Romney had to win the debate... He did.

[VaYank5150]

Such as not having to pay taxes on offshore accounts.

VaYank...the left has been talking about all of the "loopholes" and "Tax havens" that only the wealthy such as Romney can capitalize on. What are they? I dont know. I have never been able to use them, so I never looked for them.

Cap gains is what it is all about......those with cap gains who do not pay regular income tax, take those cap gains and invest them in tax free situations.....I believe those are the ones who will feel it.

As for specifics...lets look at specifics...

According to Obama, he will cut into the deficit by increasing taxes to 40% on those making 250K or more...

Sounds good to those on the left..

But where are the specifics?

That will generate less than 100 Billion dollars....and we hgave a deeficit of 1.3 trillion.....so with that tax increase we decrease our deficit to 1.2 trillion.....so then he cuts spending by his proposed 2.5 times the increase in tax revenue.....so about .25 trillion...

Leaving us with a trillion dollar deficit.....oh joy.

Why are those "specifics" not being questioned by anyone?

As Romney made clear....

He worked with a legislature comprised of 87% democrats....if he walked in with "specifics" and said "pass this", he would have gotten nothing done.

Instead he presents "principles"....and he then works with both parties to come up with the specifics to acheive it.

You may want to criticize that philosophy....but I like it.

You are not going to get that sort of "only Romney needs to provide specifics" answer from me. What I thought was enlightening last night was that Obama was VERY specific. However, I began to ponder...."OK, Mr. President, since you have this specific plan to cut $4T from our defecit, which is great, but WHY are you holding it on your pocket after nearly four years? Why haven't you implemented it in your first term?"

Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, so I think that "debate" is a waste of time. I don't see how Romney can spit all over the ACA, while holding up his brilliant plan both at the same time.

Either way, the meme of it's all about jobs for Romney doesn't play for me, as he doesn't have any specifics on how he plans to create jobs, nor which types of jobs, nor how long it will take. Add to that, his tax cut plan is dependent on said job creation so as not to add to our defecit, and I see nothing more than a "vision", and if a "vision" is all he's got, well, we already have one of those in office now.

And finally, his desire to find budget cuts almost everywhere else except the bloated DoD budget does not fly with me. Why should the DoD budget be some sacred cow that is untouchable? How much do we really need? Can anyone answer that for sure?

Thats your ideology...and if you feel that way, then dont vote for him.

But to answer your question.....the Secretary of Defense is the best qualified to answer it.....and he said that the Obama cuts could be catastrophic.

From my ideological standpoint.....we are in a dnagerous world./ History has shown that those that appear to be the strongest militarily may have the least amount fof friends...but they also have the least amount of worry about a foreign attack.

Perhaps it is ideaology. But answer me this. How well did the largest, most advanced and most expensive military in the WORLD protect us on 9/11? Wasn't that a foreign attack?

 

[Jarhead]

You are not going to get that sort of "only Romney needs to provide specifics" answer from me. What I thought was enlightening last night was that Obama was VERY specific. However, I began to ponder...."OK, Mr. President, since you have this specific plan to cut $4T from our defecit, which is great, but WHY are you holding it on your pocket after nearly four years? Why haven't you implemented it in your first term?"

Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, so I think that "debate" is a waste of time. I don't see how Romney can spit all over the ACA, while holding up his brilliant plan both at the same time.

Either way, the meme of it's all about jobs for Romney doesn't play for me, as he doesn't have any specifics on how he plans to create jobs, nor which types of jobs, nor how long it will take. Add to that, his tax cut plan is dependent on said job creation so as not to add to our defecit, and I see nothing more than a "vision", and if a "vision" is all he's got, well, we already have one of those in office now.

And finally, his desire to find budget cuts almost everywhere else except the bloated DoD budget does not fly with me. Why should the DoD budget be some sacred cow that is untouchable? How much do we really need? Can anyone answer that for sure?

what are Obama's specifics for cutting 4 trillion. I heard the principles...but not the specifics.

Raise the tax rates on those making more than $250,000. Eliminate waste and fraud within our government programs such as MediCare. Cut the DoD budget. Use some of the funds currently being used to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to pay down the debt.

rasing taxes on those making 250K or more will increase revenue by 100 billion.
Obamas proposed spending cuts of 2.5 times the increase in tax revenue will save 250 billlion.
That is a total of 350 billion...

Making our deficit 950 billion....nearly a trillion.

So when he says 4 trillion....he mans over ten years.....

But during that time, our debt is growing by 1 trillion a year....

So with his plan our debt will be at 26 trillion....not 30 trillion.

That is a plan?

 

[Jarhead]

You are not going to get that sort of "only Romney needs to provide specifics" answer from me. What I thought was enlightening last night was that Obama was VERY specific. However, I began to ponder...."OK, Mr. President, since you have this specific plan to cut $4T from our defecit, which is great, but WHY are you holding it on your pocket after nearly four years? Why haven't you implemented it in your first term?"

Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, so I think that "debate" is a waste of time. I don't see how Romney can spit all over the ACA, while holding up his brilliant plan both at the same time.

Either way, the meme of it's all about jobs for Romney doesn't play for me, as he doesn't have any specifics on how he plans to create jobs, nor which types of jobs, nor how long it will take. Add to that, his tax cut plan is dependent on said job creation so as not to add to our defecit, and I see nothing more than a "vision", and if a "vision" is all he's got, well, we already have one of those in office now.

And finally, his desire to find budget cuts almost everywhere else except the bloated DoD budget does not fly with me. Why should the DoD budget be some sacred cow that is untouchable? How much do we really need? Can anyone answer that for sure?

Va...he was VERY specific with how he plans to create jobs.

Not increase taxes, eliminate rediculous regulations...open up Alaska for drilling.....allow for more off shore drilling permits.....approve the pipeline....

You may not want him to do those things from an ideological strandpoint...and I respect that....but that dopesnt mean he was not specific with his plan.....he was very specific.

He never stated which regulations he would eliminate to create more jobs. I do not believe there are 12 million jobs in the oil and natural gas sector. Do you?

He said it will create 4 million jobs in the oil, gas and coal secotrs...and I bvelieve that number.

The balance of 8 million is what he believes the tax cuts as well as the regulation eliminations will create.....and I see that as possible.

And as I said earlier....hge did not state the reghulations he will eliminate....but that doesnt mean there are not thousands he can....for there are thousands of regulations that are not necessary.

 

[Jarhead]

You are not going to get that sort of "only Romney needs to provide specifics" answer from me. What I thought was enlightening last night was that Obama was VERY specific. However, I began to ponder...."OK, Mr. President, since you have this specific plan to cut $4T from our defecit, which is great, but WHY are you holding it on your pocket after nearly four years? Why haven't you implemented it in your first term?"

Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, so I think that "debate" is a waste of time. I don't see how Romney can spit all over the ACA, while holding up his brilliant plan both at the same time.

Either way, the meme of it's all about jobs for Romney doesn't play for me, as he doesn't have any specifics on how he plans to create jobs, nor which types of jobs, nor how long it will take. Add to that, his tax cut plan is dependent on said job creation so as not to add to our defecit, and I see nothing more than a "vision", and if a "vision" is all he's got, well, we already have one of those in office now.

And finally, his desire to find budget cuts almost everywhere else except the bloated DoD budget does not fly with me. Why should the DoD budget be some sacred cow that is untouchable? How much do we really need? Can anyone answer that for sure?

Thats your ideology...and if you feel that way, then dont vote for him.

But to answer your question.....the Secretary of Defense is the best qualified to answer it.....and he said that the Obama cuts could be catastrophic.

From my ideological standpoint.....we are in a dnagerous world./ History has shown that those that appear to be the strongest militarily may have the least amount fof friends...but they also have the least amount of worry about a foreign attack.

Perhaps it is ideaology. But answer me this. How well did the largest, most advanced and most expensive military in the WORLD protect us on 9/11? Wasn't that a foreign attack?

it was the only attack on our home land since pearl harbor....it was a makeshift attack and by no means conventional......but our response to it was what will keep others from happening....asssuming we do not weaken our military.

 

[longknife]

Actually as I posted on one of the other 50 posts just like this, who won the debate does not matter, it's how prospective voters saw it. My wife who grew up in a consertive home, who has voted for republicans her whole life, thinks this. She was very put off by how hyper mitt romeny seemed. She was also disturbed with how he seemed to cut off both Obama and the moderator, also the was really kinda upset the he seemed to be flip flopping on everything he has said for the last year and also making his own running mate look bad in the process. She has now decided after watching the debate that Romney is not the person she will be voting for, she now prefers Obama and will vote for him as well, I will also point out that all of her friends feel the same way. We has a debate party and all of her friends are cons, but they ALL feel as if Romney is the wrong choice and after seeing what he did up there, can not vote for him.

If such shallow, minor things made you wife "change her mind", what did she truly and strongly believe before?

Did she not see the substance of the interchange?

Did she fail to see the difference in experience and knowledge?

I truly feel sad for anyone who could not look at the debate in a fair manner and decide upon substance and not the unimportant stuff.

 

[Jarhead]

Actually as I posted on one of the other 50 posts just like this, who won the debate does not matter, it's how prospective voters saw it. My wife who grew up in a consertive home, who has voted for republicans her whole life, thinks this. She was very put off by how hyper mitt romeny seemed. She was also disturbed with how he seemed to cut off both Obama and the moderator, also the was really kinda upset the he seemed to be flip flopping on everything he has said for the last year and also making his own running mate look bad in the process. She has now decided after watching the debate that Romney is not the person she will be voting for, she now prefers Obama and will vote for him as well, I will also point out that all of her friends feel the same way. We has a debate party and all of her friends are cons, but they ALL feel as if Romney is the wrong choice and after seeing what he did up there, can not vote for him.

If such shallow, minor things made you wife "change her mind", what did she truly and strongly believe before?

Did she not see the substance of the interchange?

Did she fail to see the difference in experience and knowledge?

I truly feel sad for anyone who could not look at the debate in a fair manner and decide upon substance and not the unimportant stuff.

I personally dont believe he has a wife.

I believe he is sitting in mommys basement in his underwear typing away for hours at a time on his super charged computer.

 

[Ernie S.]

No more thrill up your leg, Chris?

"I don't know what he was doing out there. He had his head down, he was enduring the debate rather than fighting it. Romney, on the other hand, came in with a campaign. He had a plan, he was going to dominate the time, he was going to be aggressive, he was going to push the moderator around, which he did effectively, he was going to relish the evening, enjoying it," Matthews said.

 

[Sallow]

Romney destroyed Obama on substance.

The substance was Obama's failed record.

I agree with you on this point. He made the debate about the FACTS of where our economy is, and immediately put Obama on the defensive. That is precisely what Mitt needed to do. However, Romney in no way, shape or form provided any substance for his own ideas. None.

Well he went a little further then that. Romney went into Orwell territory. Tax cuts are now "Rate Reductions".

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

actually as i posted on one of the other 50 posts just like this, who won the debate does not matter, it's how prospective voters saw it. My wife who grew up in a consertive home, who has voted for republicans her whole life, thinks this. She was very put off by how hyper mitt romeny seemed. She was also disturbed with how he seemed to cut off both obama and the moderator, also the was really kinda upset the he seemed to be flip flopping on everything he has said for the last year and also making his own running mate look bad in the process. She has now decided after watching the debate that romney is not the person she will be voting for, she now prefers obama and will vote for him as well, i will also point out that all of her friends feel the same way. We has a debate party and all of her friends are cons, but they all feel as if romney is the wrong choice and after seeing what he did up there, can not vote for him.

if such shallow, minor things made you wife "change her mind", what did she truly and strongly believe before?

Did she not see the substance of the interchange?

Did she fail to see the difference in experience and knowledge?

I truly feel sad for anyone who could not look at the debate in a fair manner and decide upon substance and not the unimportant stuff.

i personally dont believe he has a wife.

I believe he is sitting in mommys basement in his underwear typing away for hours at a time on his super charged computer.

lol!!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Exactly. After the media is done fact checking and contrasting his new positions to his old ones, his win won't be nearly as shiny.

You're depending on the party media to fabricate and spin on behalf of Obama, which they will. But you over-estimate the impact of after-the-fact fabrications. I'm sure the NY Times has dozens of lies already, in an attempt to promote Obama, but a live performance has far more effect on people than the party press explaining why they didn't see what they saw.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Romney destroyed Obama on substance.

The substance was Obama's failed record.

The key to this was simple; Romney had to focus on Obama's record to win: Obama had to distract from his record.

Romney was more effective in shining a light on Obama's record of abysmal failure than Obama was at blowing smoke and obfuscating.

 

[elvis]

Romney needs to win ALL the debates.

 

[Oldstyle]

Actually as I posted on one of the other 50 posts just like this, who won the debate does not matter, it's how prospective voters saw it. My wife who grew up in a consertive home, who has voted for republicans her whole life, thinks this. She was very put off by how hyper mitt romeny seemed. She was also disturbed with how he seemed to cut off both Obama and the moderator, also the was really kinda upset the he seemed to be flip flopping on everything he has said for the last year and also making his own running mate look bad in the process. She has now decided after watching the debate that Romney is not the person she will be voting for, she now prefers Obama and will vote for him as well, I will also point out that all of her friends feel the same way. We has a debate party and all of her friends are cons, but they ALL feel as if Romney is the wrong choice and after seeing what he did up there, can not vote for him.

Let me get this straight...

You're saying that a group of "conservatives" watched last nights debate and after seeing it, all decided that Romney was the wrong choice?

Really?

It's rather amusing when progressives can't admit the truth to themselves.

I'm sorry, Luke but I don't think there is a conservative on the planet that would have been swayed to change their vote from Romney to Obama from what took place on that stage last night. The truth is...Romney mopped the floor with the President. That isn't simply my opinion...but it's the general consensus of people who watched the debate INCLUDING die hard liberals like Bill Maher, Chris Matthews and Ed Shultz.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Romney needs to win ALL the debates.

I don't think that will be much of a problem.

But I don't know if it will be enough, though it looks like he has Virginia and Florida locked up now.

Despite idiocy from forum hacks, this is a VERY close race and set for a photo finish.

 

[Ernie S.]

“Let’s be real,” Carville said. “They have run a very good campaign thus far. I don’t think that President Obama did what this campaign wanted him to do. I think he was off his game tonight. But let’s don’t go overboard here. It will be like a big sort of pushback. … My point is this — President Obama came in, he wanted to have a conversation. It takes two people to have a conversation. Mitt Romney came in with a chainsaw. He’s trying to talk to a chainsaw.”

Read more: Carville: ‘Mitt Romney came with a chainsaw’ | The Daily Caller

 

[Ernie S.]

LINK

Denver, Colorado (CNN) – Two-thirds of people who watched the first presidential debate think that Republican nominee Mitt Romney won the showdown, according to a nationwide poll conducted Wednesday night.

According to a CNN/ORC International survey conducted right after the debate, 67% of debate watchers questioned said that the Republican nominee won the faceoff, with one in four saying that President Barack Obama was victorious.

 

[Conservative]

VaYank...the left has been talking about all of the "loopholes" and "Tax havens" that only the wealthy such as Romney can capitalize on. What are they? I dont know. I have never been able to use them, so I never looked for them.

They've never specified them.

Interesting how the libtard masses squeal like Ned Beatty in 'Deliverance' about Romney not specifying loopholes he'd get rid of, but are utterly silent about Obama not specifying the loopholes 'only the rich' take advantage of.

 

[Conservative]

“Let’s be real,” Carville said. “They have run a very good campaign thus far. I don’t think that President Obama did what this campaign wanted him to do. I think he was off his game tonight. But let’s don’t go overboard here. It will be like a big sort of pushback. … My point is this — President Obama came in, he wanted to have a conversation. It takes two people to have a conversation. Mitt Romney came in with a chainsaw. He’s trying to talk to a chainsaw.”

Read more: Carville: ‘Mitt Romney came with a chainsaw’ | The Daily Caller

If you are prepared, you come in with a metal bar to block the chainsaw or knock it out of your opponents hand, Jimmie. The only thing Obama had in his hand all night was his johnson.

 

[Conservative]

Romney needs to win ALL the debates.

I don't think that will be much of a problem.

But I don't know if it will be enough, though it looks like he has Virginia and Florida locked up now.

Despite idiocy from forum hacks, this is a VERY close race and set for a photo finish.

Not sure about 'locked up'. RCP average has Obama ahead by 3.5 and 2.0, respectively. Although I believe that will start to change in a few days.

 

[Oldstyle]

You are not going to get that sort of "only Romney needs to provide specifics" answer from me. What I thought was enlightening last night was that Obama was VERY specific. However, I began to ponder...."OK, Mr. President, since you have this specific plan to cut $4T from our defecit, which is great, but WHY are you holding it on your pocket after nearly four years? Why haven't you implemented it in your first term?"

Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, so I think that "debate" is a waste of time. I don't see how Romney can spit all over the ACA, while holding up his brilliant plan both at the same time.

Either way, the meme of it's all about jobs for Romney doesn't play for me, as he doesn't have any specifics on how he plans to create jobs, nor which types of jobs, nor how long it will take. Add to that, his tax cut plan is dependent on said job creation so as not to add to our defecit, and I see nothing more than a "vision", and if a "vision" is all he's got, well, we already have one of those in office now.

And finally, his desire to find budget cuts almost everywhere else except the bloated DoD budget does not fly with me. Why should the DoD budget be some sacred cow that is untouchable? How much do we really need? Can anyone answer that for sure?

what are Obama's specifics for cutting 4 trillion. I heard the principles...but not the specifics.

Raise the tax rates on those making more than $250,000. Eliminate waste and fraud within our government programs such as MediCare. Cut the DoD budget. Use some of the funds currently being used to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to pay down the debt.

With all due respect, VaYank? Obama has been in office for four years now, correct? Has he ever REALLY made cuts anywhere? He "says" he's going to realize billions in savings by eliminating waste and fraud in government but then simply adds another couple "layers" to the massive "onion" that is the Federal Government, more layers with even MORE waste and fraud. He "says" he'll use money saved by getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan to pay down the debt but as events in Benghazi two weeks ago proved there are some very nasty folks out there who have no intention of letting us end conflict. As for raising the tax rates on those making over $250,000? First of all it WILL slow down the economy and cost jobs...secondly it's such a small amount of money that it would only pay for the entitlements we've obligated ourselves to for a few weeks at best! Admit it...this tax hike on the "wealthy" is not sound fiscal policy...it's an election year ploy. At a time when the country really needs leadership Obama seems to only be concerned with keeping HIS job...not creating new ones for the millions of people who are currently unemployed.