What questions would you like to see asked in the debates?

canndo

Well-Known Member
"Mr. Obama, you said during your first term that you would respect the state's rights to regulate medical marijuana as they saw fit. Why have you now opted to interfere with their practices?"


"Mr Romney, A two part question - are you a medical expert? and second, It is clear that this country spends many billions of dollars a year prosecuting a war on Pot smoking Americans with no positive effect. Further, 50 years of medical research has found no compelling medical reason for the prohibition of marijuana. Should you become president what will you do differently than Mr. Obama with regard to cannibis"?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
"Based on both your records, why should any American believe any of your rhetoric?"

I like it.... what we never see is well crafted questions. A well crafted question will force the answerer to answer in a responsive way or be glaringly obvious that he has "pivoted" (the new word of this cycle). Never ask a "two part question" or a series of questions unless the first part can only be answered in a positive or negative way, never give the answerer a way to pick the question he wants to address.

"why should we believe you" would be a great way to open a debate.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
"mr. romney, don't you think it would be more appropriate to place the luggage on the roof and the dog in the car?"
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Fun as it may be, don't you think you would rather not waste your question?
i don't consider that a wasted question.

how someone can justify treating a vulnerable creature in such a calloused manner is very relevant to what i think about them as a leader.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Why is democrats trying to suppress debate questions?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79718.html?hp=r20
hey socky mcsockpuppet, learn to read. they aren't trying to suppress any questions, they don't want questions about getting the deficit in order to be LIMITED as the republicans are trying to make happen.


the Simpson-Bowles commission’s plan “may contain proposals helpful to our recovery…to hold it out as the only pathway to fiscal responsibility and economic success is foolish and wrong.”

“We urge the [Debate] Commission to fight any effort to unnecessarily narrow such an important debate by placing disproportionate attention on one set of proposals over another,”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79718.html#ixzz23eNYV31d
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Mr. Douche bag or Mr. Turd Sandwich, Where in your constitution that you have both sworn oaths to uphold does it say that government can restrict what a free and peaceable person can possess or ingest ?
 

Nitegazer

Well-Known Member
For both candidates:

Being that our $700 billion defense budget represents 20% of the Federal budget, and represents about half of the world's expenditures on military forces-- How can a balanced budget be achieved without considering a considerable reduction in defense spending?
 

deprave

New Member
For both candidates:

Being that our $700 billion defense budget represents 20% of the Federal budget, and represents about half of the world's expenditures on military forces-- How can a balanced budget be achieved without considering a considerable reduction in defense?
good question...the answer is that its impossible..that’s what I was going to write actually
 

nontheist

Well-Known Member
hey socky mcsockpuppet, learn to read. they aren't trying to suppress any questions, they don't want questions about getting the deficit in order to be LIMITED as the republicans are trying to make happen.


the Simpson-Bowles commission’s plan “may contain proposals helpful to our recovery…to hold it out as the only pathway to fiscal responsibility and economic success is foolish and wrong.”

“We urge the [Debate] Commission to fight any effort to unnecessarily narrow such an important debate by placing disproportionate attention on one set of proposals over another,”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79718.html#ixzz23eNYV31d
Yes because we don't want to ask any questions that "democrats can be held accountable for". We have far more important things than dept right? Like Mitts tax returns.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
i don't consider that a wasted question.

how someone can justify treating a vulnerable creature in such a calloused manner is very relevant to what i think about them as a leader.
UB, a question such as this when presented to a sociopath will result in a useless answer. Better that we simply note that he did what he did as in my opinion there can be no sufficient excuse. Can you think of an answer that would have you dismiss his action? I can't.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Mr. Douche bag or Mr. Turd Sandwich, Where in your constitution that you have both sworn oaths to uphold does it say that government can restrict what a free and peaceable person can possess or ingest ?

I think this is to vague and invites all sorts of rhetoric.
 

deprave

New Member
"BromneyTron Model 5,000 and Model 6,000: Why is government the exception to moral rules such as theft and murder? How much longer do you think politicians such as yourselves will get away with your lies and deception? Why is your rhetoric exactly opposite of your actual plans? Lastly, why do you follow your corporate overlords as opposed to the people in your actions while only paying lip service to us? Thank you both in advance Mr's BromneyTrons its an honor to be in the presence of such divine royalty! I Look forward to your pandering answers and false display of character"
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Yes because we don't want to ask any questions that "democrats can be held accountable for". We have far more important things than dept right? Like Mitts tax returns.

Say! In all the talk about Ryan and Ayn Rand I forgot about that... Where are those tax returns anyway?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
For both candidates:

Being that our $700 billion defense budget represents 20% of the Federal budget, and represents about half of the world's expenditures on military forces-- How can a balanced budget be achieved without considering a considerable reduction in defense spending?

Nice, but it lets' Obama off the hook.
 
Top