How to argue with a Republican.

[suziedemocrat]

I saw Rosie O'Donnell when she was guest hosting "The View" and they interviewed Sean Hannity from Fox News. I thought Sean came off looking better than Rosie, even though Rosie's points made much more sense. It reminded me of how much better the Republicans are at arguing their points than we Democrats are.

It got me thinking, if you ever want to have a political discussion/argument with a Republican - ASK QUESTIONS!!! Rosie made statements - like "This war is illegal." Sean asked Rosie questions like "Do you think we are better off without Saddam Hussein in Power?" He would ask the question over and over and when she refused to answer - she looked terrible.


I say - Let's ask questions of our own. I'm starting to think the person asking the questions has the power. The power to frame the debate and make the other person address the points they want addressed. Let's make THEM answer some questions. Like:

1) If Saddam Hussein was such a terrible guy that it was worth going to war to take him out, why not just tell the country in 2002 - "Hey, look, this Saddam has got to go, he is gassing his own people, he has mass graves, we need to go to war to remove him!" Why make up all the Weapons of Mass Destruction BS if just that fact that Saddam was such a bad man was a good enough reason?

2) Do you think getting rid of Saddam Hussein was worth at least 1600 American lives, tens of thousands of Iraqi lives, ruining Iraq's infrastructure, and billions(trillions?) of taxpayer dollars?

3) Do you think if it is shown that Bush lied to the American people to justify this war that he should be impeached?

4) If you support this war, are you going to enlist? Are your children?

Lets start asking the Republicans to defend their rhetoric!!!

[SheilaT]

1. Do you think it's good

that millions of people are without health care?

[HawkerHurricane]

2. First rule of winning debates...

is to set the terms in your favor.
It is easier to attack than defend.
The question is NOT "Do you want Saddam in power?" it's
"Is it worth it to get him OUT of power?"

Or, better still...

"Why do you want to play into Osama's hands by attacking Iraq? The purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to provoke a reaction, preferably one against a Muslim Arab state that was in no way involved, so that Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda could crow about how America was no better than any other imperial power. So, WHY do you want to play into Osama's hands by attacking Iraq?"

Drive it home! Terrorism WORKS when the people on the other side hate you MORE than they respect you. Minimize the reasons to hate you! We had the support of the whole world! We went into Afghanistan with support even from Muslim Arabs! WHY did we throw away that support to take Saddam, a 3rd rate dictator who couldn't even threaten the northern third of his own country!

[BillZBubb]

3. You are exactly correct.

It's about framing. And the Democrats continually fail at it. Asking tangential questions is a strong technique.

But, in Rosie's and the Democrats defense, they are up against skilled propagandists. Our side essentially has reasoning amateurs who try to be honest. Their side has professional dis-a-semblers.

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. Are you OK with letting homeless babies

live and starve on the streets?

Why are you anti-choice, but cut social programs that would help those babies?

Why are you pro-life only until birth?

Why do you think it's your business what I do with my womb?

How can you say you're pro-life and support the death penalty?

[immoderate]

5. Your question #3 should be a mantra!

3) Do you think if it is shown that Bush lied to the American people to justify this war that he should be impeached?

Whatever libs there are should not let up on that. What can they say?

--IMM

[Coexist]

7. begin it with the qualifier

Do you believe that the ends justify the means, that if Bush is shown...

few if any people believe that "the ends justify the means" is scenarios.

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. repukes don't care if he lied.

When they admitted there were no WMD, the sheeple went with the talking points of..."Saddam is gone!" "He gassed his own people!" "He had mass graves!"

THEY DON'T CARE IF HE LIES. Being the good Christians that they are. :eyes:

[Jackpine Radical]

11. How about setting a contextual trap, like this?:

1) Do you think it was right to impeach Clinton because he lied to the American people about sex?

Assume they answer "Yes." Then ask...

2)Do you think it would be right to impeach Bush if he lied to get us into an unjustified and unwinnable war?

[alarcojon]

16. Someone ask O'Really

also known as O'Lielly or, my favorite, O'Shithead.

[Toots]

6. Why did the Administration emphatically say it was not about Saddam?

Both the Secretary of State and the National Defense Advisor (Powell and Rice) said in no uncertain terms that it was not about Saddam. It was only about WMDs and Saddam could stay in power if he just complied with the UN. They did not care that Saddam was evil only that he may have WMDs. Regime Change was never, I repeat Never mentioned as a just cause for war.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

9. "Do you still think Clinton was wagging the dog when he cruise

missiled Afghanistan in retaliation for the embassy bombings, or have you changed your mind on that?"

[emanymton]

10. Simple, Simplistic, Silly And Shallow...

Bumper sticker questions like "Do you think we are better off without Saddam Hussein in Power?" are a mark of a simpleton. Keeping your message simple, shallow and silly may impress the audience but will not advance your position.

So answer your bumper sticker question of "Do you think we are better off without Saddam Hussein in Power?" with a truly thought stopper, "For Whom, the rich, Haliburton or oil companies?" Ask the Vet who has lost his legs/arms and can't get quality health benefits because of the cuts in VA services, "Do you think we are better off without Saddam Hussein in Power?"

Shemp Hannity has his simple, simplistic and silly positions down cold and knows not to devivate from his script. He repeats his twaddle but cannot defend it. Attack his nonsense with simple logic and reason but don't argue on his terms.

"Do you think we are better off without Saddam Hussein in Power?" Who is we, oil companies? rich? NOT THE PEOPLE:

[NeoTraitors]

12. Somewhere here on Du there is an excerpt

of Powell and Rice saying that Saddam could remain in power if he would disarm the WMD's. How did they ever get away with asking the 'Would it be better if Saddam was still in-charge' question in the first place?

Where are the WMD's? Saddam is irrelevant IN THEIR OWN WORDS!

I don't even argue with R's anymore, the can look for answers at the end of my fists.

[suziedemocrat]

15. I agree - it's better not to argue with them at all - but sometimes

we have to defend our position. And I think the poster who said that Republicans are much better at this spin than Democrats who just try to be honest is right. I think we need to figure out how to get our message across when we need to.

[suziedemocrat]

13. Better? "For Whom, the rich, Haliburton or oil companies?" Good Point!

Very good points!

[Pepperbelly]

19. How many American lives was Saddam worth? nt

[Canuckistanian]

14. I want to ask, "What was the rush?"

I mean, Saddam was a bloodthirty dictator for over 20 years. The gassing of the Kurds took place during Bush the Smarter's reign.
So did the first Gulf War.
What I want to know from them is what made Saddam so much of a threat in 2003 but not in 2001?

[tx_dem41]

17. How to argue? Don't. Discuss and debate. You win that way. n/t

[suziedemocrat]

23. You're right - but sometimes it's hard if your are passionate about it.

He was clearly making Rosie upset when she wanted to be nice. We need the tools - that they already seem to have - to win the debate/argument.

[FizzFuzz]

18. So, Mr Republican hack.....

Do you think the US is better off when we enhance corporations by breaking workers' pension contracts?

Do you think the US is better off when the Whitehouse falsifies overwhelming scientific proof of global warming so that corporations may run larger profits?

Do you think the safety of US citizens is enhanced when the Whitehouse exposes the identity of crucial undercover CIA agents assigned to identify terrorists? So you think its good to expose ultra-covert intelligence because Republicans don't want to hear criticism?

How is it that Conservatives are compassionate when they pass laws that take away people's human rights, sustenance and threaten our very survival? (name various bills and budget cuts)

So, tell me why Republicans like to lie so much? (have a few bald faced lies handy. There are a fucking ton to choose from)

[suziedemocrat]

21. Oooooohhhh - Good Questions!

[NeoTraitors]

24. Part of the problem Suzie is that the RW

smearmachine literally is in cahoots with this administration. They know just what to say and how to say it. It's like a playbook for football- every situation has a planned response. Media types friendly to our cause are not connected to our pols the same way.

For instance, Jon Stewart is a great communicator for our cause, however he is not given 'talking points' from a Howard Dean or a John Kerry the way that the RW media is from the Chimp administration.

Steward once said (paraphrase) 'John Kerry is the first decorated combat vet the dems have nominated since John Kennedy.' Stewart was trying to defend Kerry against the Swiftie smears but he got it wrong. George McGovern was a highly decorated pilot during WWII, while Carter and others had at least served in the military. Were Stewart fed info from the Dems, perhaps he wouldn't make such a mistake. FoxNews never would've made such a mistake. (Unless it was in favor of a repub)

Where do you go on tv to see our side fairly presented? Right now, you don't. We are doing the best we can at DU, by trying to get our 'info' (ie the truth) to anyone friendly to our cause in the media.

Short summary: Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are literally told what to say and how to say it and they would NEVER go off message or say anything negative about the chimp. Keith Oberman and Jon Stewart think for themselves and do a great job, but they are not orchastrated by our pols the way the Right is.

The end result is, one side is WRONG, yet 'decisive' the other side is RIGHT but 'mushy'. Decisiveness is having a field day right now.

[suziedemocrat]

25. Good Point.

[tinrobot]

20. Do you think the world is better with Osama still roaming free?

You don't?

Then why did you support a war in Iraq that did nothing to bring him to justice and increased his support among Arabs?

...and so on.

If you hit them with facts, they shut down the hearings and switch off the mikes.

[Maraya1969]

22. Excellent point Recommended

5) How do you feel about the Downing Street memo?

6) How did Jeff Gannon get CIA and FBI clearance and why was he let into the press room with no real credentials?

7) How would you feel about stem cell research if your child had type 1 Diabetes?

[mzmolly]

26. Do you think it was prudent to ignore Osama Bin Laden in pursuit of a man

who was contained and disarmed in Iraq?

[Bullshot]

27. You attack Hannity's question with your own questions:

You mean the same Saddam whom the Reagan and Bush I administrtions gave access to our weapons technology? The same Saddam whom these administrtions propped up in order to provide a counter to Iran?

Bring up the mishaps of their beloved demi-God Reagan. Drives 'em into a fit every time. They never address the question when you do that.