Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
A) Why are Europeans so obsessed with America?
B) Isn't it true, that Europeans are obsessed with America because of it's arrogance?
Updates
+1 y
Thank you for finally admitting I was right! I'm glad you did some research on your own and then regurgitated it to me like I hadn't already told you! Lol Ha Ha Also, stop with the "xenophobic" bs, it makes you look weak and dumber than you already look. You know it was your buddy that had a problem with foreigners. How do I know? Because you called him out for it! I quote, "it's not fair to hate all Americans". You can't find one quote of me being xenophobic. Yes, that even includes my question
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
3Opinion
B, is a leading question, because you are leading a witness into a particular answer you want from them, not an answer they might have. A, is a loaded/open ended question, because you aren't looking for a particular answer but have set an unsubstantiated claim and are looking for various answers that fit the narrative that Europeans are obsessed with America.
Some people think it's leading people into "thinking Europeans are obsessed with America". What do you have to say about that?
Whether Europeans are obsessed with America or not wasn't the question. That is the claim you made to set a narrative for various answer as to, "why" they are.
So, would you say, the best way to tell the difference between the two, is by knowing exactly how to answer the asker's question?
I OBJECT, Your honor! Leading the witness...
What is the best way to tell the difference between the two?
When someone asks you a leading question, you know the exact answer they want. Just like you so beautifully demonstrated. I'm DONE now!
To be honest, depending on the circumstances, I would say that question is more along the lines of argumentative and probably wouldn't be relevant.
Question A, is the one I mean. But it clearly isn't leading or even misleading.
Jesus Christ! Court isn't in session!
@slingblade1126 Under what grounds is that argumentative? I am curious.
I would need to know the context of why you're asking the question. If I was here from Europe just for a vacation and got arrested and charged with DUI and felony H&R, if I took the stand and you asked me, "why are Europeans so obsessed with America", my attorney would scream! "Objection, your honor! It's argumentative on the grounds it calls for speculation. It's also not relevant". If I was here from Europe to protest R v Wade and got arrested and charged with felony vandalism and trespassing, if I took the stand and you asked me the same question, my attorneys objection would be the same. But there is a clear difference in the context of why your question was asked and I guarantee each objection would be sustained BUT you could argue the ruling of one of those. Which one would it be?
I agree, the first example is mainly not relevant. I doubt any attorney would object to it for being argumentative. As for the second example, it's relevant because it gets into the mind of you and your crimes. You came thousands of miles to protest a decision by our highest court that doesn't involve you. Why the obsession? It shows your willingness to actually involve yourself in illegal activities due to your obvious disdain for the decision. That's how I would argue it.
You should ALWAYS object on multiple grounds! It makes your opponents look stupid. As for you comments about example 2, the judge would say, "Objection sustained. Rephrase the question".
"Mr. Slingblade, why are YOU so obsessed with America and it's policies"?
"I object, your honor! The question is argumentative, he's starting to badger my witness. He's also misleading the jury! It's not a crime to come from another country to protest. It's also not a crime to be "obsessed" with a country and/or it's policies. I also fail to see the relevance! Tell this dumb Mother Fucker to move on to a different line of questioning"!
Judge: "Objection sustained. Counselor, I'll will give you one more opportunity to rephrase your question.
"Your honor, obsession by every study and measure, leads to compulsive and often times illegal behavior. That is without question. If I show his obsession for this country and it's policies, it actually goes toward an aspect of motive".
I'm sure this part would be a sidebar meeting but it would without question show relevance.
Judge: "You've shown relevance. Just rephrase your question".
How much longer are you going to do this? Don't you have a life anymore?
"Mr. Slingblade, is it fair to say you show an unusual interest in America's policies"?
"Especially since you are from another country and our policies don't effect you".
"I object your honor! The question is argumentative. This prick is speculating that laws here don't effect other countries or my client in particular. He has no knowledge if they do".
Judge: "Objection overruled. I'm gonna let him answer. It leaves room for elaboration but counselor, keep your line of questioning narrow in scope".
Does that make you feel better?
B is leading. A is open-ended.
But I also wonder about this. The Europeans brag how they are so worldly. It's about 1500 miles from London to Rome. From my house to Denver is 1500 miles. They claim it's worldly to travel through all those countries to get to Rome. But somehow the same distance is less traveled because it's in the same country.
It's funny, I can travel 50-100 miles in any direction and experience the culture of 5, 6 different countries.
Exactly. Depending on the city - if there's a china town, it's almost being in a different country even 5 miles away. Definitely not the same culture
I was going to say it was a loaded question but your goal was the same as a leading question and the differences are semantics. But your goal was to confused and mislead the OP into saying something she didn’t want to.
case closed.
Lol! Lol! "Umm, I was, duh, Umm going to say, umm, it was a, duh, loaded question". Yeah, I almost believe that. A few things, #1) learn the definition of semantics. I'll give you examples if you'd like. #2) answer my question. And, finally, tell me the exact answer I wanted from the OP.
You think you’re smart because you know what loaded question is, don’t you Mr. Walrus?
You see my very round friend. When you ask a loaded question you’re trying tricking the answerer into a defensive position by assuming an unverified fact. It’s not so much you are trying to get a specific answer but you are leading the answerer into a trap. Leading questions are similar but they require that you answer in a specific way.
I was just there to back my euro friend. Not my fault you’re xenophobic.
I object! You're leading the witness. Rephrase the question.
You’ve lost. Get over it. Move on.
Be the first girl to share an opinion
and earn 3 more Xper points!