#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
Calling all Obama voters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgfA2b9YSag
After watching this video I just wanted to know some proper reasons why people voted for Obama. I mean, when he speaks you can't help but like the guy, but policy-wise what was the reason smart people voted for him? Just curious...
| Add New Argument |
|
1
point
-1
points
2
points
-2
points
Explain to me where she says she will "get something for free,to get free hand-outs". In reality, the says: "I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car, I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he's gonna help me." You and the video creator are merely twisting her words. The key word is "worry". She knows she'll still have to do it (put gas in her car and pay her mortgage), but she won't have to "worry" about it, i.e. coming up with the funds to pay for those won't be difficult (in her view). Because she believes Obama's policies will make her standard of living better. Not because she thinks he'll give her (specifically) a handout. To be honest, this video backed up your point less than the previous one. Additionally, will you provide a reputable source (not some 30 second clip from youtube) to back up your claim that Obama voters are idiots? 2
points
Weak argument, would not the language have been "being able to pay my mortgage." Plus the whole concept of voting because you are going to get something is exposed. If I help him,he'll help me. Should we not vote for what's best for the country rather than what we will get out of "helping" him. Sounds like a promise in my opinion or the thought of one. Additionally, you will never be satisfied with any source so no, no I won't. "Should we not vote for what's best for the country rather than what we will get out of "helping" him." That sounds rather like a socialist. Sacrificing freedoms for the greater good. Also, are you saying that she doesn't think of any but herself? Using herself as a personal example does not eliminate her belief that others will not also have to worry about mortgages and gas. "Sounds like a promise in my opinion or the thought of one." So don't vote ever. Politicians make promises. If you don't like promises, don't vote for politicians, i.e. don't vote ever. But, I'm sure you want to vote. Just make sure that when you do, don't vote for the people who will 1) help you out (even if you aren't the only one being helped) or 2) promise things. 1
point
Who said anything about sacrificing freedoms? Keep your hands off my constitution. Mine and your freedoms end only when someone's rights are violated just like it has always been 2) no I am not saying that but she gave her vote up for a hand out, for the goverment to take from someone else to help her(only way goverment can,they produce nothing) because she helped him get elected If you don't see the difference between a promise to do what is best for a country or a promise if you vote for me with the thought of I don't have to worry about paying my mortgage,about putting gas in my car,I don't know what to tell you.The woman in the video specifically spelled out what she thought she was going to get in return for voting for Obama. "Who said anything about sacrificing freedoms? Keep your hands off my constitution. Mine and your freedoms end only when someone's rights are violated just like it has always been" Don't worry, I wasn't planning on taking your freedoms. I was just twisting your words into a way they weren't intended. I wonder if that sounds familiar. "she gave her vote up for a hand out" No she didn't. She meant perhaps a bit larger scaled: the economy will recover, I'll get a job/be promoted, I'll earn more money, and then I won't have to worry about the mortgages or gas. We have yet to know if she was correct in her beliefs, but you can't deny she believed them. Regardless, are your (now 13) allegedly stupid Obama voters representative of the entire 53% US voters who voted for Obama? 1
point
"Don't worry, I wasn't planning on taking your freedoms. I was just twisting your words into a way they weren't intended. I wonder if that sounds familiar." Yes,you do it all the time. "No she didn't. She meant perhaps a bit larger scaled: the economy will recover, I'll get a job/be promoted, I'll earn more money, and then I won't have to worry about the mortgages or gas." See you did it right there,you told us what she meant. You are twisting her words to mean what you want "meant perhaps" proves that clearly. But you can do that right,we can't but you can. "See you did it right there,you told us what she meant. You are twisting her words to mean what you want "meant perhaps" proves that clearly. But you can do that right,we can't but you can." My interpretation is not twisting her words. You have your interpretation that I believe is wrong, and I have my interpretation that I think is right (for my previous arguments' reasons). Of course there will be disagreement on her intent as we are not her. 1
point
I did not say that you could not do the same. I believe your interpretation is wrong (i.e. that she was asking personally for a handout). As I believe it's wrong, I believe it's twisting her words. I'm sure you believe my interpretation is wrong, ergo, it is twisting her words. It seems that through your confusion you have stated no one should be able to analyze another's words. I'm sure that was not intended, but I see no other logical extension from your standpoint. 1
point
"will you provide a reputable source (not some 30 second clip from youtube)" The inference that I am twisting her words (which you also admit to now) and you saying you are right along with "provide a reputable source" was not an attempt to say don't do this? If my interpretation of this is wrong that you were stating in public that only myself and the recorder were twisting her words along with a "that's not a reputable source" was not an attempt at trying to silence me, I apologize but I think this tactic is really quite simply to see on this site alot. While I may be confused (another attempt at trying to silence), I think it was quite clear that you did not agree with my interpretation and you acted on that. "It seems that through your confusion you have stated no one should be able to analyze another's words. " No,I have stated that you think you can analyze her words to fit your belief but that the video poster and myself may not because we are twisting her words and using a source that you do not prefer. Just some consistency please. "The inference that I am twisting her words (which you also admit to now) and you saying you are right along with "provide a reputable source" was not an attempt to say don't do this?" By "this" I am inferring you are speaking of...what? Providing reputable sources, not a 30 second clip from YouTube with no background of the women giving the statement, nor of the date of her interview, nor the news program she was featured on, nor a poll that states most Obama voters want handouts? Right, silly of me to expect a professional approach to opining. We should all spout our opinions regardless of factual backing. "If my interpretation of this is wrong that you were stating in public that only myself and the recorder were twisting her words along with a "that's not a reputable source" was not an attempt at trying to silence me, I apologize but I think this tactic is really quite simply to see on this site alot." Except for the last part (where I'm confused at what you are saying exactly), I can respond fairly simply. I stated in my previous post (the one you disputed) that to either one of us, the other is twisting the woman's words. "Twisting words" is merely a phrase similar to "interpreting" except much more packed with negative connotations. Using vague or uninteresting vocabulary can hardly be persuasive. I hope that explanation wasn't confusing. "Just some consistency please." I fail to see the inconsistency. I expressly state (in posts previous to this) that we are (both) mutually twisting her words to our own ends. Could any less be expected when posting one's opinion without first-hand experience to the interview? I did not say that you could not do the same. I believe your interpretation is wrong (i.e. that she was asking personally for a handout). As I believe it's wrong, I believe it's twisting her words. I'm sure you believe my interpretation is wrong, ergo, it is twisting her words. It seems that through your confusion you have stated no one should be able to analyze another's words. I'm sure that was not intended, but I see no other logical extension from your standpoint. 1
point
"Regardless, are your (now 13) allegedly stupid Obama voters representative of the entire 53% US voters who voted for Obama?" Alot are jumping ship including Democrats running for office that don't want to be seen with him (Obama). Also I would really like to find out how this lady is feeling right now about her situation,even the situation you "perhaps" thought she was referring to. Wonder if her worries are gone? "Alot are jumping ship including Democrats running for office that don't want to be seen with him (Obama)." A lot of Republicans are jumping ship including Republicans running for office that don't want to be associated with new radical Republican proposals. See, I can make a claim without any data too. But I won't. Instead, I'll provide a different perspective: http://campusprogress.org/articles/ It's not that people are necessarily jumping from one party or another, but rather that the younger generation (< 30) of voters are disinterested with our political system. They are more likeley to vote for their Democratic candidate in the district (57% compared to 32%), but only about half say they will definitely vote. Meanwhile, the older generations (30-50 and 50+) are more likely to vote Republican (45% to 43% and 52% to 41% respectively) and are also more likely to vote at all (65% and 80% respectively). These numbers don't indicate jumping ship, but rather a lack of participation. 1
point
Texas Democratic candidate distance themselves from Obama- It's not just the young voters,it's the candidates For the most part, according to a Gallup poll, Obama's (dis)approval ratings are relatively equal: 46% approval, 47% disapproval. The numbers have remained close since about April. As such, one can hardly claim people are jumping ship. Although the Democratic candidates in Texas (a Red state) are distancing from themselves Obama when he travels to Austin (a red city in a red state), I don't see much ideological differences, just physical differences. (for red states and blue states: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ |
