Right wingers are usually better at debating

[Kizzume]

To make a general statement, I believe that right wingers debate better than left wingers do, particularly on forums.

Right wingers may resort to religious references quickly, but it usually takes them a while to start going into personal attacks. The things they lump together are often very offensive to left wingers, and the left wingers are usually very vocal about it, or if it happens too often, they just leave. In my past, I have been guilty of leaving a couple message boards over it when I was still in fluctuation between considering myself left wing, independent, and right wing.

Left wingers may have more factual things to back them up, but it doesn’t take them very long at all to start going into personal attacks. The things they lump together are often very offensive to right wingers, and the right wingers are usually very quiet about it until it becomes something VERY obvious, unless of course it’s a debate on a right-tilting forum, and then they’ll be pretty vocal about it too.

Independent posters are sometimes really good at pissing off both sides, but that’s neither here nor there. I have balanced out to know that there are some things I’m more right wing in and others I am more left wing. I tilt a little bit more towards the left.

My biggest thing is, I do not believe in strict authoritarianism. I would be just fine with a right-wing government if it was not overly-authoritarian. I would be even better with a left-wing government if it was not overly-authoritarian. I would prefer the most a balanced government that is not overly-authoritarian.

Anyway, to get back on track—

I think right wingers are better at debate. They know how to state a large concept in a small amount of words, whether it’s pleasurable to people’s sensibilities or not. So many right winger’s comments are taken wrong.

I’d say that left wingers misinterpret comments from right wingers 6 out of 10 times.

On the other side of the coin:

I’d say that right wingers misinterpret left wingers about 3 out of 10 times, unless the subject of religion is being talked about, then it’s usually 6 out of 10 times.


How do you feel about this? Do you feel I’m way off?

[Kizzume]

To me, someone is better at debate when he or she is able to stump the other person--where that person has to think for a while about what their next statement will be. I see right wingers do this more to their opponents than left wingers. This COULD be because they sometimes state things that aren't rational and are purely emotional or religious-driven, but often times this is not the case.

[Hackfest]

Obviously, if you HAD to categorize me, I'd be more Right than Left. But the Left has some AWFUL representation, and that's a large part of the problem. With absolute idiots out there like Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, Alec Baldwin, heck, most celebrities, Rachel Maddow, Randi Roades, on and on and on, the ignorance terrifies someone who uses facts as opposed to emotion. I really believe that Liberalism when extreme is not a point of view, but a personality. Rosie O'Donnell does more good for the Right than some Right-Wingers. And when people talk smack about O'Reilly or Hannity or Medved, I listen and watch these people, and I just don't see it. Sure, the right has Coulter, Savage and the like hurting them, but in general, everything seems more organized and factual on the right, especially when you watch these people debate. Look at O'Reilly and Donahue here. Donahue IMO tries repeatedly to charge Bill with sending people to die. For the PURPOSE OF DYING. Sure O'Reilly gets temperamental, and that's not a good quality, but look at Donahue. The guy has NOTHING. The Left seems to always be grasping at straws and I believe this is partially due to the direction the Left has taken. JFK was a Democrat. Today he would be considered a conservative Republican. More later, time to eat.

[Kizzume]

That was quite the heated moment on that show. Thanks for posting that

[Coyote]

kizzume said:

To make a general statement, I believe that right wingers debate better than left wingers do, particularly on forums.

How do you feel about this? Do you feel I’m way off?

No, I agree with you. They're pretty good at what they do, and it annoys me to no end.

[chuq]

I will agree, for the most part, right wingers seem to alwys use emotions while the left has a tendency to try logic. Sorry, but logic is something that is completely missed by the voter or debater. Name the big issues for the right? Almost all are emotional issues.

[Kizzume]

How true. It's unfortunate to me that the left wing doesn't GET more emotional about the things they're logical about. We'd be living in a different America if that were the case.

[Hackfest]

I will agree, for the most part, right wingers seem to alwys use emotions while the left has a tendency to try logic. Sorry, but logic is something that is completely missed by the voter or debater. Name the big issues for the right? Almost all are emotional issues.

I'm confused. Did you gather that from what I said? Because I wrote and read it as the Left being emotion driven and the Right being logic driven, especially when speaking of pundit representation.

[Kizzume]

?

[jq]

hackfest said:

I will agree, for the most part, right wingers seem to alwys use emotions while the left has a tendency to try logic. Sorry, but logic is something that is completely missed by the voter or debater. Name the big issues for the right? Almost all are emotional issues.

I'm confused. Did you gather that from what I said? Because I wrote and read it as the Left being emotion driven and the Right being logic driven, especially when speaking of pundit representation.

pffffffffffffffffffffffft.

[chuq]

hackfest said:

I will agree, for the most part, right wingers seem to alwys use emotions while the left has a tendency to try logic. Sorry, but logic is something that is completely missed by the voter or debater. Name the big issues for the right? Almost all are emotional issues.

I'm confused. Did you gather that from what I said? Because I wrote and read it as the Left being emotion driven and the Right being logic driven, especially when speaking of pundit representation.

No, I am disagreeing with you. The Right uses emotional issues because they are easily presented to the people. Then it is easier for the people to digest it, because little thought is necessary.

[Hackfest]

No. I don't see that at all. I don't see many conservatives crying about P.E.T.A. or trees or the environment, all of which are emotional issues. But what's funny is that I meant in the style of debate. Liberals get emotional (Rosie anyone?) while Conservatives use logic.

[Kizzume]

Conservatives use religion to back up their convictions a lot.

Usually the liberals that DO get emotional are usually borderline psycho, which is why people made that assumption about Howard Dean when he had the "I had a scream" speech. To me, he was one of the few liberals that were able to be emotional without seeming psycho--unfortunately, I was in the minority.

Conservatives use huge packets of logic that are sometimes flawed--it is very hard to find ways of explaining how those packets of information are flawed because they're huge packets, and the wording of them are usually crafted into one synonymous cluster of words that are like a puzzle. Liberals will use TINY packets of logic that are all disjointed and will pick apart a problem in a scrappy-doo sort of manner with those tiny packets.

That probably made no sense at all.

[Hackfest]

I totally agree with you.

[Coyote]

lol made sense to me too.

I think where CHUQ was going was that conservatives like to stir up emotional responses, whether in liberals or other conservatives. That's sort of their debate style sometimes. Say something totally guaranteed to piss you off or they like to whip up emotional feelings against their opponent.

While liberals enjoy using common sense and logic to sway opinion, often we are short of both. 'Course that describes most people, really, libs or cons.