Romney Out-Debates Obama

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
Bring Science back to the WH

National Review Online has an interesting article up about how Romney schools Obama on science.
tldr; Romney wins. But don't take my word for it, read what our non-conservative friends at Slate have to say.

But, then, like I said earlier, more special needs than Harvard grad.


small dead animals: Bring Science back to the WH






How the GOP candidate schooled the president on science policy.

President Obama has assembled the most scientifically accomplished administration since the time of the founding fathers. His head science adviser, John Holdren, is a physicist, a MacArthur genius, and a former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology is lousy with university deans, officers of the National Academies of Science, and Nobel Prize winners. The head of NOAA, Jane Lubchenco, is a marine scientist and former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has a Nobel Prize in physics.

And these folks aren’t just in D.C. for decoration. A few years ago, Obama issued a memorandum to all heads of executive departments and agencies on the subject of scientific integrity. It began:

Science and the scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration on a wide range of issues, including improvement of public health, protection of the environment, increased efficiency in the use of energy and other resources, mitigation of the threat of climate change, and protection of national security.

With that dream team in his corner, and with his powerful belief in the scientific method, you’d think Obama would have an overwhelming advantage over Mitt Romney in a debate of the top American science questions. You’d be wrong.


more awful truth here

Science Debate 2012: In an upset, Romney schools Obama on science policy. - Slate Magazine
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Again another misleading headline when you read the story at the link. No that I expected much more from Mittens and gang regarding their respect for mother nature.

But I do find the story interesting coming from the GOP who want to dismantle everything 'sciency'............

Oh the date, I always forget to check the date. This was published the day before Obama's acceptance speech.............



Sigh. Mitt, take a break from the campaign for an afternoon and go kayaking on the Potomac River. In your lifetime, it has gone from a filthy, acidic drainage ditch for coal mine tailings to a thriving, cleaner-all-the-time waterway teeming with fish and birds.

It’s clear from Romney’s answers that his top priorities are reducing government and promoting business, and that science is fine as long as it doesn’t interfere with those ends.

Science Debate 2012: In an upset, Romney schools Obama on science policy. - Slate Magazine


Now, our friends down in Tampa, at the Republican convention, were more than happy to talk about everything they think is wrong with America, but they didn’t have much to say about how they’d make it right.

We’ve doubled our use of renewable energy, and thousands of Americans have jobs today building wind turbines, and long-lasting batteries.

And yes, my plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet because climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future. And in this election, you can do something about it.



President Barack Obama's Remarks at the 2012 Democratic National Convention - Full Speech - YouTube
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
So an op-ed from a right wing source says Romney is better than Obama on something. I bet there are as many sources on the American "left" that will say the exact opposite with the same degree of conviction...
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
If the article is accurate then I guess it is fortunate for Obama that policies don't really matter in US elections. Instead rhetoric rules as the recent Republican Convention so aptly illustrated. Taking quotes out of context and twisting the facts are far more important in winning elections than any scientific expertise. And why not? What is the point in attempting to talk facts in a country where a large segment of the population doesn't believe in evolution or global warming?
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Bring Science back to the WH

National Review Online has an interesting article up about how Romney schools Obama on science.
tldr; Romney wins. But don't take my word for it, read what our non-conservative friends at Slate have to say.

But, then, like I said earlier, more special needs than Harvard grad.


small dead animals: Bring Science back to the WH






How the GOP candidate schooled the president on science policy.

President Obama has assembled the most scientifically accomplished administration since the time of the founding fathers. His head science adviser, John Holdren, is a physicist, a MacArthur genius, and a former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology is lousy with university deans, officers of the National Academies of Science, and Nobel Prize winners. The head of NOAA, Jane Lubchenco, is a marine scientist and former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has a Nobel Prize in physics.

And these folks aren’t just in D.C. for decoration. A few years ago, Obama issued a memorandum to all heads of executive departments and agencies on the subject of scientific integrity. It began:

Science and the scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration on a wide range of issues, including improvement of public health, protection of the environment, increased efficiency in the use of energy and other resources, mitigation of the threat of climate change, and protection of national security.

With that dream team in his corner, and with his powerful belief in the scientific method, you’d think Obama would have an overwhelming advantage over Mitt Romney in a debate of the top American science questions. You’d be wrong.


more awful truth here

Science Debate 2012: In an upset, Romney schools Obama on science policy. - Slate Magazine

Does that mean he's the Master (De)Bater then?;)
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
The problem is the two have not had a debate so the headline is off center right from
the start. It is a long hard road for Romney he can't win the states he needs for the
electoral collage. The real Republicans like Jebb Bush stayed well away from this
train wreck. The Bush family is conspicuously silent knowing they are going to take a
beating at the polls.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see half naked cheerleaders at Republican rallies if
this keeps up. The problem is the real issues are not being debated because nonsense
reigns supreme. This is not healthy for the country. Mind you if they found out what
Romney is about the election would be over by tomorrow. Ryan is about to become a
real liability before this is over as the Democrats will be able to tag him to death with the
policy he advocates. Special interests like women and others will come out in this
election. Obama will win on electoral college states. Not only that apparently Romney
and team have pretty much written of the entire west coast and the New England states.
So now the desperate right is clinging to the victory of imaginary debates. Sad really
 

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
found it so not amazing that the only news I received via msm down here, was romney...I kept mentioning Ron Paul to my friends/workmates etc, and they never herd of him........;-)