Obama Wins Debate Factchecking

Fact checkers will hammer Romney's distortions and lies.

How is putting more people to work, paying Income Taxes, a lie?

Isn't that what he promised Mass? Didn't they end up # 47 in job growth?

Wasn't he a ONE term Governor?

Did taxes and fees increase by $750 million per year?

Was long-term debt Increased more than $2.6 billion?

How are his poll numbers in the state he governed?

YOU want him running the country. WE'RE misinformed?
 
lets look at the tax cut, how do they know it's gonna cost $5 trillion? I love these kinds of figures...it's all bullshit....These are the same people that give us numbers that NEVER work out how they say.....because liberals think everything runs in a vaccum.....but say 3% growth....it's not even close to that

If your figures are bullshit, then your figures would have to be bullshit too. Personally, if I have to choose, I'll take the bullshit derived from thorough analysis than the bullshit you pull out of your ass because it's politically expedient.

Even with good figures, bad analysis of dynamic changes caused by those figures is not even up to bullshit.

If you compute that the economy we have today will not change over the next ten years, the $5 trillion figure has validity. But, only an economic idiot would make that assumption.

If the 20% drop in income tax rates causes just a 2% increase in the annual growth of the economy, then the $5 Trillion cut is completely nullified on its own, and after the ten years, is pure revenue gain. However, Romney insists that any tax rate reductions at the higher income level will be fully offset by eliminating tax writeoffs for that income group.

If he is only half right, that $5 Trillion will be reduced to $2.5 trillion, and just an uptick of 1% in the growth rate of the economy would nullify the rate reduction over ten years.

Now, to your factcheckers. Unless they have a good crystal ball, they don't have the foggiest idea of whether, or not, Romney's tax plan would create a $5 trillion hole in the deficit.
 
It's interesting that even MSNBC is using phrases like "got his clock cleaned" referring to obama's performance.

Well yeah.

Romney lied like crazy..was rude..rolled the Moderator and Obama did almost nothing about it.

The choices were pretty bad. A. Call him on it..and wind up looking like a bully. B. Keep cool and play by the rules.

B. Lost on style but won on substance.

MEANWHILE:

427962_454003217985685_1520897422_n.jpg
 
Fact checkers will hammer Romney's distortions and lies.

How is putting more people to work, paying Income Taxes, a lie?

Isn't that what he promised Mass? Didn't they end up # 47 in job growth?

Wasn't he a ONE term Governor?

Did taxes and fees increase by $750 million per year?

Was long-term debt Increased more than $2.6 billion?

How are his poll numbers in the state he governed?

YOU want him running the country. WE'RE misinformed?

With a few "clerical" adjustments...your own words can be used to describe Obama's failures.

Increased debt by 5 trillion...get the idea?:razz:
 
lets look at the tax cut, how do they know it's gonna cost $5 trillion? I love these kinds of figures...it's all bullshit....These are the same people that give us numbers that NEVER work out how they say.....because liberals think everything runs in a vaccum.....but say 3% growth....it's not even close to that

If your figures are bullshit, then your figures would have to be bullshit too. Personally, if I have to choose, I'll take the bullshit derived from thorough analysis than the bullshit you pull out of your ass because it's politically expedient.

Even with good figures, bad analysis of dynamic changes caused by those figures is not even up to bullshit.

If you compute that the economy we have today will not change over the next ten years, the $5 trillion figure has validity. But, only an economic idiot would make that assumption.

If the 20% drop in income tax rates causes just a 2% increase in the annual growth of the economy, then the $5 Trillion cut is completely nullified on its own, and after the ten years, is pure revenue gain. However, Romney insists that any tax rate reductions at the higher income level will be fully offset by eliminating tax writeoffs for that income group.

If he is only half right, that $5 Trillion will be reduced to $2.5 trillion, and just an uptick of 1% in the growth rate of the economy would nullify the rate reduction over ten years.

Now, to your factcheckers. Unless they have a good crystal ball, they don't have the foggiest idea of whether, or not, Romney's tax plan would create a $5 trillion hole in the deficit.
You're full of IFs yourdamnedself. in fact Ifif was a fifth, we'd all be drunk off of your post alone.
 
How is putting more people to work, paying Income Taxes, a lie?

Isn't that what he promised Mass? Didn't they end up # 47 in job growth?

Wasn't he a ONE term Governor?

Did taxes and fees increase by $750 million per year?

Was long-term debt Increased more than $2.6 billion?

How are his poll numbers in the state he governed?

YOU want him running the country. WE'RE misinformed?

With a few "clerical" adjustments...your own words can be used to describe Obama's failures.

Increased debt by 5 trillion...get the idea?:razz:

Obama did that? I disagree, and any reputable economist would as well. The first YEAR wasn't a result of HIS budget.

I know your side banks on the ignorance of the electorate, and sadly, that is often a winning strategy, but honestly, allowing that twaddle to be fingered on your keyboard day after fucking DAY indicates an unhealthy obsession with twiddling. Seek help.
 
Pretty piss poor debate IMO. Romney did win (on assertiveness) but both candidates in my eyes did not look presidential.. A president should look the public in the eyes and tell them the hard truths.

Cutting spending alone is not going to be enough to make a dent in this deficit. More tax cuts while we are still spending millions of dollars daily overseas is not the answer and in the short term it will cause less revenue to be generated by the government (more borrowing for military efforts and programs that already exist).. This is where that 5 trillion estimation comes from. Long term, it puts us at the mercy of big business, and if there is no hiring or expansion these tax cuts will tank the economy even further. The problem is that there are companies right now that are experiencing adequate profit enough to expand but still aren't doing so.

Calling Romney's plan a vast tax decrease is disingenuous because if loopholes, deductions, and exemptions are eliminated, more income becomes taxable so this isn't as cut and dry as most of you people are putting it.

Did everyone watch with the intention of cheerleading? I personally wanted the details and as a voter that has never voted for either prominent party I was left just as unsure as I was before.

I want specifics on where waste will be abolished, where cuts will take place and what loopholes and exemptions will be eliminated.. so far all I've heard about was some obscure mention of a private jet loophole from either candidate.. got to be frickin' kidding me..

Any candidate that gets too specific, is either ignorant of how Washington works, or is just a liar or a dreamer. In congress, there are over 535 differing opinions of what is waste, abuse, and/or corruption. Our next president needs to set attainable goals, and then work with the leadership of the congress to enact legislation to meet those goals. Getting too specific before the negotiations commence, winds up goring some oxen, and builds resistance to beneficial changes.

Romney outlined a workable plan with specific and obtainable goals, to get America working again, and pull us out of the muck that we have been stuck in for the last four years. Obama didn't need to outline anything, since the results of his (plan?) is obvious to anyone who is not wearing blinders. His goal was to obfuscate and distort his own economic record, and blame everyone and everything but himself for the mess.

We are not going to straighten America out without some pain for everyone. But, we first need to assure that Washington is working toward the same goal. Otherwise, all we are going to get is more pain.
 
Owning my own business, albiet a small one, I pay many taxes, two of them being payroll tax and sales tax.

The liberals always mischaracterize these taxes by saying "oh the business just passes that expense onto the consumer" or "the employee pays the payroll tax". These are half truths.

The employer also pays a separate payroll tax of business' money and the business can't always pass on the price of the sales tax to the consumer because we must compete with other businesses all of whom are trying to under bid my business.

We pay tax every year on the building we own, on the equipment in our business. So cutting taxes would help me sell my service for less making it easier for me to compete helping to get more business therefore allowing me to hire someone to help me handle the extra work load.
 
Last edited:
Owning my own business, albiet a small one, I pay many taxes, two of them being payroll tax and sales tax.

The liberals always mischaracterize these taxes by saying "oh the business just passes that expense onto the consumer" or "the employee pays the payroll tax". These are half truths.

The employer also pays a separate payroll tax of business' money and the business can't always pass on the price of the sales tax to the consumer because we must compete with other businesses all of whom are trying to under bid my business.

We pay tax every year on the building we own, on the equipment in our business. So cutting taxes would help me sell my service for less making it easier for me to compete helping to get more business therefore allowing me to hire someone to help me handle the extra work load.


LMAO -- are you saying you're such a wimpy business person you are unable to compete on a level playing field with your competitors?
 
I heard about 45 seconds and Obama lied in that time. Romney said he would have embraced Simpson Bowles and Obama said he did. That is a lie. Obama abandoned SB as soon as he could.

Romney said he would have embraced Simpson Bowles. Simpson Bowles had tax increases in it.

So was Romney lying when he said he'd support it, or when he said he wouldn't raise taxes?

You're an idiot is the truth.
Romney, when asked, said he didnt support SB because he had his own plan. But if he were Obama he would have supported it.
Is that too complicated for your 3rd grade education to understand?

I highlighted what you said first, and what you said second.

Does anyone see a problem there?:lol::lol::lol:
 
PolitiFact | Fact-checking the Denver presidential debate

Here's what we've checked so far:

Taxes

• Obama said that Romney's plan "calls for a $5 trillion tax cut." The figure accounts for only half of Romney's plan, and it's cumulative over 10 years. The governor says he will offset those lost revenues by reducing tax deductions and eliminating loopholes. However, he hasn't specified what those changes would be. The president made a misleading statement about an incomplete plan, but he did describe what the plan was missing and that Romney would not fill in the gaps. We rated the claim Half True.

• Obama said that "independent studies" looking at Romney's tax plan say the only way to meet Romney's goal of not adding to the deficit is by "burdening middle class families." A reputable study from the Tax Policy Center found that to meet Romney's deficit goal, middle class taxpayers might lose exemptions and deductions worth about $2,000. So we previously have rated Mostly True a claim that Romney is proposing a tax plan "that would give millionaires another tax break and raise taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year."

• Romney said six tax studies look at a study that Obama described and "say it's completely wrong." Previously, Romney has claimed that five studies back his tax plan. We found that Mostly False. We saw no more than two independent studies out of the five claimed.

• Obama said he "lowered taxes for small businesses 18 times." When we examined his claim last summer that his administration had "provided at least 16 tax cuts to small businesses," we rated it Mostly True, noting that conservative tax specialists say the statistic ignores proposed and enacted tax hikes on small businesses.

Deficit

• Romney claimed that Obama had said he would "cut the deficit in half." That's the case. We rated a claim from Crossroads GPS that Obama failed to keep his pledge of halving the deficit True.

• Obama said he put forward "a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan." That's true if you combine the 10-year impact of his budget with the 10-year impact of cuts already approved. (For that reason, we've previously found his claim that his budget plan would "cut our deficits by $4 trillion" Half True.)



Jobs

• Romney said part of his plan to create jobs includes North American energy independence. He said that while oil and gas production might be up, Obama shouldn't get credit — the increase was on private lands, not public. We have previously found that oil production on public lands dropped 14 percent in one year, but that's not the whole story. It was small snapshot, and partly because of hurricanes. We rated a claim from Crossroads GPS that oil "production's down where Obama's in charge" Half True. Our reporting confirmed Romney's claim that Obama shouldn't get credit — but neither, perhaps, should President George W. Bush.

• Romney said half of college graduates can't find a job. We've previously rated that Mostly True — about a quarter of recent college grads can't find a job, while another quarter found jobs that don't require college degrees.

Medicare

• Romney claimed "on Medicare for current retirees, (Obama is) cutting $716 billion from the program." That amount refers to Obama's reductions in Medicare spending over 10 years, primarily in what's paid to insurers and hospitals. But the statement gives the impression that the law takes money already allocated to Medicare away from current recipients. We rated Romney's claim Half True.

• Romney also claimed that Obama used those Medicare savings to pay for his health care law. We've previously rated Romney's claim that Obama took that money from Medicare "to pay for Obamacare" Half True. The new health care law uses a number of measures to try to reduce the rapid growth of future Medicare spending. Those savings are used to offset costs created by the health care law — especially coverage for the uninsured — so that the overall law doesn't add to the deficit.

• Obama claimed that the "essence" of Romney's plan for retiree health care was to "turn Medicare into a voucher program." Romney would give seniors a premium support payment toward private insurance, to replace the current system of government payments to doctors and hospitals. Generally, we think "voucher program" is a fair way of describing to voters the vision for Medicare under a Romney-Ryan administration. We rated Obama's claim Mostly True.

• Obama recycled an outdated number about vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan's original Medicare proposal, saying that "because the voucher wouldn't necessarily keep up with health care inflation, it was estimated that this would cost the average senior about $6,000 a year." That ignores a more recent Ryan proposal that pegs the size of the voucher to the second-cheapest plan available on a Medicare exchange. We rated a related claim from the secretary of Health and Human Services last month Half True.

Health care

• Romney said that Obama failed to cut health care premiums by $2,500. That's true. On our Obameter, which tracks Obama's 2008 campaign promises, we've rated that a Promise Broken.

• Obama said that Romney used the same advisers to create his Massachusetts health plan that Obama later did for his health care law. Rick Santorum once claimed that a "Romney adviser admits Romneycare was the blueprint for Obamacare." If Santorum's ad had said "former adviser," that would have been True.

• Obama claimed that Romney said his Massachusetts law was a "model for the nation." Romney later fired back that he said it was a model "state by state," not from the federal government down. We've previously found that an early version of Romney's book No Apology did advocate the Massachusetts model as a strong option for other states, as Romney said.

• Romney said that Obama "put in place a board that can tell people ultimately what treatments they're going to receive." Romney avoided the more inaccurate and harsher wording of some other critics, who have falsely described the board as "rationing" care. But Romney's claim can leave viewers with the impression that the board makes health care decisions for individual Americans, and that's not the case. We rated his statement Mostly False.
 
The idea of liberals "fact checking" anything is too absurd for anyone to take seriously.

PolitiFact | Fact-checking the Denver presidential debate

Here's what we've checked so far:

Taxes

• Obama said that Romney's plan "calls for a $5 trillion tax cut." The figure accounts for only half of Romney's plan, and it's cumulative over 10 years. The governor says he will offset those lost revenues by reducing tax deductions and eliminating loopholes. However, he hasn't specified what those changes would be. The president made a misleading statement about an incomplete plan, but he did describe what the plan was missing and that Romney would not fill in the gaps. We rated the claim Half True.

• Obama said that "independent studies" looking at Romney's tax plan say the only way to meet Romney's goal of not adding to the deficit is by "burdening middle class families." A reputable study from the Tax Policy Center found that to meet Romney's deficit goal, middle class taxpayers might lose exemptions and deductions worth about $2,000. So we previously have rated Mostly True a claim that Romney is proposing a tax plan "that would give millionaires another tax break and raise taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year."

• Romney said six tax studies look at a study that Obama described and "say it's completely wrong." Previously, Romney has claimed that five studies back his tax plan. We found that Mostly False. We saw no more than two independent studies out of the five claimed.

• Obama said he "lowered taxes for small businesses 18 times." When we examined his claim last summer that his administration had "provided at least 16 tax cuts to small businesses," we rated it Mostly True, noting that conservative tax specialists say the statistic ignores proposed and enacted tax hikes on small businesses.

Deficit

• Romney claimed that Obama had said he would "cut the deficit in half." That's the case. We rated a claim from Crossroads GPS that Obama failed to keep his pledge of halving the deficit True.

• Obama said he put forward "a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan." That's true if you combine the 10-year impact of his budget with the 10-year impact of cuts already approved. (For that reason, we've previously found his claim that his budget plan would "cut our deficits by $4 trillion" Half True.)



Jobs

• Romney said part of his plan to create jobs includes North American energy independence. He said that while oil and gas production might be up, Obama shouldn't get credit — the increase was on private lands, not public. We have previously found that oil production on public lands dropped 14 percent in one year, but that's not the whole story. It was small snapshot, and partly because of hurricanes. We rated a claim from Crossroads GPS that oil "production's down where Obama's in charge" Half True. Our reporting confirmed Romney's claim that Obama shouldn't get credit — but neither, perhaps, should President George W. Bush.

• Romney said half of college graduates can't find a job. We've previously rated that Mostly True — about a quarter of recent college grads can't find a job, while another quarter found jobs that don't require college degrees.

Medicare

• Romney claimed "on Medicare for current retirees, (Obama is) cutting $716 billion from the program." That amount refers to Obama's reductions in Medicare spending over 10 years, primarily in what's paid to insurers and hospitals. But the statement gives the impression that the law takes money already allocated to Medicare away from current recipients. We rated Romney's claim Half True.

• Romney also claimed that Obama used those Medicare savings to pay for his health care law. We've previously rated Romney's claim that Obama took that money from Medicare "to pay for Obamacare" Half True. The new health care law uses a number of measures to try to reduce the rapid growth of future Medicare spending. Those savings are used to offset costs created by the health care law — especially coverage for the uninsured — so that the overall law doesn't add to the deficit.

• Obama claimed that the "essence" of Romney's plan for retiree health care was to "turn Medicare into a voucher program." Romney would give seniors a premium support payment toward private insurance, to replace the current system of government payments to doctors and hospitals. Generally, we think "voucher program" is a fair way of describing to voters the vision for Medicare under a Romney-Ryan administration. We rated Obama's claim Mostly True.

• Obama recycled an outdated number about vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan's original Medicare proposal, saying that "because the voucher wouldn't necessarily keep up with health care inflation, it was estimated that this would cost the average senior about $6,000 a year." That ignores a more recent Ryan proposal that pegs the size of the voucher to the second-cheapest plan available on a Medicare exchange. We rated a related claim from the secretary of Health and Human Services last month Half True.

Health care

• Romney said that Obama failed to cut health care premiums by $2,500. That's true. On our Obameter, which tracks Obama's 2008 campaign promises, we've rated that a Promise Broken.

• Obama said that Romney used the same advisers to create his Massachusetts health plan that Obama later did for his health care law. Rick Santorum once claimed that a "Romney adviser admits Romneycare was the blueprint for Obamacare." If Santorum's ad had said "former adviser," that would have been True.

• Obama claimed that Romney said his Massachusetts law was a "model for the nation." Romney later fired back that he said it was a model "state by state," not from the federal government down. We've previously found that an early version of Romney's book No Apology did advocate the Massachusetts model as a strong option for other states, as Romney said.

• Romney said that Obama "put in place a board that can tell people ultimately what treatments they're going to receive." Romney avoided the more inaccurate and harsher wording of some other critics, who have falsely described the board as "rationing" care. But Romney's claim can leave viewers with the impression that the board makes health care decisions for individual Americans, and that's not the case. We rated his statement Mostly False.
 
The First Debate: Mitt Romney's Five Biggest Lies | Politics News | Rolling Stone

By Tim Dickinson
October 4, 2012 9:32 AM ET
Mitt Romney turned in a polished performance in last night's presidential debate – and revealed himself to be an accomplished and unapologetic liar. In an evening where he sought to slice and dice the president with statistics, Romney baldly misrepresented his own policy prescriptions, made up numbers to fit his attacks and buried clear contrasts with the president under a heaping pile of horseshit.

Here are mendacious Mitt's five most outrageous statements:



Read more: The First Debate: Mitt Romney's Five Biggest Lies | Politics News | Rolling Stone
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top