Best 472 quotes in «debate quotes» category

Had Windham possessed discretion in debate, or Sheridan in conduct, they might have ruled their age.

Having a debate with a modern Christian is like punching a sponge.

Here's a guy that inherited $200 million. If he hadn't inherited $200 million, you know where Donald Trump would be right now?

He who defines the terms, controls the debate.

He who writes the Resolved Clause, wins the debate.

Have you noticed that every one of these candidates for Presidency say: "Barack Obama's weak, Vladimir Putin's kicking sand in his face. When I talk to Putin, he's gonna straighten out. Just looking at him I'm gonna - he's gonna be - " and then it turns out they can't handle a bunch of CNBC moderators at a debate. I don't think the Chinese and the Russians are gonna be too worried about you.

I also want to make sure that when we debate these things [hackers attacks], that we actually have the facts that are very clear in front of us to have this debate.

How is it that this debate has been twisted on its head, that somehow those that advocate peace and diplomacy are anti-American?

I am broadly concerned about the slow death of free speech, but particularly in universities and also with regards to the climate change debate.

I am convinced that we as a body must conduct a formal and legitimate debate about election irregularities.

I am happy to debate the past with the Prime Minister... I have a big dossier on his past, and I did not even have to sex it up.

I believe an invitation from the Commission on Presidential Debates is similar to a draft notice - a civic responsibility.

Historians debate to this day whether Fidel Castro was a communist from the time he took power or only became one after he was spurned by the United States. What is not disputed is that he was always an autocrat moving ruthlessly against anyone who dared oppose him.

I am incrementally a pessimist, but I see the international debate that Edward Snowden has engendered, and I think this is exactly where the discussion should be. So, I would say I'm more optimistic than pessimistic.

I don't ever participate in debates about the existence or nonexistence of God because I can't imagine why anyone would be persuaded one way or the other by such things.

I don't really feel like I have to have a debate with my husband over issues.

I don't think this debate is negative, it is enriching

I'd want to have a fair moderator. I thought that Mitt Romney was treated very unfairly in the third debate [in 2012].

I can tell you is all nine of the people here [on debates] would make an infinitely better commander in chief than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.

I don't know Condoleezza Rice personally. I'm sure she's a nice lady, and I'm sure she plays the piano well. But she was a very bad National Security Adviser. The National Security Adviser is supposed to be an arbiter of policy and open minded in internal debates.

I don't know where we should take this company, but I do know that if I start with the right people, ask them the right questions, and engage them in vigorous debate, we will find a way to make this company great.

I enjoyed debate on the floor but it's not really debate in the same way.

I fear that, in the end, the famous debate among materialists, idealists, and dualists amounts to a merely verbal dispute that is more a matter for the linguist than for the speculative philosopher

If Hillary Clinton had to face me on a debate stage, at the very least, she would have a hitch in her swing.

If I can get on the presidential ballot in all 50 states and be allowed into the debates, I'd not only run, I'd win.

If you listen to the debate, [Barack Obama] and [John] McCain said the same thing about gay rights.

If John McCain wants to have a debate about who has the temperament, and judgment, to serve as the next Commander-in-Chief, that's a debate I'm ready to have.

I don't mind the debates, they're good for America, but we shouldn't be out there attacking each other all the time.

If you know that God loves you, you should never question a directive from Him. It will always be right and best. When He gives you a directive, you are not just to observe it, discuss it, or debate it. You are to obey it.

I heard Dennis Kucinich say in a debate, 'When I'm president... and I just wanted to stop him and say, 'Dude.'

I happen to like debating, and I like to debate like a lawyer, and I can argue any points to death, and I will.

I have worked to expand the health care debate beyond the current for-profit system, to include a public option and an amendment to free the states to pursue single payer.

I like Macron a lot and I very much welcome him - particularly the fact that he made Europe one of the main topics of the election debate.

I like the debate, but I don't really like the fight. I don't like being in the ring. I'm not competitive.

I look forward to continuing the debate about Britain's future - in Parliament and across the country.

I'm against tax increases on anyone, period, end of debate.

I'm a talker. I love a good debate.

If we’re going to have arguments, let’s have arguments — but let’s make them debates worthy of this body and worthy of this country.

I'm more a collector of identities and words that feel right to me. To me this is an inarguable point. I am who I say I am and that's not up for debate.

I'm not going to get into a debate over the non-essentials. I won't try to change other denominations. Why be divisive?

I'm pretty good at sticking to what I know. You don't see me social commentating on health-care or presidential debates. I talk about what I know because I'm petrified of being wrong.

In a body [like Congress] where there are more than one hundred talking lawyers, you can make no calculation upon the termination of any debate.

In a film, you have to externalize things that are internal and of course it becomes a debate about to what extent you do that.

In all intellectual debates, both sides tend to be correct in what they affirm, and wrong in what they deny.

In a lifetime of observing and participating in political debate, I have seen a lot of meanness.

In debates between anarchists and statists, the burden of proof clearly should rest on those who place their trust in the state. Anarchy's mayhem is wholly conjectural; the state's mayhem is undeniably, factually horrendous.

In debate, one randomly was assigned to one side or the other. This had at least one virtue - it made one see that there was more than one side to these complex issues.

Indeed one's faith in one's plans and methods is truly tested when the horizon before one is the blackest.

I negotiated the proper timing and other things having to do with one of our other debates.

In every debate, whatever the format, whatever the questions, there is one and only one way to identify the winner: Who commands the room? Who drives the narrative? Who is in charge?