win; he didn't even get a tie. First debate: Kerry wins. Second debate: Edwards wins. Next two deates are on domestic policy, Bush's weak points. Bush is going down in flames. Nothing (well, almost) I like better than to see a Bush go down in flames. Deja vu and all that.
Well the polls that favored Bush were scientific polls, and I don't think the Gallup, Newsweek and many other polls should be taken too lightly. Anyways we should all vote for Bush in order to see the New Yorkers in '08 Hillary versus Rudy.
No, no, no....'08 will be all about King vs. O'Reilly, because only talk show hosts will be eligable under the NewsCorp/Halliburton Constitution of the United States of Enron ![]()
Originally posted by Taboo # 7 You know one thing that I'm sick of the Repubs saying? (among countless other things)...that Bush is "resolute", "a strong leader", a "man who sticks to his guns"... Let's put this in perspective: Before the Civil War, Lincoln was on the fence about slavery, but basically had not much of an intention of actually freeing them. If he had stayed "resolute", even after the war, would I be fanned right now by my Negro maids as my big stud Jim works in the field, producing the tobacco products that I need to maintain my outrageous fortune?
If JFK hadn't been so busy getting head from Marilyn Monroe while the Soviets shipped missles to Cuba, then decided not to waver from the position of going toe-to-toe with the Russkies, would I now be writing this from an underground layer where the resistance to our mutated overlords plans a glorius uprising on the last pristine spot of above-ground earth still livable (New Jersey)? Anyway, I love how the Repubs say "polls don't matter" then start looking to them immmediately to see if they did good or not. That's like when I say "my drunken ramblings don't matter", then sit anxiously awaiting a response to them....:p
The Dem.s have been the ones this year who have touted the polls the most, and when Bush pulled ahead a couple weeks ago, Republicans stuck in the faces of Dem.s. I like it when Bush pulls ahead in the polls, but would I say they determine an election, no! Gore was ahead in the polls in 2000.
Originally posted by bLuE oRdEr Which explains why he won.
I'm not about to say Cheney lost because of a lousy CBS poll, which is one of the worst news organizations right now. ABC said Cheney won, and I'm waiting for more polls to come out.
But oh well, unless a candidate comes out with a lead greater than the margin of error, then polls don't matter.
Originally posted by Tristan > Originally posted by bLuE oRdEr> Which explains why he won.
I'm not about to say Cheney lost because of a lousy CBS poll, which is one of the worst news organizations right now. ABC said Cheney won, and I'm waiting for more polls to come out.
But oh well, unless a candidate comes out with a lead greater than the margin of error, then polls don't matter.
I meant the 2000 poll explains why Gore won-- the popular vote.
But let's be objective here, Tristan. The ABC poll used a sample in which Republicans were the majority. A poll result in which Republican voters say the Republucan candidate won tells us nothing about the impact of the debate. The CBS poll, on the other hand, was a poll of undecided voters, and they thought Edwards won. That's significant.
Spin, spin, spin-- the well-oiled Republican machine continues to spin, while Bush goes down in flames. ![]()
The debate polls are insignificant considering the small numbers of people used. I would love to do some Chi Squared Tests (and other statistical crap) on these damn polls.
In 2000, the right man won.
