Tuesday, October 16, 2012

"who's winning?"

It's the most American question there is.  And right now the answer is you, because you're seeing this and therefore likely to capitalize on the extra credit opportunity by answering the questions below in a comment to this post.

1. What does it take to win an argument?  Is this/should this be the same criteria we use to select a president?

2. Who do you think won tonight's debate?  Describe in detail three reasons for your answer.


  1. I think in order to win an argument, the participants mustn't view it as a competition, but rather as a search for the most practical solution. If not it turns into a pendulum of ad hominems and the argument is futile. I do think this should be the same criterion we select our president upon.

    I think President Obama 'won' tonight's debate.
    I think this primarily because Romney's points about economic reconstruction were incoherent and quixotic. While I applaud Romney for mentioning China pegging the Yuan, he failed to provide any solutions to stop it. Another reason I believe Obama won was because he has plans for a slow but solid stabilization of the economy apposed to Romney's 'cut taxes and spend more' notion that is very similar Bush's economic policies that had thrown us into our current debt crisis. My final point is that Romney wants to deregulate or 'cut the red tape' for many large industries which can be harmful to consumers and the environment while Obama wants to maintain the regulations protecting consumers from the oligarchy we call the free market.

  2. I agree with Justin's point of how to win an argument, that it shouldn't be seen as a competition, but rather a way to come to an agreement or solution. To win an argument you also have to be calm, stay on topic, and definitely be reasonable. Having realistic examples and backup for your side of the argument is important. For the most part I think this criteria should be used to select a President, because it should be someone who know their facts, and is reliable to defend our country.

    I didn't get to watch the whole debate because of work, but with the majority that I saw, and listening to my parents I think Obama won this debate. This time it seemed that Obama was more aggressive, yet sensible in his argument and stayed on track in answering the question. On the other hand Romney appeared to be on edge, and more on the defense of making his points, rather than explain his ideas thoroughly and calmly. On the question about letting weapons out to criminal or the mentally ill, Obama gave examples, and explained his idea to the topic and how he can fix it. Then on Romney's turn he went off track, and didn't really explain his thoughts or solution to the topic.

  3. 1.I think that it takes confidence to win an argument because you need confidence in order to be successful. You also need to be persuasive in order to win an argument because you have to be able to get people to like you and change there opinions. Yes, this is the same criteria that we use to select a president because I know that people do not want a president that is not confident in what he or she does.

    2.I think that Obama won the argument because I think he was more to the point than Romney was. President Obama also won because he had good point that put Romney down in my eyes. The first one was when Romney wanted to have Detroit go bank rupt and Obama pointed that out and it is bad because he wants a state to go bank rupt. Another one is when President Obama pointed out that Romney said that he would help bring down the 7 trillion dollars but he would not know how to do it until he was alected. The last one that I got was when President Obama said that he got all of the the people that threatened the U.S. or attacked it.

  4. 1.)I think to win an argument you must be able to back up what you say with good examples or evidence. If you can have a convincing way to persuade people you are better or more suited for something it will help. People like to see confidence and passion in work also because it gives them reassurance that they really won the argument.

    2.) Romney presented many strong examples of why he should be president over Obama. He attacked a lot but Obama stayed strong in his own argument. I would have to say it went to Romney because he showed what Obama did wrong and how he could possibly fix it or change it.