Edited

Watching that debate B vs. P was a mind numbing experience. I am sure most people ended up knowing less than when it began. It really was not a debate but a fight or rather a gutter brawl. And it reminded me of the rules of Fight Club. The debate was not about the issues but about the debaters. The goal was to see who could sling the most "crap" on the other while remaining pristine in appearance. Facts and logic in such a debate are almost irrelevant. The first rule of Debate Club is never directly answer any question. The second rule is to reframe the question to suit yourself. The third rule is to cherry pick the facts. The forth rule is to attack your opponent rather than the issue. You can make up the fifth,sixth,etc rules.

Biden: Isnt M/P going to be more Bush.
Palin: You keep looking back. We are looking forward.

Palin didnt get to be Governor of the largest state without having something up her dress. Palin was brilliant as a debater by the Rules of Debate Club. In fact that is her Forte. She should hold all her future press conferences as Debates.

Biden did suffer from the fact the O/b is really not that different on many issues as M/p. On Immigration Invasion Amnesty, On the War,ON the bailout, there is not much difference.

Rokybird




-------------------------------
#1 - The first rule of Fight Club is, you do not talk about Fight Club.

#2 - The second rule of Fight Club is, you DO NOT talk about Fight Club.

#3 - If someone says stop, goes limp, taps out, the fight is over.

#4 - Two guys to a fight.

#5 - One fight at a time.

#6 - No shirts, no shoes.

#7 - Fights will go on as long as they have to.

#8 - If this is your first night at Fight Club, you have to fight.



How to Win Any Debate… Even if You’re Less Intelligent, Less Prepared, and Less Attractive than Your Opponent
Published January 23, 2007 Blogroll , creation , debunking , discussion , life , mind , unconventional wisdom

As a freshman in high school (about ten years ago), I participated in the only formal debate of my life. It was conducted in a massive auditorium in front of about a thousand people. I didn’t want to do it, but I was chosen (“honored”) to represent the school…

I didn’t care about the debate. The state wrestling tournament was coming up, and I preferred to focus my energies on that rather than on thinking about the merits of gun control. My opponent – a Berkeley-bound senior – was more intelligent, more prepared, more popular, and certainly more attractive than me.

Yet when the debate ended, the audience (mostly students) was overwhelmingly in favor of my position. And though I had forfeited the debate by breaking numerous procedural rules, it didn’t matter. People talked about what went on in that auditorium for months to come.

Here are seven lessons that I learned that day – lessons that I’ve used, successfully, ever since.

*****

1. Winning Isn’t Really Winning
Many people think that a debate is about choosing a position and holding steadfastly to that position until, perhaps, an opponent breaks. But this is a very limiting view of winning, because it doesn’t allow for the kind of discussion that creates better options and better decisions. Winning isn’t about forcing our opinions down others’ throats with whatever rhetoric we can muster… it’s about creating an atmosphere for collaboration and change.

My opponent believed that winning meant arguing his position with “greater aplomb and dexterity”. He was right… provided that the guys in suits and ties were the only judges around. But there were a thousand people in the audience – none of whom knew the formal rules of debate – who decided on the de facto winner that afternoon. And, like me, they didn’t care what the suit-and-tie guys thought!

2. Using “Logic” Is Oftentimes Not an Effective Strategy
Many people try to drill their knowledge and opinions into us because they believe, for some reason, that with enough facts – or even words – we’re bound to change our minds eventually. But this is hardly ever the case. We appreciate facts… but not so many that they crowd our space and make it hard for us to form our own opinions.

My opponent had prepared for an old-fashioned, tit-for-tat rhetorical debate… for which he had a barnyard of statistical data to support his position. On the other hand, I had a gripping personal story, ketchup packets, and scribbles on a napkin. Yet as far as the audience was concerned, my arsenal was ultimately more compelling… because, as one friend said, “It was easy to, you know, get what you were saying.”

3. Monitor Your Emotions… Always!
Oftentimes, when we feel passionate about something, our emotions compromise our ability to do what’s needed to win. They may incite us to make ad hominem attacks: “What are you… a f***ing idiot?” Or they may incite us to appeal to baseless feelings: “This will work… I know it will… I promise.” Neither helps foster the atmosphere of discussion and collaboration that is required for winning.

When I squeezed the ketchup packets on my forehead to demonstrate a gunshot wound to the head, my opponent became flustered. But rather than rolling with the punches, or simply not acknowledging me at all, he chose to attack: “You’re crazy… what are you doing… this is a debate… you can’t do that… you’re an idiot.” By saying these things, he made his own position look less legitimate and he alienated himself from an audience that had clearly enjoyed the ketchup.

4. Be Declarative
Many of us prefer to soften our strong opinions with words like “likely” or “mostly” or “almost”… and then we spend time further considering alternatives. Though covering every inch of skin on our ass is great for a college essay or formal debate… it’s not nearly as useful in real life. People want to know where we stand… so that they can quickly form an opinion based on that position. Nuanced and conditional statements make this process harder.

For his opening statement, my opponent defined gun control, placed it in the context of the U.S. Constitution, explained classic oppositions to his argument, talked about why those oppositions were wrong, used statistics to back up his position, and then took a deep breath. Few people in the audience were able to follow it all. My opening statement, on the other hand, was this: “I am absolutely 100% not guilty… of what I’m about to do!” Then I dramatized a gunshot accident and provided the audience with a few relevant statistics. Everyone got the picture!

5. Tell a Good Story
Many of us don’t understand how hard it is to get someone to change, or even to open up, their mind. We are bombarded by thousands of marketing messages each day, and attention is hard to come by. If we want to win a debate, then we’re asking people to do a lot of work: First, we’re asking them to listen… then to think about what we’re saying… then to formulate an opinion… then potentially to do something about it. To help them along, we must tell good stories that make our ideas easy to digest, synthesize, form an opinion about, and act on.

The dramatization was a story in itself… it was easy to understand, react to, and think about. But later, during the debate, I elaborated on that story. “It’s real… it happened to someone I knew… and someone many of you know, too… and that’s why you should think long and hard about your stance on this issue.” My opponent didn’t know any stories… and so it wasn’t surprising when his numbers and quotes were forgotten by people who simply had no context for remembering them.

6. Don’t Take Objections Personally
If people object to your opinion… congratulations! It means that you’ve touched a nerve deep enough to get them thinking or feeling… and that you’ve helped to foster an environment in which discussion, collaboration, and change can occur. And if you’re worried that objections might undermine your own argument… stop worrying! Objections oftentimes allow people to agree with you, as the ensuing dialogue enables others to provide counterpoints that perhaps reinforce your position. And if people don’t agree with you… then perhaps their objections will sharpen, improve, or even change the opinions you presented!

Many audience members, including the “official” judges of the debate, disapproved of my tactics. “Infantile, poorly executed, and in bad taste,” one of the judges said afterward. But though they were hoping to sway popular opinion against me, their strong and public disapproval actually encouraged more discussion than any amount of ketchup could have mustered.

7. Don’t Worry About the Outcome – Others Will Take Care of It
Our opinion is just that: our opinion! And if expressing it helps to create a forum in which real discussion and new opinions can flourish, then we’ve won… even if most people don’t ultimately agree with us.

I don’t know how many people eventually agreed with my position in the debate. But I do know that I got a lot of students thinking and talking about a serious issue, and that the “normal” way of spurring discussion – conducting a formal debate – likely would have been ineffective.

****

Conclusion
In more recent years, I’ve applied the above lessons to business and to the rest of my life and I have found that although we grow older, we don’t seem to grow much smarter when it comes to understanding what it means to “win” a debate… and how to go about doing it!

I hope this helps. And if it doesn’t, perhaps we can debate it! Tweet