The Rules of Debate

[rogue06]

Except I cited The Wall Street Journal which by most accounts is one of the most liberal news sources in the country (the Journal's "conservative" reputation stems from the fact that its primary focus is economic rather than political). I deliberately picked that as my source specifically so that low-info morons like you and Dimbulb couldn't take issue with it. But instead of challenging an article from a left-wing source which cites a wide variety of studies, Dimmy there links to Wikipedia which has been proven time and time again to be an unreliable source.

Seriously, guys, you can't make this up.

The WSJ's editoral section is conservative but several studies have shown that it's news reporting tilts decidedly to the left.

[seer]

I think Trump was suffering from cocaine drip, which is probably why he couldn't stay focused.

I told him to wait until after the debate to start doing lines! He never listens!

[Irate Canadian]

It has happened time and time again, that when the government artificially increases wages, it's invariably followed by long-term economic decline as employers are forced to reduce hours, layoff workers, put a freeze on hiring, raise prices, or in the worst instances close up shop, especially in cases of small businesses like restaurants which have razor-thin profit margins. The idea that you can raise the cost of labor without it having a negative impact on business is a liberal fantasy. It's like trying to end poverty by printing more money. You can't get something for nothing. Even the government's own CBO report was forced to concede the negative impact of raising the minimum wage!

Source: USA Today

(Feb. 2014) President Obama's call to raise the federal minimum wage could help lift 900,000 workers out of poverty, but at a cost of as many as 500,000 jobs, according to an analysis released today by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...-jobs/5582779/

© Copyright Original Source

And research consistently supports this conclusion:

Source: Forbes

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin.../#3a10a05e3680

© Copyright Original Source

Source: Heritage Foundation

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...n-million-jobs

© Copyright Original Source

At best, artificially increasing wages would hurt as many people as it helps.

Exactly!

I remember reading an article somewhere that even if we do raise the minimum wage, it only has a short-term benefit, and is generally just used as a talking point for lower economic class voters to vote more to the left, even though on this issue a raise in the minimum wage would be more negative then positive to the economy over the long term.

There are some reasons to vote for the left, but this kind of pandering isn't one of them.

[seanD]

Howard Dean accused Trump of snorting coke. Howard Dean said this publicly.

[The Thinker]

CtZ0RCQWIAAC9zL.jpg

CtZPlkNUIAAMq96.jpg

[Mountain Man]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18813[/ATTACH]

Reiterating discredited talking points counts as a "fact check"? I can't tell if this is serious or satire.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18814[/ATTACH]

In other news, Trump held a rally in Florida last night with 18,000 in attendance. It would have been 30,000, but the venue couldn't hold everybody who showed up.

trump-melborne-7.jpg
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...a-trump-rally/

When was the last time a Hillary event was so eagerly attended? Trump is filling airplane hangers. Hillary can barely fill a conference room!

[The Thinker]

Reiterating discredited talking points counts as a "fact check"? I can't tell if this is serious or satire.

Discredited talking points? Are you kidding me? These are all well known facts.

In other news, Trump held a rally in Florida last night with 18,000 in attendance. It would have been 30,000, but the venue couldn't hold everybody who showed up.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18815[/ATTACH]
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...a-trump-rally/

When was the last time a Hillary event was so eagerly attended? Trump is filling airplane hangers. Hillary can barely fill a conference room!

Right, a stadium filled with the stupidest people in the country ran out of capacity, and that therefore shows all those quotes in the picture are wrong.

Oh and I'm not a Hillary fan, so I don't care about how many events she fills.

[Mountain Man]

Discredited talking points? Are you kidding me? These are all well known facts.

Well-known to liberals maybe.

Trump actually refuted at least three of those lies on the spot during the debate.

[rogue06]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18814[/ATTACH]

That is pretty much from the Never Trump crowd who probably had those reviews written and ready to post before the debate started.

[Mountain Man]

Right, a stadium filled with the stupidest people in the country ran out of capacity, and that therefore shows all those quotes in the picture are wrong.

No, it shows that those quotes are from media pundits who are out of touch with voters. They can claim all they want that Trump lost, but online polling and the enthusiasm of Trump supporters tells a much different story.

[Raphael]

That is pretty much from the Never Trump crowd who probably had those reviews written and ready to post before the debate started.

Except, as someone who would reluctantly vote Trump to keep Clinton out of the White House, if I were an American, had similar opinions of Trump's performance.


While I am not American, I think there are a bunch of people who are sitting in the same seat of "voting Trump because we don't want Clinton" who are not happy with Trump's performance. Even if we don't like him that much, his performance is going to make them apathetic enough to skip voting, and he needs all those folk, and the fence sitters to get out there and vote for him.

[Starlight]

I cited The Wall Street Journal which by most accounts is one of the most liberal news sources in the country (the Journal's "conservative" reputation stems from the fact that its primary focus is economic rather than political). I deliberately picked that as my source specifically so that low-info morons like you and Dimbulb couldn't take issue with it. But instead of challenging an article from a left-wing source which cites a wide variety of studies,

You're falsely equating left-wing with liberal. The WSJ is an economically right-wing, socially liberal publication. So I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw it on economic issues. Its purpose is to tell the Wall St CEOs what they want to hear, which is that they are the most wonderful people in the world and essential to the economy, and that they should pay their staff less. There's few sources in the world I would trust less on economic issues, although of course Breitbart would certainly be one of them.

[Mountain Man]

Except, as someone who would reluctantly vote Trump to keep Clinton out of the White House, if I were an American, had similar opinions of Trump's performance.

While I am not American, I think there are a bunch of people who are sitting in the same seat of "voting Trump because we don't want Clinton" who are not happy with Trump's performance. Even if we don't like him that much, his performance is going to make them apathetic enough to skip voting, and he needs all those folk, and the fence sitters to get out there and vote for him.

I readily admit that Trump's performance wasn't stellar, but while he missed a couple of golden opportunities, it certainly wasn't the disaster that some are making it out to be. As for Hillary, her stilted, meandering, over-rehearsed answers didn't do her any favors. It was like listening to a kid reciting his lines in a grade school play. No emotion, no conviction, just a robotic delivery.

I stand by my original assessment: Trump didn't hurt himself, and Hillary didn't help herself. All things considered, that's a win for Trump.

[Mountain Man]

At least that's what it sounds like to me.

[Starlight]

At least that's what it sounds like to me.

So, question:
Are you such a low information moron that you don't understand the difference between socially liberal and economically left-wing, or were you deliberately trying to deceive us by equating them?