How Are You Defining A Debate Win?

[MarcATL]

Specifically.

How about you participate in your own crappy thread?

You must be retired, or just a bad worker if you have the time to lounge around this site all day and all night.

I don't, I have work to do and that comes first.

With that said, I've read this entire thread frontways and backways, and I've yet to see a valid response from a RWer.

I guess he won because you people feel he did. He went out and lied his BUT-TOCKS off and acted like a petulant child screaming out of turn and what's not and you define that as a win.

The fact-checkers have already dismantled all of Mitt Robot's talking points and he has positioned himself to be more left than he has been campaining these last 18 months. Like Obama said, that wasn't Mitt Romney that he debated that night, that fellow on stage was a stranger pretending to be Mitt Romney.

It will be interesting to see how far all his lies will get him.

 

[usmcstinger]

Specifically.

I define a winner as one who truthfully and successfully convinces the majority of people that his/her ideas are best for the public. Though having charisma and dominating debate are impressive, convincing people with facts is what matters to me.

Then you'd have to say that Obama won the debate, because all Mittens did was lie.

A stupid statement from a stupid person. Obama telling the truth is an oxymoron.

If you had an original thought it would die of loneliness. You are a typical Obama voter.