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

[Uncensored2008]

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.

Obama was in a tough spot, he had to steer the debate away from his record, which left him scant opportunity to tout his agenda. Romney did a good job of keeping the focus on Obama's record and the implications of the Obama administration on the direction of the nation. EVEN if Romney didn't believe a word he was saying, it was easy for him to sell it as there was an air of authenticity to his deficit reduction strategy.

Obama, on the other hand, had no chance of selling his plan, given his record. Lehrer even tried to lead Obama, with “but Mr. President, you’re saying that in order to get the job (reducing the deficit) done, it has to be balanced (between tax increases and spending reductions)…” but it failed because no one can take Obama seriously.

A record like Obama's is a very difficult thing to run against.

 

[Conservative]

Barone: Thoughts on the first presidential debate | WashingtonExaminer.com

Obama suffered tonight from his lack of scrutiny from mainstream media. As I like to say, there is nothing free in politics, but there is some question about when you pay the price. In this first debate Obama paid the price for the hands-off treatment he has received from mainstream media. His talking points, advanced by his spokesmen in the confidence that they will not be seriously challenged, were refuted by an energized and articulated and well-informed Mitt Romney. He stood there petulantly and pathetically, nonplussed by the fact that his flimsy talking points were effectively challenged.

The most important thing about these debates is that they give voters an idea of which candidate can take command for an office one of whose titles is commander-in-chief. Romney, in his interactions with Lehrer and with Obama, established that he is a man who can take command. Obama, through the whole debate, seemed like a man who cannot. Romney took command tonight and Obama looked irritable and weak. Americans don’t usually want irritatble and weak leaders as their commanders-in-chief.

Which one looked more like a president? Mitt Romney.

 

[VaYank5150]

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.

In one of my earlier responses to Jarhead, you will see I said pretty much the same thing(s) you just did. While I appreciated that he had specifics about his $4T defecit reduction plan, it left me wondering WHY it is not now, nor has it been for the past 4 years in place? I cannot answer that question, but if Obama seems to know how to get it done, why doesn't someone ask him why he hasn't done it already?

 

[VaYank5150]

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.

So....if the loopholes are not truly there for the rich folks to take advantage of, how is Mitt supposed to close them to pay for a 20% across the board tax cut?

 

[VaYank5150]

I mean, along with the 12 million jobs he promises he alone can create...

 

[Conservative]

I mean, along with the 12 million jobs he promises he alone can create...

watch the debate again, dumb ass. Romney specifically said "HELP create".

 

[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.

So....if the loopholes are not truly there for the rich folks to take advantage of, how is Mitt supposed to close them to pay for a 20% across the board tax cut?

where did I say the loopholes were not there? Please, point that statement out to me, as I looked and I seem to have missed where I said that.

I said the Dems "are utterly silent about Obama not specifying the loopholes 'only the rich' take advantage of.:, even though they whine about them all the fucking time.

 

[VaYank5150]

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.

So....if the loopholes are not truly there for the rich folks to take advantage of, how is Mitt supposed to close them to pay for a 20% across the board tax cut?

where did I say the loopholes were not there? Please, point that statement out to me, as I looked and I seem to have missed where I said that.

I said the Dems "are utterly silent about Obama not specifying the loopholes 'only the rich' take advantage of.:, even though they whine about them all the fucking time.

So....you now agree that whatever those loopholes are, they are in there. Otherwise, Romney's tax cuts go up in smoke, right?

 

[HUGGY]

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

Mittens had to run his mouth and lie.... he did.

 

[Conservative]

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

Mittens had to run his mouth and lie.... he did.

Don't you have a few dogs you should be fucking about now?

 

[Uncensored2008]

So....if the loopholes are not truly there for the rich folks to take advantage of, how is Mitt supposed to close them to pay for a 20% across the board tax cut?

Are you too much of a hack to listen?

He mentioned directly disallowing mortgage deductions on property over $1 million in value, while Romney said he would eliminate Capital gains on those making under $200K, those making more would still pay.

 

[Uncensored2008]

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

Mittens had to run his mouth and lie.... he did.

What did he lie about, Rev. Jim?

Be specific.

 

[VaYank5150]

So....if the loopholes are not truly there for the rich folks to take advantage of, how is Mitt supposed to close them to pay for a 20% across the board tax cut?

Are you too much of a hack to listen?

He mentioned directly disallowing mortgage deductions on property over $1 million in value, while Romney said he would eliminate Capital gains on those making under $200K, those making more would still pay.

And those alone will allow his 20% across the board rate cut deficit neutral? Are you too much of a hack to think?

 

[Uncensored2008]

And those alone will allow his 20% across the board rate cut deficit neutral? Are you too much of a hack to think?

No, those are just a portion. Hopefully the hive is smart enough to grasp that a 20% reduction from 39% drops the rate to 31.2%, not to 19%. (Granted, you're democrats, so you'd never be honest enough to say it, but I hope that the hive grasp it.)

Reducing deductions on the top tax payers will easily fund an across the board reduction. Remember, the top tax payers pay virtually all the taxes, so this will be more of an "honesty adjustment" than a tax cut.

 

[HUGGY]

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

Mittens had to run his mouth and lie.... he did.

What did he lie about, Rev. Jim?

Be specific.

You already know. His handlers should have warned him about Obama being smarter than to respond in an unpresidential fashion and get into a juvenile "food fight" with a challenger.

I can understand clearly why someone as brainwashed and simple minded as yourself would see Mitten's out of control performance as a win. If the world was made up only of easily impressed 14 year olds I would agree. But, it is not.

Obama did not make any mistakes in the debate that he has to answer for. Mittens made several big ones and they will be thrown in his face and in Ryan's face relentlessly.

Willard treated his opportunity to appear presidential as casually as you do here on USMB. Irrational...liar... not to be trusted. You get called on it all of the time. So will Mittens.

 

[VaYank5150]

And those alone will allow his 20% across the board rate cut deficit neutral? Are you too much of a hack to think?

No, those are just a portion. Hopefully the hive is smart enough to grasp that a 20% reduction from 39% drops the rate to 31.2%, not to 19%. (Granted, you're democrats, so you'd never be honest enough to say it, but I hope that the hive grasp it.)

Reducing deductions on the top tax payers will easily fund an across the board reduction. Remember, the top tax payers pay virtually all the taxes, so this will be more of an "honesty adjustment" than a tax cut.

Due to the loopholes that exist, I don't believe ANYONE knows what the richest of the rich should be paying. And since Romney either doesn't know, or won't say, how can any true mathematical analogy be made?

 

[Uncensored2008]

You already know.

What I know is that you're a drugged out partisan hack, throwing spit wads.

His handlers should have warned him about Obama being smarter than to respond in an unpresidential fashion and get into a juvenile "food fight" with a challenger.

So, you think your Messiah® came off looking smart?

ROFL

I can understand clearly why someone as brainwashed and simple minded as yourself would see Mitten's out of control performance as a win. If the world was made up only of easily impressed 14 year olds I would agree. But, it is not.

Obama did not make any mistakes in the debate that he has to answer for. Mittens made several big ones and they will be thrown in his face and in Ryan's face relentlessly.

Willard treated his opportunity to appear presidential as casually as you do here on USMB. Irrational...liar... not to be trusted. You get called on it all of the time. So will Mittens.

So, you can't actually come up with any lies by Romney, but you're happy performing fellatio on Obama..

 

[Uncensored2008]

Due to the loopholes that exist, I don't believe ANYONE knows what the richest of the rich should be paying.

So you agree with Romney about closing loopholes.

BTW, which "loopholes" are you talking about.

And since Romney either doesn't know, or won't say, how can any true mathematical analogy be made?

Ah, but he did say, and you're just lying because Obama got torn to shreds.

 

[VaYank5150]

Due to the loopholes that exist, I don't believe ANYONE knows what the richest of the rich should be paying.

So you agree with Romney about closing loopholes.

BTW, which "loopholes" are you talking about.

And since Romney either doesn't know, or won't say, how can any true mathematical analogy be made?

Ah, but he did say, and you're just lying because Obama got torn to shreds.

In case you haven't been paying attention, I openly admit Romney won the debate on "style", but still had little in the way of substance. As a middle class voter, I want to know where this money is coming from to pay for these tax cuts, since I know Mitt already looks down his noce at 47% of the country as it is and will probably be looking out for his millionaire friends. I want to know where the money is coming from to keep funding our already bloated DoD budget AND cut everyone's tax rate 20% AND not increase the defecit.

 

[HUGGY]

Due to the loopholes that exist, I don't believe ANYONE knows what the richest of the rich should be paying.

So you agree with Romney about closing loopholes.

BTW, which "loopholes" are you talking about.

And since Romney either doesn't know, or won't say, how can any true mathematical analogy be made?

Ah, but he did say, and you're just lying because Obama got torn to shreds.

The truth got torn to shreds.. by Romney.. in front of America. He will be judged on election day partly for the lies he told last night.