Defeatist Elitist
-
Posts
2,428 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Defeatist Elitist
-
-
I also use characters for looks and personality as well. That's why the hot ones get most of the attention
You have horrible taste. FACT: Makalov is uber hawt. :P
-
I have one more immediate problem: the over-emphasis on supports. It's like a character with fewer support options is automatically bad. Supports don't make a unit! A unit that's good on its own >>> a unit that's good with supports.
Another problem: Assuming characters will be used. In a debate between two characters, the only fair way I can see is if the only characters assumed to be used are the two in question and the lord(s)/any other required characters. For example, in the Rebecca vs. Wil debate, saying Lowen wants Marcus is meaningless, because you can't be sure he'll even be used later on. For debates, the rest of the "team" should be shaped based on the two in question, giving the two of them what's best for them to see who truly has the best potential. Since lords will always deployed, considering who they would rather have is probably valid.
Well, Supports can make a mediocre unit good, and a good unit amazing. They can make massive differences...
And to this: characters are assumed to be used because they're "best". Again, in a debate if you don't like the characters the other person is assuming, challenge them on it. Show why you think other characters would be used. That's the thing about a debate. If you see something, you can challenge it. The opponent can try to back their point up, etc.
-
Probably because I haven't had my say publically yet. I've PM'd a few people about some things, people on both sides of this debate, and think I've had a few valid points.
The biggest point of contention is that there are people, on both sides, that don't like their ideas about what is good and proper contended. The debaters are apply rules to situations that those rules don't apply to. People (myself especially) really hate it when they are told they are wrong despite having perfectly valid strategies for going through the game easily and our responses (mostly my fault, and I apologize for this) have been incredibly toxic.
People need to stop phrasing things with such finality that they don't allow other people to have ideas that differ to their own. Example, people telling me that bows are the "worst weapon type". I love ranged units. Love them to death, especially in the latest installments of the series. Bows ignore the weapon triangle, which is nice because you are never at a disadvantage with the damage you can potentially inflict, and can attack without fear of being counterattacked, meaning I remove the potential to even take damage in a lot of instances. That for me is strategically more important than having my archer units have the ability to counter-attack from close range.
I know a lot of people are thinking I'm hypocritical with this, and you're right. When I got here, I was pooh-poohing all over swordmasters. I still don't like them, but my problem was the way I was telling people why I dislike them. The nature of the FE games, there really can't be any final "THIS IS BETTER THAN THIS" because as a well thought-out strategy game, there's always a give and take. There is no such thing as a unit that is the best in all situations. It just doesn't happen. The moment you tell someone that they are wrong for finding something strategically viable, you're going to piss them off.
I learn by observation so I hope you guys can at least see that I've tried my best to be as insightful as I could be.
additional: how the heck did I get another 10% warning? I haven't posted anything but this for an entire weekend. =\
I responded to this with a PM, although I should post similar here...
A statement is stated with finality because, well, does it matter that much? If someone tells me "X unit is the best unit ever" that isn't going to stop me from arguing against it. It doesn't really make a difference. If you believe it wrong, prove it.
-
Well played ZX! But how about this. In HHM, mages start to have a large population later. Rebecca's res is sure to cone in handy. Also, her better avoid becomes undeniable later. Not only does she take less damage from mages later, she also has that high avoid to help with her Low hp. And she was support with lowen, who(for those not supporting him with Marcus) makes a good wall. And a wall is just what an archer wants.
I makez a good?
Sorry, my iPhone auto corrects somethings, sometimes thing I dont want it to...{♢.♢}
Ah, but Late Game is rarely a problem, as by then most of your characters kick enough ass that you barely have to worry. It's early game where there's trouble. Regardless, let's take a look at them at 20/1, right after promotion.
Wil:
36.5 16.0 16.0 14.2 10.6 7.5 13.2 7
Rebbecca:
32.4 14.6 15.5 18.3 7.8 8.7 13.5 6
It's pretty similar, isn't it, although now she has a clear Avoid edge, but her Res edge is slipping.
Now, support wise, Wil is actually pretty alright off. Lowen, when fielded, is unlikely to get a Rebbecca Support, so Wil and Rebbecca (assuming both are fielded, which for the sake of a debate like this, they usually are) are likely to Support each other, since the Support ain't half bad, and is pretty fast. Wil can also probably sneak a Lyn B.
But I must stress, early game is when the problems are, and Wil's problems just aren't as bad as Rebbecca's.
-
Wait, there are more Cavaliers! But Oscar and Kieran are definitely the two best. All the Cavaliers in this game are amazing however, since the Paladin class is just incredible. You can end up with massively versatile characters, who all have pretty good stats, not to mention the massive Movement as well as Move Again.
A team with Titania, Oscar, Kieran, Astrid and Makalov is an incredibly awesome team. :D
-
And so the heroes Faiya and ZXVR made peace speaking for their respective forces. The war ended peacefully before there was too much bloodshed.
Tactics: ☆☆☆
Survival:☆☆☆☆☆
Funds:☆☆
Exp:☆☆☆☆☆
Combat:☆☆☆☆☆
Man, that Cheeseburger really hurt our Funds, hey? Sorry 'bout that...
-
I'll move it to FE7 if you don't mind.
Rebecca is better. Challenge that.
You want me to debate from Wil's point of view? Sure. :D
I shall begin...
First off, you'll notice that Wil comes back in Lyn's mode, which is totally easy. He won't be a drag on your party at all to train then. He should gain a few levels there, at least enough to match the number of levels Rebbecca would gain in the time between when she joins and when he joins in HHM. Now, say they're both level, say, 8-10. Honestly, I just chose a promising sounding number, but that sounds about right... But wait, there's a catch. Rebbecca has to work a LOT harder for those levels than Wil does, her levels are far harder, she is fairly easily killed, etc.
Now, assuming they both managed to reach that level (8):
They would look like this:
Wil:
HP: 24.5 Str 9.0 Skill 8.0 Speed 7.4 Def 6.2 Res 1.5 Luck 8.4 Con 6
And Rebbecca:
21.2 6.8 8.5 10.2 4.0 3.1 7.5 5
Now, HP is a win for Wil, as is Str, by a fair margin. Skill is essentially a tie, but hitting (especially with bows), is rarely an issue. Speed is a clear win for Rebbecca, but Con closes the gap for Wil a little bit. Def is another win for Wil, and Res goes to Rebbecca. However, Res is a less important stat, since there aren't too many mages, they all have AWFUL attack, and they all go down really quickly anyway. Wil wins Luck by a little.
Now, Wil is definitely winning durability, with higher Def, HP, and comparable Avoid, due to his higher Luck, and her lower Con.
Offense is a toss up. The AS difference usually won't end up causing too much difference, but it does on some enemies. Wil is likely to be wielding a heavier bow though, and thus will have a higher Pow, in addition to his better Str. So in all enemies that have less than 4 AS, or more than 6, Wil will win, whereas all those with 4, 5, or 6, Rebbecca will probably win. Of course, there will be some difference. I may go into Supports soon.
Man, I really need to play this game again, I'm getting REALLY hazy... :(
-
Tino is already starting to use that format. SS is another story...
I'm sure SS will agree. You guys might not know, but SS is probably one of the nicest people I've ever seen. I will say with confidence that he is WAY nicer than I will ever be.
-
Alright then, since the main discussion in the last one was GBA Snipers being weak, and Rebecca vs Will, I'll focus on that.
Well, GBA Snipers are definitely weak I would say, since they have no Crit boost, and Bows are probably the weakest weapon in the game.
Personally, I believe both Will and Rebbecca to be fairly mediocre. I would give the edge to Rebbecca though, as though she is quite difficult to use effectively at first in order to level her up, she ends up being fairly good, and has amazing Dodge. I also see her Supports as somewhat better, if a little unrealistic in some situations (Dart not being fielded because of massive damage to funds, etc).
Rebbecca just seems to have more good points. Obviously there is more, but I'm trying to keep this light for now.
-
Yes, that works. Btw, feel free to debate-ify my sniper thread.
The forest may finally be at peace!?! We should make an epic story about it.
Actually, I'm thinking of making a separate thread, so as not to disturb the people in the first one.
-
Point being: We don't care! I think Rebecca is better, he thinks Wil is better. I'm not challenging him on it, because what he thinks, though I respect it, won't really have an affect on how I play the game. Who CARES who the "truly superior" character is, considering there even is one? I'm not about to say "By this logic, this character is better, so I'll use him/her instead." I shape my opinions on characters based on what I've seen them do, not something I can look up on the internet. Does this matter to anyone else? NO, and I don't expect it to.
Sorry, that wasn't my intention. He said that was a demonstration of your method of arguing. I said that that doesn't really work for me for the stated reason. Then I asked if I could show how I would do it, but in a thread where everyone had really agreed to it, and no-one would feel bad, since I think all the earlier threads had that problem.
EDIT: But would you agree to my proposition? I think that it makes both sides pretty happy. Non debaters can just say "No thank you, I'm not really interested", and people who are interested can have fun debating.
-
We're not seeing eye-to-eye. Pretty much everything I say about Fire Emblem is my opinion, unless it's an obvious fact like "Titania can use axes." "Rolf is good," though I did say it isn't a completely opinionated statement in itself, neither is it someone claiming that this is absolute truth. I would see it as opinion, as would many others at this forum. You debaters see it as a challenge, and it's just annoying to have our opinions challenged.
Did you completely understand the Bikeshed metaphor? I can't be sure you did, so I'll expand, using Tana as blue and Vanessa as green:
Raven wants to paint his bikeshed blue because he thinks that's the best color for it. You think green is the best color, and you can provide substantial evidence as to why that is so. Does this mean you should? No, it doesn't. It will likely only serve to annoy him because you're telling him that his idea on how to do this is wrong.
Thus, the argument starts. The debater says Vanessa is better, and the more casual player thinks Tana is. Which side is wrong here? Answer: NEITHER. Why is this? People do things differently, people have different experiences, and out views on the world are shaped by those experiences. You think because you can give more evidence as to why Vanessa is better that that makes it a fact, but Raven can reasonably think otherwise. What you may consider a good reason, Raven may easily think is a bad reason.
Take supports, for example; these are a HUGE, HUGE thing that show up in debates. What is really better: A character that's amazing without supports, or a character that's great with supports? I say the former. Thus, I think supports alone aren't enough to make a character a truly good character, and that they shouldn't be such a huge deal in debates. Definitely considerable, but not a defining argument. That can change an opinion right there.
Lastly, go ahead and debate all you want, I don't care. But if someone states something you don't agree with in something that isn't obviously a debate topic, something that can easily just be opinion even if it isn't exactly worded so, think of the bikeshed and please don't go challenging it out of the blue. There are cases where an argument is being called for, though. If someone said "Priscilla sucks, no one should use her" I would attack that person until I had him or her on the ground begging for mercy. But if someone says "I don't like Priscilla, she's not that good" I'd likely just skip over it and let it be, unless that was the first post in the topic, in which it's obviously asking for a reply.
P.S. Priscilla is my favorite Fire Emblem character.
I see what you're saying, and though I don't totally agree, I think maybe I have a compromise.
Maybe then, if the topic is not an obvious debate, and one of us sees something we would debate, we should post something like "Would you consider debating this?" or "Do you mind if I give an argument?", and perhaps make a new thread? That seems good with me.
@ Anna: Agreed, and I will do my best to keep things like that.
-
ZXVR, you've made some valid points. But we only attack( usually) when we feel people are just trying to shoot us down. Look at how me and Fox talked about Wil and Rebecca in the sniper topic in this forum. That's a good way to do things. More could have been said, but you get the picture of what we want? Maybe it would be less debate and more compare/contrast.
But the way you guys are talking will rarely discover the superior character. The point of debating is to create a list of characters, from best to worst. We USUALLY compare and contrast, but on a far larger scale, and with conclusions thrown in. Mind if I try in that Archer thread to show you how I personally would go about that debate? Or should we make a new thread, Rebecca vs Will, in a one on one type thing, or something. I'll try to avoid things like "shooting your opinion down", but I would appreciate you pointing it out when I do it.
-
the main problem with the debate topics is that debaters make their statements as irrefutable. many people here either don't really care about the FE debating standards or have a different standard for judging characters.
you should understand that these people think that way, and not completely stomp their ideas. this isn't a debating forum yet, so people are not quite used to having full-fledged debates in here.
non-debaters should really not take to personally all of the debate topics. get all of the information provided on the debates and use it to your advantage if you want, or just accept that others have a different idea of units.
Well, when you debate you aren't very likely to attack your own position, or admit it's weakpoints unless someone else actually gets them, right? The point is generally to argue your character to "victory".
I know a lot of people think differently, and are not fully ready for debates. This is why most of the time I post, it is to explain debating, and debating standards. Not only that, but I try to explain WHY we have them, HOW we get them, etc.
Would you like me to post that information here, and hopefully clear things up?
-
ok, seriously ZXValaRevan, using that FE8 peg knight topic against us is stupid. It says "which do you like more" in two different places which means it's solely an opinion topic. No one put "IMO" or "I think so and so is better because..." because the whole thing is an opinionated topic. If I said "Tana is the best" I know it looks like just a statement to debate, but look at the topic it's in. It shouldn't matter what we say there. It's and OPINIONATED topic so all posts are considered opinions no matter what they say unless specified
Besides, I said she is usually a bit more reliable because she turns out better for me (I regret not putting that), I never said she was better
That's just the way I see things, I don't know about anyone else
And that's why I was posting here. Again, if I say "Which Console do you like more?" and you say "Wii is better", it doesn't make it your unbeatable opinion. There is a very distinct difference between liking something and saying/thinking it's good. Etc.
So, does that mean that since SS posted in that topic, that was assumed to be his opinion, and thus he couldn't be wrong? Because I could use the same logic against you. Again, the question doesn't excuse the answer.
-
STOP TAUNTING ME GUYS!
:P
Personally, I like Louise, 'cause she's total hotness. Same with Shinon, and Leonardo is pretty cute. :D
-
He fights like ten men.
HE FIGHTS FOR 10 FRIENDS?
-
<_<... This isn't going anywhere, is it. I'd try to end this with "truce", but that would only result in "lulz debaters win, fatality".
So, you guys OBVIOUSLY don't get what I'm saying. We're( at least I am) fine with you debating. We're NOT ok with you stomping on our ideas. You cannot say it has not been done, for it has on multiple occasions. You can state your "facts" as much as you want. I like to hear your views. But they always seem so tricking arrogant and forceful, causing dislike. WHY CAN'T YOU GUYS SEE THAT( well, Tino has...)! Why can there be no mingling!? I've seen peaceful debates, so why not just make all of them like that?
Look, so far, I actually have not initiated ANY debates. I've only jumped in on ones that have been started by others, and then mainly in order to defend the concept of debating. I see you're fine with debating. And I personally don't think we're stomping all over your ideas. Unless by stomping all over your ideas, you mean proving them wrong, and well then, isn't that kind of the point of discussion/debate? I mean, we haven't insulted you or anything for your likes and dislikes. We've just said, "X character is good/bad for Y reason". There can be mingling, in fact everywhere else debates are totally peaceful. The only times they aren't is when people start whining about them. Sometimes they may seem arrogant, but usually that's because of a joke, or because we're just debating.
Alright, maybe we're not understanding opinions right here.The Titania topic was a split topic. It was taken from a topic where it had started because it was completely off-topic. So that one started again, as a result of someone challenging another where it was unneeded. Not pointing fingers, because I don't really remember who initiated that one.Opinions cannot be wrong. I don't understand what you're missing there. 2+2=7 is a false statement, not an opinion. "Rolf is good" isn't exactly an opinion or factualized statement by itself, but I would think most people would generally see it as an opinion. Plus, I don't think anyone said it so bluntly. Whenever anyone said it, I do believe it was said in a more opinionated way. But that goes back to Ronan's Bikeshed metaphor; Just because you can prove your way to be better, doesn't mean you absolutely need to.
I thought about that before reading this and I know it's true, but I think it's too involved now to just come to a halt.
Hiding behind opinion? That's laughable. I guess all I'm doing here is hiding, because I'm full of opinions, as is everyone else.
You came here for debaters? Here? When there are other places that (I believe) are full of debates and they actually like it? Places they don't have to debate about debates? Okay...
I know it didn't look it, but I, personally, was only trying to show that Rolf isn't just a horrible character. I would rather not compare him to Titania.
You've said that "2 plus 2 is 7" is a false statement, not an opinion, but "Rolf is good" is an opinion? The structure of words is almost identical. What if I said "Crabs are responsible for nuclear warfare"? See what I mean. And to the bike shed metaphor, simply put, we enjoy it, and it usually is constructive.
What I mean by hiding behind opinion is this:
I often argue with people. I might say I am something of an expert. Often, people who I argue with will say something, and then say "HA! IT'S MY OPINION, NOTHING YOU CAN SAY CAN PROVE ME WRONG!". Now, if you say "In my opinion, 2+2= 7", then your opinion is wrong. If you say "2+2=7" it's not even an opinion. Etc.
Now, honestly, all I ask is that people stop complaining about debates. I (and hopefully Tino and SS), will try to keep our debating in some threads, but it's kind of hard to not try to engage someone in a debate when they say things like "best" or whatever. It's like someone dangling a carrot in front of our noses. :D
PS. The Titania topic was not really anyone's fault, but it WAS a debate topic, if I can see one. Tino stated in passing in the "Laguz Band" topic that their where enough broken characters in the game without the Laguz Band being useable by Reyson, and one of the characters he listed was Titania. Someone quoted him and said "Since when is Titania broken in PoR", etc. That is, without a doubt, an invitation for debate.
-
We all know it takes two to debate. But I guess part of us says "We're NOT losing to these guys!". Seriously, I doubt if we didn't respond that you guys would be like "Damnit, nobody is debating! Better leave.". You guys will find SOMETHING to debate on. And two problems with leaving it. 1. You'd probably gloat and be the arrogant jerks you guys can be, claiming dominance of the topic. 2. Why should we just ignore it? Ignoring leads to more problems. If we ignore it you guys would continue. It would be nice to stop it completely. And your response towards Bianchi was completely uncalled for.
Wait, my response was totally uncalled for? And all those people who swore at us for doing nothing where just totally fine? My response to her was based on the fact that she basically said "You all have no idea what you're doing, but instead of doing anything, I'm just going to mock you, but don't you know, DEFEND yourselves, or try to make a point, because I won't listen". That is considered very bad form.
Also, we try never to be arrogant jerks. You guys are trying to have your cake and eat it too. Want to be able to state what you like and dislike? Fine, we CAN'T argue that. Want to state what you think is good or bad? Fine, but we can argue that fine. The problem comes when you try to state what's good or bad and say we shouldn't argue it.
I guess what I'm getting at, is that I don't think hiding behind opinion is a valid argument.
Either way, we seriously cannot debate without an opponent. It won't work. One of the reasons I came here was to find new debaters, and new opinions and blood. I ENJOYED the Titania vs Rolf debate. Because most other places everyone is already used to the established idea that Titania>Rolf.
Meh. This is becoming a speech.
-
i had refrained from posting in this thread, but enough is enough
this is getting ridiculous.
you are too busy blaming each other that you don't even think about the problem
did you know that in a discussion it takes TWO? perhaps not, seeing that everybody blames the other side instead of realizing and accepting their own mistakes and try to fix them. and this goes to both debaters and non-debators.
so toodles! and don't even bother to respond to this message, since i'm not coming back to this thread.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Good one. Don't post if you don't plan on returning. Seriously, I don't want to be rude, but really don't state something if you aren't going to listen to the responses. Especially don't tell people that you won't listen to the responses.
Anyway, I WILL respond.
I have pointed out that a Discussion takes TWO. That's what I said earlier. And I believe we may have made certain mistakes, but when we made them, I immediately tried to rectify them. Notice that we have admitted we where wrong about some things? Besides, obviously we wouldn't be debating this as we are now if we didn't believe we were right. Unless someone here is playing devil's advocate.
-
Eldest
Murtagh is Eragon's brother
Harry Potter 7
Snape. Pretty much everything about him in the end surprised me a lot
Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn
Sephiran is Lehran and all that goes with it
Sadly, I saw those twists coming miles away. Alright, not the RD one. I need to stop being such a literary twat.
But where there seriously any people who
doubted Snape being good
? I just thought it was really obvious
...But I do LIKE those. I like a lot.
Oh yeah, best plot twist EVAH:
KotOR
You are Revan.
-
Bold made me lawl. But so what if we don't accept your ways? Would you be stubborn if I tried to make you do something you don't want to? There are other places for your standards and way of thinking. Use them there. Before you say anything about it, we aren't close-minded, we simply do not enjoy your ways. Just because you like X doesn't mean everyone should like X. Trying to force it on them is arrogant. See?(truly sincere here. If you don't get it say so)
We've never said you had to do things our way. It is a FACT that we cannot debate without an opponent. If we actually did say "NINO SUCKS AND YOU SUCK FOR LIKING HER", if you don't respond, WE CANNOT DEBATE. Every single debate we've had here has only happened because you all participated. Even this one now. Ironic actually, in order to stop us from debating, you debate with us. :P
And for the statements thing:
The two main topics I've seen where this happened was the Titania topic (which was for debating anyway), and the Which Pegasus Knight did you LIKE topic. You might think that a statement "Rolf is good", is an opinion. But, well, several things.
One, it's stated as a fact. Nothing there necessarily implies it's an opinion. Obviously however, the context has a pretty massive effect.
Two, just because it's an opinion that Rolf is good, doesn't mean my opinion can't be wrong. If I said "I like Rolf" or "I like Rolf because", then I can't really be wrong, can I? But if my opinion is that 2+2=7, then my opinion is wrong. Etc.
Now, for the main "problem" thread. A lot of things in that thread where stated like I outlined before. Now, the title might have said "Which one do you like?", but if I ask someone which car company they like and they say "GM is BETTER", it doesn't really matter what the question was, they're saying GM is better. Now, let's look what happened once the debating started:
QUOTE(Raven @ Oct 2 2008, 12:06 PM) *Tana, obviously... Vanessa's nice too, but Tana is just that little bit nicer and better.
Vanessa completely destroys Tana until end-game, where Tana becomes slightly better.
QUOTE(CGV @ Oct 2 2008, 02:38 PM) *Hard to say, but Tana gets my vote. She is usually a bit more reliable than Vanessa...
Do I even need to say the other reason?
How is Tana more reliable than Vanessa? She joins incredibly underleveled, goes completely supportless in Eirika's route, and requires much more babying. It is closer in Ephraim's route, where Tana can get Ephraim A, Cormag B, but that's only half the time.
Vanessa has the best support combination in the series, giving her arguably the best durability and offense in the game. She blows Tana out of the water for almost the entire game.
SS initiated a debate based on their statements, statements that would appear to be statements of "X character is better"
Now, let's see the first response to SS:
You just don't bother with her, I guess. Tana, even in my hard mode runthrough without any form of abusing, I got her caught up to Vanessa in no time. Both her and Vanessa are very reliable. Before you continue about how her supports are better, I just don't give a crap about them, to be blunt. I will not agree on your comment that "She blows Tana out of the water for almost the entire game" no matter how much you try to debate it, because it just doesn't happen to people who know how to use a unit and are able to raise a unit quickly and efficiently.Also, the topic asks which do we "like" more. We have our personal opinions and experiences with Tana, so don't go challenging them. It just pisses people off. You have your opinion that you like Vanessa the most, and other people like Tana or maybe even Syrene. This ends now, please. For this thread, anyway.
First, he responds trying to debateish. But he doesn't REALLY, as he continues to say "Do whatever you want, I will never accept your point no matter how well defended it is", then tells SS that he doesn't know how to play the game. However, this basically is asking for a response, seeing as he insulted SS fairly blatantly, and denied everything he said.
Then, he pulls the thing about the topic. Now, if he had JUST given the bottom part, I would say that SS should have stopped. But as it is, he's saying something, then saying "NO, STOP NAO!", which isn't very courteous.
It accelerated from there.
-
Drawing style and country of origin?
-
Rumors have been around for a while, but I don't think a second season is in 100% confirmation. I could be wrong.
It is. Kyoto is probably animating it now. They put up a site, a fake 404 error, and a bunch of stuff indicating that it would cover the events in the novel "The Dissapearance of Haruhi Suzumiya", as well as a couple Live Action trailers showing some of the events of "The Bamboo Rhapsody".
Obama Clearly won the debate
in General
Posted
Do you still take McSame seriously? He basically supports everything Bush does...
The last 8 years, the Republicans dominated, because they know how the political game works. They never bother with issues, in fact, they would rather Americans never look at the issues, because they get owned their. Most of what they do is with words. They put a negative connotation on words like "socialist", "liberal", and even "elite". They are "patriotic". They make their key words. Al Gore and Kerry didn't know how to play the game. They just said what they where going to do, and they had good ideas. But that was the wrong choice, although Gore actually won anyway, so meh. McSame simply attacks Obama at every turn. As does Palin. They do things like call him "unpatriotic". But things are kind of changing now. Obama has keyed into the game. He's made his key word "change", and boy is it helping him. The accusations the Republicans throw at him are no longer working as well. Unlike before, when you can fudge and lie all you wanted, know that the internet is where it is, when they lie, they are called on it. That is why there are so many Republican Hypocrisy videoes and such going around. Politics is changing, and hopefully for the better.
I believe Obama won. He addressed the issues, and explained points. He did what was important. McSame just attacked him over and over, throwing in a couple "patriotic" speeches here and there.
For example, Obama's Health Care plan is WAY better than McSame's (if that name is annoying, you can tell me to stop, I just love it to pieces). Obama explained it. McCain went up and said, "My healthcare plan is good for Americans. Obama's healthcare plan is totally shitty, and sucks.", then, Obama comes up and says "You know, that was a pack of lies, and your Health Care plan is REALLY bad." McCain comes up and says "Obama's healthcare is shitty. Mine is patriotic." and repeats the same lies from his last statement.
In short, never trust a man who shares a name with a French Fry brand. And when electing a leader, choose the one who, when his life is threatened, can fly away using his ears, as opposed to the one who will attempt to hobble to safety while wheezing.