Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I dunno, Newt is pretty tough in a debate. Romney held his own but he never scathed him. I imagine that Romney will have plenty of debate ammo considering Obama's lackluster performance as president.
One thing that I have noticed about Obama is he doesn't seem presidential (we disagree on that) and Romney as always struck me as presidential looking. ~shrug~ Different folks, different opinions. I do agree with you about the weight being the incumbent brings with.
I have been saying for years now that Romney just looks presidential.
Newt did do well in the debates, but as you say Romney did not exactly consistently beat him in the debates. The candidates he seemed (to me) to defeat in the debates (Perry: "Oops") were weak debaters.
If you polled people in 2008 on who looked more presidential they probably would have picked Romney (and Edwards, McCain...) over Obama (and Clinton). But in 2012, Obama is president, and all else equal someone who is president seems more presidential than someone who isn't. Look at the last debates between a sitting president and a challenger: Transcript: Bush, Kerry debate domestic policies - CNN. I think Kerry would have been a better president than Bush, but there's no denying that Bush seems like the president and Kerry seems like a guy who would like to be president.
It won't surprise me if Obama looks better in the debates. He's a smooth talker.
That's his problem: all style and no substance.
Its like chess. Its actually easier to beat someone who knows what theyre doing because you can see what their next move might be.
Nonsense. Obamas record is damned good.
If it comes down to Obamas record and its honest, Obama wins.
Romney needs to make it about what he will do differently, not how Obama has failed, because he hasnt.
Aside from being President when our Seals killed Osama Bin Laden, what exactly in Obama's record is "damned good"?
Got us out of Iraq, passed Obamacare, passed the Lilly Ledbetter ( sic? ) act, 20+ months straight of private sector job growth, "saved" GM, the "intervention in Libya, Signed the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act, The Credit card bill of Rights, $290 billion in Making Work Pay tax cuts, Tax credits for Health Insurance, added 4.6 billion to the Veterans Administration budget, Increased funding to national parks and forests by 10%, established the Consumer Finacial protection Bereau and appointed the first Latina to the supreme court in US history to name a few.
Now some of those things you might disagree with, as you are well within your rights to do, but to pretend as so many do on this board that his record is one of failure is just dishonest. The man has worked diligently to get his agenda through. Hes had numerouses successes.
Now take the Republican "obstructionism" and look at that the same way. Is it obstructionism to fight what you disagree with? Is that "obstructionism" not just a tactic to prevent going down a road they dont wish the country to go down?
If looked at in that sense, the so called obstuctionism is actually Republican victories. I disagree with their policies but one has to recognize the successes and failures of both sides if one is to remain honest.
Its like chess. Its actually easier to beat someone who knows what theyre doing because you can see what their next move might be.
That is a completely false description of how chess works.
Former Classmate Of Both Candidates: 'Barack Will Smoke Romney' In Debateshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/29/classmate-romney-obama-debate-_n_1553427.html
His supreme court nominations are almost criminal in the future harm they will do to this country. His entire presidency has been interlaced with dishonesty and under the table tactics because he has been too afraid to be honest with the American people about the things that he has done and how they were accomplished. Obama has been the most crooked president since Nixon. Hopefully, someday he will pay for his dishonesty to the American people. He is a world-wide embarrassment to our country.
By Sabrina Siddiqui
Sidney Barthwell, perhaps the only former classmate of both Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama, thinks the former Massachusetts governor doesn't stand a chance when facing the incumbent president in debates prior to their November electoral contest.
When they debate, Barack will smoke Romney, Barthwell, a district court magistrate in Michigan, said in an interview published by The Daily on Tuesday.
"Mitt Romney is smart, he continued. Having said all that, I still think hes going to get smoked. The best he can do is hopefully come out not looking like a fool. Mitt will find out the hard way as soon as they have their first debate: You dont debate Obama.
Barthwell, 64, was the only black member of Romney's 1965 class at Cranbrook Schools and later attended Harvard Law School with Obama. He identifies himself as being politically independent, has donated money to both campaigns and has "tremendous respect" for both men, he said.
But whereas Obama struck Barthwell as "brilliant" at Harvard -- where the two became friendly while working together for the Black Law Student Association -- he recalled Romney's years at Cranbrook as nothing to write home about. "Mitt was not particularly popular. He was very, very ordinary."
More: Sidney Barthwell, Former Classmate, Predicts Trouble For Romney When Debating Obama
By Sabrina Siddiqui
Sidney Barthwell, perhaps the only former classmate of both Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama, thinks the former Massachusetts governor doesn't stand a chance when facing the incumbent president in debates prior to their November electoral contest.
When they debate, Barack will smoke Romney, Barthwell, a district court magistrate in Michigan, said in an interview published by The Daily on Tuesday.
"Mitt Romney is smart, he continued. Having said all that, I still think hes going to get smoked. The best he can do is hopefully come out not looking like a fool. Mitt will find out the hard way as soon as they have their first debate: You dont debate Obama.
Barthwell, 64, was the only black member of Romney's 1965 class at Cranbrook Schools and later attended Harvard Law School with Obama. He identifies himself as being politically independent, has donated money to both campaigns and has "tremendous respect" for both men, he said.
But whereas Obama struck Barthwell as "brilliant" at Harvard -- where the two became friendly while working together for the Black Law Student Association -- he recalled Romney's years at Cranbrook as nothing to write home about. "Mitt was not particularly popular. He was very, very ordinary."
More: Sidney Barthwell, Former Classmate, Predicts Trouble For Romney When Debating Obama
Without a teleprompter???????
Lakhota, if you and your ilk were soooooooo sure that was the truth, you wouldn't be protesting too much in articles and threads.
You would keep it quiet and use it as an "October Surprise" when the debates come.
But libs told us the same thinga bout Al Gore vs. Bush in debates and Jimmy Carter vs. Reagan.
The reality was WILDLY different. The fact is both libs were SMOKED in those debtes, ESPECIALLY CARTER who is the closest I would compare to Obama.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YxFc_1b_0"]1980 Presidential Candidate Debate: Governor Ronald Reagan and President Jimmy Carter - 10/28/80 - YouTube[/ame]
Carter did SO BADLY in that debate that libs stung by their humiliation in predicting so wrongly on this debate, even went the extra mile of claiming a "CONSPIRACY." (which is what libs do every time they LOSE) Reagan must of stole Carter's notes or saw Carter practice debate. That, OF COURSE, did not stick because it was obvious that Carter lost simply because he was outgunned by the obviously intellectually superior Reagan.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2PajQltLrg"]2000 Presidential Debate Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]
Then there was the Bush V. Gore debate, where Gore ended up looking like a complete FOOL with his extra heavy make up to try and LOOK like Ronald Reagan and his constant sighs and rolling eyes. He looked childish and amateur against Bush (who's no great debater himself) So much so, that the Democrats accused Bush of wearing an aparatus that night to get answers from someone feeding to them in his ear
(Here's the full debate on CSPAN with full video) Presidential Candidates Debate - C-SPAN Video Library
Like I said, libs ALWAYS claim a conspiracy when THEY LOSE!
ESPECIALLY WITH THE 2000 DEBATE, libs told us that Al Gore was sooooooooo brilliant, he would smoke Bush.
Does anyone still maintain Gore is brilliant? Anyone?
So, keep protesting too much libs. You always do when you are worried. It's an attempt to intimidte and worry your target.
IT NEVER WORKS, but you keep trying it.
Can't wait until those debates! How about you?
Without his teleprompter Obama is left with his "ums and ahs" and fecthing around for whatever comes to is head, and that usually isn't muich.
Former Classmate Of Both Candidates: 'Barack Will Smoke Romney' In Debateshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/29/classmate-romney-obama-debate-_n_1553427.html
Barry will smoke anything
Salon?
His supreme court nominations are almost criminal in the future harm they will do to this country. His entire presidency has been interlaced with dishonesty and under the table tactics because he has been too afraid to be honest with the American people about the things that he has done and how they were accomplished. Obama has been the most crooked president since Nixon. Hopefully, someday he will pay for his dishonesty to the American people. He is a world-wide embarrassment to our country.
And he will be reelected will you survive?
His supreme court nominations are almost criminal in the future harm they will do to this country. His entire presidency has been interlaced with dishonesty and under the table tactics because he has been too afraid to be honest with the American people about the things that he has done and how they were accomplished. Obama has been the most crooked president since Nixon. Hopefully, someday he will pay for his dishonesty to the American people. He is a world-wide embarrassment to our country.
And he will be reelected will you survive?
Probably, I do pretty well. So far Obama's policies have only cost me $1200.00 a month in lost income. The problem is the next president will likely have a SCOTUS pick or two. If Obama wins the election our nation is fucked for a generation.
And he will be reelected will you survive?
Probably, I do pretty well. So far Obama's policies have only cost me $1200.00 a month in lost income. The problem is the next president will likely have a SCOTUS pick or two. If Obama wins the election our nation is fucked for a generation.
Because of the wingnut Supreme Court - Obama MUST win reelection.
Probably, I do pretty well. So far Obama's policies have only cost me $1200.00 a month in lost income. The problem is the next president will likely have a SCOTUS pick or two. If Obama wins the election our nation is fucked for a generation.
Because of the wingnut Supreme Court - Obama MUST win reelection.
If he does can we all be part Cherokee?
Without a teleprompter???????
Lakhota, if you and your ilk were soooooooo sure that was the truth, you wouldn't be protesting too much in articles and threads.
You would keep it quiet and use it as an "October Surprise" when the debates come.
But libs told us the same thinga bout Al Gore vs. Bush in debates and Jimmy Carter vs. Reagan.
The reality was WILDLY different. The fact is both libs were SMOKED in those debtes, ESPECIALLY CARTER who is the closest I would compare to Obama.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YxFc_1b_0"]1980 Presidential Candidate Debate: Governor Ronald Reagan and President Jimmy Carter - 10/28/80 - YouTube[/ame]
Carter did SO BADLY in that debate that libs stung by their humiliation in predicting so wrongly on this debate, even went the extra mile of claiming a "CONSPIRACY." (which is what libs do every time they LOSE) Reagan must of stole Carter's notes or saw Carter practice debate. That, OF COURSE, did not stick because it was obvious that Carter lost simply because he was outgunned by the obviously intellectually superior Reagan.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2PajQltLrg"]2000 Presidential Debate Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]
Then there was the Bush V. Gore debate, where Gore ended up looking like a complete FOOL with his extra heavy make up to try and LOOK like Ronald Reagan and his constant sighs and rolling eyes. He looked childish and amateur against Bush (who's no great debater himself) So much so, that the Democrats accused Bush of wearing an aparatus that night to get answers from someone feeding to them in his ear
(Here's the full debate on CSPAN with full video) Presidential Candidates Debate - C-SPAN Video Library
Like I said, libs ALWAYS claim a conspiracy when THEY LOSE!
ESPECIALLY WITH THE 2000 DEBATE, libs told us that Al Gore was sooooooooo brilliant, he would smoke Bush.
Does anyone still maintain Gore is brilliant? Anyone?
So, keep protesting too much libs. You always do when you are worried. It's an attempt to intimidte and worry your target.
IT NEVER WORKS, but you keep trying it.
Can't wait until those debates! How about you?
Without his teleprompter Obama is left with his "ums and ahs" and fecthing around for whatever comes to is head, and that usually isn't muich.
NASA photo analyst: Bush wore a device during debate - Kevin Berger - Salon.com
Will Romney be "wired" for the presidential debates like Bush was? How else could he compete?
