The debate winner isssss........

[Some Guy]

You're not being... specific enough. Obama was charging Romney with not being specific about his plans for the future, such as with medicare, as he was laying blanket assertions such as "mine does this and that" without actually detailing what his plan is. It's easy to spout off possibilities from a non-committal standpoint when you're not in a position of power to do such things.

Yes it is. Obama took full advantage of that as a candidate in 2008. And if the democrats are crazy for specifics, just like they are for Romney's tax records, Romney should just bow and give them what they want, because... they're.. awesome?!

Why should we trust Romney? He is known to say whatever needs to be said to gain public opinion in any given situation. He is two-faced. I don't know how people can like him.

Well obviously you can't trust him. You made up your mind well before he was even nominated. So, he's not speaking to you. Why should he care about your vote? He shouldn't. He's not going to get it.

I have come to the conclusion that it is a default position to like Romney, because they simply can't stand Obama for ideological differences.

Well, get over it. This wouldn't be the first election where someone gets the anti-other guy vote. Obama was a big recipient of that in 2008.

People buy into the conservative hype of creating expectations for a president coming into term with a major recession, and based on this ultra-high standard, everything he does necessarily fails. They would never have applied the same standard to McCain had he won. No way. Therefore, it has nothing to do with what the president has or has not done since he was in office. It has simply to do with hating everything he has done, because he is not a conservative.

And you hate conservatives for their ideas. Pot, meet kettle.

In other words, it is one big ad hominem attack on the presidency, not attacking the "what" but attacking the "who," and when attacking the "what" it is only because of the "who."

Bullshit. When asked about the role of government, Obama basically eloquently detailed why the federal government needs to have it's fingers in everything. Romney's response to that question: listing specifics about the Constitution. Big ideological difference there. So, this whole "conservatives hate Obama because of the color of skin" ..sure, some do, but most hate him for his ideas. You hate conservatives for their ideas. Pot, meet kettle, again.

I find conservatives, for this reason, to be highly immature. With Bush, we had reason to be upset. He sent us into a war we didn't need to fight, and in doing so, spent money that we needed here. That is a good reason to be pissed. Being mad at a president for not miraculously fixing a major recession is not warranted, and is unjustified. The willingness to throw flame on a president trying to fix this situation because of ideological ire, is really immature.

Bullshit. The nonexistant economic recovery is just a byproduct of his ideas (in conservatives estimation), which is basically that government should at least have a hand in just about everything if it's not outright running it. To conservatives, that sucks.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When you lack integrity, leading the debate amounts to nothing.

If what you say is true then that makes Obama even more inept than I thought. According to you he was lead around by a man with no integrity.

Ummm... So what. That has nothing to do with integrity. In fact, this demonstrates integrity on Obama's part, not trying to take the lead, but trying to have a respectful debate about important issues that people need to hear about, instead of trying to lay down the next "zinger" to get a nice jump in the polls, as if this has anything to do with being a president. It is not a sign of strength to really give it your opponent, it is a sign of weakness, especially when it is used a compensatory mechanism for having no positive arguments of your own.

You're on your own bud. Even democratic strategists and pundits are ALL saying it was Obama who was completely out to lunch. I tried to be non partisan in my op so everyone would feel free to be realistic in their responses but your rhetoric doesn't match what we just saw

 

[Some Guy]

I don't think the 'base' is going to react any other way that to be excited that Romney delivered the goods tonight.

It's not even so much the words that he said, but how he delivered them: with conviction and energy. He was aggressive, compassionate and presidential. I think he did such a good job at it that most hardcore conservatives who watched probably didn't even really see the very moderate positions he espoused.

 

[candycorn]

Romney and Obama both did pretty well. I do however give Romney a slight edge because he was able to get under Obama's skin a few times and Obama's facial expressions clearly showed it.

Thing is my mind on who to vote for in November was already made up so my opinion really doesn't matter with regard to the outcome of this debate.

I think Romney proved to be presidential and that's what he needed to show.

The moderator was the big loser imo.

I agree with you. Slight edge to Romney.

 

[candycorn]

There were no winners it was a stalemate

That is correct. On the strength of the debate alone there was no clear winner or loser, I think there is the risk of significant fall-out from Romney's failure to provide the hard core conservatives with a single scrap of red meat.

I don't think the 'base' is going to react any other way that to be excited that Romney delivered the goods tonight. The message is going out to the moderates who will decide this election, and those moderates got a clear picture of Obama as an unprepared community organizer.

Romney sounded more liberal than Obama tonight. I don't think anyone will believe him when he says he doesn't want to reduce the tax burden on the rich.

 

[Intense]

Romney and Obama both did pretty well. I do however give Romney a slight edge because he was able to get under Obama's skin a few times and Obama's facial expressions clearly showed it.

Thing is my mind on who to vote for in November was already made up so my opinion really doesn't matter with regard to the outcome of this debate.

I think Romney proved to be presidential and that's what he needed to show.

The moderator was the big loser imo.

Agree with you there on all 3 points. In the future, more emphasis needs to be put on time limits, not interrupting, and letting the Moderator, moderate.

 

[newpolitics]

If what you say is true then that makes Obama even more inept than I thought. According to you he was lead around by a man with no integrity.

Ummm... So what. That has nothing to do with integrity. In fact, this demonstrates integrity on Obama's part, not trying to take the lead, but trying to have a respectful debate about important issues that people need to hear about, instead of trying to lay down the next "zinger" to get a nice jump in the polls, as if this has anything to do with being a president. It is not a sign of strength to really give it your opponent, it is a sign of weakness, especially when it is used a compensatory mechanism for having no positive arguments of your own.

You're on your own bud. Even democratic strategists and pundits are ALL saying it was Obama who was completely out to lunch. I tried to be non partisan in my op so everyone would feel free to be realistic in their responses but your rhetoric doesn't match what we just saw

I never claimed he won, although I would say he did, but I realize that many don't see it that way and I can even understand why, I just think their reasoning is bullshit because it is superficial. I am just observing and discussing what I see to be true about the debate and the discussion.

 

[Murf76]

Favorite tweet of the night.... Mark Hemingway... "That wasn't a debate so much as Mitt Romney just took Obama for a cross country drive strapped to the roof of his car.

 

[newpolitics]

You're not being... specific enough. Obama was charging Romney with not being specific about his plans for the future, such as with medicare, as he was laying blanket assertions such as "mine does this and that" without actually detailing what his plan is. It's easy to spout off possibilities from a non-committal standpoint when you're not in a position of power to do such things.

Yes it is. Obama took full advantage of that as a candidate in 2008. And if the democrats are crazy for specifics, just like they are for Romney's tax records, Romney should just bow and give them what they want, because... they're.. awesome?!

Why should we trust Romney? He is known to say whatever needs to be said to gain public opinion in any given situation. He is two-faced. I don't know how people can like him.

Well obviously you can't trust him. You made up your mind well before he was even nominated. So, he's not speaking to you. Why should he care about your vote? He shouldn't. He's not going to get it.




Well, get over it. This wouldn't be the first election where someone gets the anti-other guy vote. Obama was a big recipient of that in 2008.




And you hate conservatives for their ideas. Pot, meet kettle.

In other words, it is one big ad hominem attack on the presidency, not attacking the "what" but attacking the "who," and when attacking the "what" it is only because of the "who."

Bullshit. When asked about the role of government, Obama basically eloquently detailed why the federal government needs to have it's fingers in everything. Romney's response to that question: listing specifics about the Constitution. Big ideological difference there. So, this whole "conservatives hate Obama because of the color of skin" ..sure, some do, but most hate him for his ideas. You hate conservatives for their ideas. Pot, meet kettle, again.

I find conservatives, for this reason, to be highly immature. With Bush, we had reason to be upset. He sent us into a war we didn't need to fight, and in doing so, spent money that we needed here. That is a good reason to be pissed. Being mad at a president for not miraculously fixing a major recession is not warranted, and is unjustified. The willingness to throw flame on a president trying to fix this situation because of ideological ire, is really immature.

Bullshit. The nonexistant economic recovery is just a byproduct of his ideas (in conservatives estimation), which is basically that government should at least have a hand in just about everything if it's not outright running it. To conservatives, that sucks.

You have made so many assumptions about me in this single post when you know nothing about me. I don't have the energy to go through them all, so I'll pick apart your most egregious unfounded assumption: I don't hate conservative ideology. I believe, in theory, conservative and liberal ideology should balance out to create an overall moderate society. Therefore, both sides have equal value, but only if both sides are valued, by eachother. This demands maturity and a concern for the society more than a concern for the self (more than we have seen), or at least, some reasonable balance between these two concerns. That is no longer the case, and more often than not, I see conservatives bad-mouthing liberals saying they are "ruining this country." This devaluation of other americans based on their political belief is seen far more from the right than from the left, and when it is from the left, I am willing to be it is an angry reaction from hearing such things, although of course there will be those on the left who are just as inflammatory, and for the same reasons. The point is, I hate the behavior and lack of integrity of conservatives. It is not their ideology, and not them as people. Again, you demonstrate your own prejudicial beliefs with the amount you just pigeonholed me without knowing a thing about me. I can't claim to be innocent of this in the past on this board and guilty of that which I accuse you of, but I am trying to recognize and get better about it. I just happen to be an angry mother fucker sometimes and don't always say the right thing. But, when I have my senses, I am able to refrain from such unwarranted remarks and generalizations about an others.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Obama never had a chance as he was trying to defend the undefendable. His economic record is that bad.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Romney and Obama both did pretty well. I do however give Romney a slight edge because he was able to get under Obama's skin a few times and Obama's facial expressions clearly showed it.

Thing is my mind on who to vote for in November was already made up so my opinion really doesn't matter with regard to the outcome of this debate.

I think Romney proved to be presidential and that's what he needed to show.

The moderator was the big loser imo.

Agree with you there on all 3 points. In the future, more emphasis needs to be put on time limits, not interrupting, and letting the Moderator, moderate.

I liked a more open debate that was had...

The truely stronger debater wins this way.

 

[Katzndogz]

This wasn't a debate. It was a lecture along the lines of what Putin did to obama in Mexico City.

 

[ScienceRocks]

You can't go on stage with Obama's record, period. You can be the best debater on earth and still fall on your ass trying.

The American people are starting to see Obama as a clown.

 

[Some Guy]

You have made so many assumptions about me in this single post when you know nothing about me. I don't have the energy to go through them all, so I'll pick apart your most egregious unfounded assumption: I don't hate conservative ideology. I believe, in theory, conservative and liberal ideology should balance out to create an overall moderate society. Therefore, both sides have equal value, but only if both sides are valued, by eachother. This demands maturity and a concern for the society more than a concern for the self (more than we have seen), or at least, some reasonable balance between these two concerns. That is no longer the case, and more often than not, I see conservatives bad-mouthing liberals saying they are "ruining this country." This devaluation of other americans based on their political belief is seen far more from the right than from the left, and when it is from the left, I am willing to be it is an angry reaction from hearing such things, although of course there will be those on the left who are just as inflammatory, and for the same reasons. The point is, I hate the behavior and lack of integrity of conservatives. It is not their ideology, and not them as people. Again, you demonstrate your own prejudicial beliefs with the amount you just pigeonholed me without knowing a thing about me. I can't claim to be innocent of this in the past on this board and guilty of that which I accuse you of, but I am trying to recognize and get better about it. I just happen to be an angry mother fucker sometimes and don't always say the right thing. But, when I have my senses, I am able to refrain from such unwarranted remarks and generalizations about an others.

If you're here, you clearly lean to one side or the other, at least, and i think it's obvious which side you lean to. You complain about, basically, how conservatives on this site, who have no ability to actually do anything to affect you other than upset you, bad mouth Obama and the left. Welcome to America. Freedom of speech is a bitch, huh?

If you're going to blame the republicans in congress for being obstructionists without acknowledging the actions of the democrats in 2008 when they grabbed the presidency and super majorities in congress, then you're basically siding with those on the left. When Obamacare is passed with hardly any votes from the republicans party, or when Obama responds to republican ideas with "you lost", it's awfully hard to legitimately claim that the republicans are solely to blame for the congressional gridlock we have right now.

 

[Darkwind]

No romrom moved to the center tonight and let out the true mittens.you are just too stupid to see it.

Wrong. Romney's entire political career has been as a moderate. He put on conservative gloves to win the primary but apparently the only one that didn't know that are the Looney left

Are you kidding me? This whole time people have been saying romeom has been just saying what you want to hear and now you fucking just admit it like its nothing?

Holy shit we as a nation are fucked.

For the past 4 years, we have been fucked, yes.

Anyone with an IQ over 50 knew that Romney is a moderate. He fed the base red meat in the primary and some people bought into it.

Obama will move to the center to get more support, though no one believes he was ever anything but an extremist.

I didn't watch the debate. I'm more interested in the excuses and delusions of the left in threads like this.

It is instructive of just how badly this country is under-educated.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

God damn it. I've been out of rep for the last hour. So many posts worthy and I'm broke.

 

[Erand7899]

If I were making excuses I would be attempting to explain Obama's rather flat and tired demeanor. No excuses here. The man was not on his game tonight. Romney on the other hand looked like he had a nose full of meth and a painful erection lasting over 4 hours.

It's obvious what happened. Romney prepared and obama relied on his many campaign speeches. He regurgitated them verbatim. When they weren't working, he had nothing.

I will agree with that in the sense that he has been very consistent in his stated policies, can't say that about Romney, tonight he did not sound like anyone a teabagger would vote for except perhaps in desperation.

Lower taxes, less regulation, less government? What is not to like for a teabagger?

 

[Londoner]

Romney and Obama both did pretty well. I do however give Romney a slight edge because he was able to get under Obama's skin a few times and Obama's facial expressions clearly showed it.

Thing is my mind on who to vote for in November was already made up so my opinion really doesn't matter with regard to the outcome of this debate.

I think Romney proved to be presidential and that's what he needed to show.

The moderator was the big loser imo.

The Prez got slaughtered.

Debates are not about truth. They are about confidence.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's obvious what happened. Romney prepared and obama relied on his many campaign speeches. He regurgitated them verbatim. When they weren't working, he had nothing.

I will agree with that in the sense that he has been very consistent in his stated policies, can't say that about Romney, tonight he did not sound like anyone a teabagger would vote for except perhaps in desperation.

Lower taxes, less regulation, less government? What is not to like for a teabagger?

He's just grasping. The far right wants Obama gone more than anyone so it matters not

 

[Sallow]

Romney and Obama both did pretty well. I do however give Romney a slight edge because he was able to get under Obama's skin a few times and Obama's facial expressions clearly showed it.

Thing is my mind on who to vote for in November was already made up so my opinion really doesn't matter with regard to the outcome of this debate.

I think Romney proved to be presidential and that's what he needed to show.

The moderator was the big loser imo.

Personally..I think Romney won on style..simply because he was very aggressive and totally rolled the moderator.

But Romney told some major whoppers on stage.