Romney-Obama Debate Thread

[Foxfyre]

In before someone rags me for mentioning the Ryan budget.

Perhaps if we type slow, we can point out that Ryan is not the nominee for President and Romney has not signed on to an unqualified Ryan budget? At least Ryan came up with a budget, however, and it was one with a great deal to commend it and that would have begun to stop the bleeding, and the Democrats have refused to pass one for three years now. The next President starts out his term with no budget.

The President is supposed to submit a budget necessary to fund the various governmental departments over which he is the chief administrator. The Congress is supposed to consider those requests but are the branch of government charged to put together the final (responsible and necessary) budget that the President can veto or sign. That is supposed to be done before the Congressional fiscal year begins in October. That gives Congress the guideline to pass the necessary appropriations bills to fund the Federal government.

President Obama seems oblivious to any concept of a working and responsible budget. I can't imagine a President Romney not deeming a working, responsible budget to be essential for sound fiscal management.

 

[copsnrobbers]

if looks could kill

he's a dead mutherfucker

Michelle looks like someone gave her a cup of salad in the lunch line instead of the doughnut she was going for

Nothing like a gray back in blue.

I just ordered a 24oz Coke a large Fry and two Woppers.

 

[dblack]

When he tried to go after Romney for "Romney-Care", Mitt pummelled him on the differences, such as the fact he actually worked with the other party, and Obama refused to.

LOL... did people actually buy it?

Well, the Obama worshippers probably didn't. But it is a fact. Obama didn't get a single Republican vote for Obamacare. When they tried to provide input, Obama dismissed then with "I won" (with the implication that you didn't so I get my say and you don't.) And more recently I recall Obama saying the Republicans are welcome to come along, but they have to sit in back. So, Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote. And how many times has he complianed that he couldn't get more done because of the Republicans?

(And more recently who can forget his whispered remark to the Russian that he would have more flexibility (to get things done) after the election. If that doesn't send cold chills down everybody's back, I can't imagine what could.)

Romney is quite right that he had a heavily Democratic legislature and he still managed to get a great deal done. And I have a strong sense that Romney has the intelligence, experience, and instincts to not give away the store during a negotiation processes.

So what? It's what he "got done" that I'm opposed to. Romney still shows exactly no comprehension of the fundamental abuse of individual rights entailed by the mandate. He embraces the same style of corporatist governance that Obama pursues. All you seem to be arguing here is that he'd be better at it.

 

[KissMy]

This is what happened.

 

[Foxfyre]

the hair on my neck says Clinton will jump in here and try to keep this moron from going down the stool

My instinct is that Clinton views Obama with a great deal of disdain and contempt and secretly wants him to go down the tubes.

 

[TrinityPower]

It seemed obama was preoccupied with the interest...er...growing in his pants for his anniversary celebration than on the issues facing the nation. Sorry but there it is. And we can all be thankful there was a podium in front of him

 

[Foxfyre]

LOL... did people actually buy it?

Well, the Obama worshippers probably didn't. But it is a fact. Obama didn't get a single Republican vote for Obamacare. When they tried to provide input, Obama dismissed then with "I won" (with the implication that you didn't so I get my say and you don't.) And more recently I recall Obama saying the Republicans are welcome to come along, but they have to sit in back. So, Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote. And how many times has he complianed that he couldn't get more done because of the Republicans?

(And more recently who can forget his whispered remark to the Russian that he would have more flexibility (to get things done) after the election. If that doesn't send cold chills down everybody's back, I can't imagine what could.)

Romney is quite right that he had a heavily Democratic legislature and he still managed to get a great deal done. And I have a strong sense that Romney has the intelligence, experience, and instincts to not give away the store during a negotiation processes.

So what? It's what he "got done" that I'm opposed to. Romney still shows exactly no comprehension of the fundamental abuse of individual rights entailed by the mandate. He embraces the same style of corporatist governance that Obama pursues. All you seem to be arguing here is that he'd be better at it.

He and Ryan at least seem to understand what fundamental freedom is, and why it is far more productive than anything managed by government. Yes, Romney has said some things that bother me re the powers of government, but I look at his track record and see results. Right now, if the bleeding isn't stopped, we will be Greece. Our number one priority must be to get people back to work and to get spending under conrol and start paying down the debt. If that doesn't happen, there is no chance for us to remain a free people.

Obama has proved in spades he has no instincts to do that and no intention of even trying. I trust Romney/Ryan far more to at least make a difference in that regard.

I really wish Superman or Jesus Christ were running this year. But since neither are, we should put the country ahead of politics and partisanship and get the best that we can get.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Well, the Obama worshippers probably didn't. But it is a fact. Obama didn't get a single Republican vote for Obamacare. When they tried to provide input, Obama dismissed then with "I won" (with the implication that you didn't so I get my say and you don't.) And more recently I recall Obama saying the Republicans are welcome to come along, but they have to sit in back. So, Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote. And how many times has he complianed that he couldn't get more done because of the Republicans?

(And more recently who can forget his whispered remark to the Russian that he would have more flexibility (to get things done) after the election. If that doesn't send cold chills down everybody's back, I can't imagine what could.)

Romney is quite right that he had a heavily Democratic legislature and he still managed to get a great deal done. And I have a strong sense that Romney has the intelligence, experience, and instincts to not give away the store during a negotiation processes.

So what? It's what he "got done" that I'm opposed to. Romney still shows exactly no comprehension of the fundamental abuse of individual rights entailed by the mandate. He embraces the same style of corporatist governance that Obama pursues. All you seem to be arguing here is that he'd be better at it.

He and Ryan at least seem to understand what fundamental freedom is, and why it is far more productive than anything managed by government. Yes, Romney has said some things that bother me re the powers of government, but I look at his track record and see results. Right now, if the bleeding isn't stopped, we will be Greece. Our number one priority must be to get people back to work and to get spending under conrol and start paying down the debt. If that doesn't happen, there is no chance for us to remain a free people.

Obama has proved in spades he has no instincts to do that and no intention of even trying. I trust Romney/Ryan far more to at least make a difference in that regard.

I really wish Superman or Jesus Christ were running this year. But since neither are, we should put the country ahead of politics and partisanship and get the best that we can get.

Mitt's track record shows that he's closer to Obama than people are willing to admit. Sure, he got things done in Mass. By raising taxes and squashing freedoms.

 

[KissMy]

the hair on my neck says Clinton will jump in here and try to keep this moron from going down the stool

The Clinton's have their own state department disaster to deal with at the moment. It may ultimately harm Obama this close to the election.

More negative jobs numbers came out today & tomorrow the monthly jobs numbers come out. The economy is slowing again. It could be a perfect storm that will sink Obama going into the election.

 

[Shelzin]

I really wish Superman or Jesus Christ were running this year. But since neither are, we should put the country ahead of politics and partisanship and get the best that we can get.

Right now the best we can get is Gary Johnson. Now is that going to happen this year? No... But then if we don't start making statements with our dollars and votes we'll have to wait 8 or 12 years for that person rather than next election. The sooner we start making the statement that lesser of two evils isn't good enough the sooner we'll get what we need to get the country running again on a course worthy of the "greatest nation on earth"

 

[Foxfyre]

So what? It's what he "got done" that I'm opposed to. Romney still shows exactly no comprehension of the fundamental abuse of individual rights entailed by the mandate. He embraces the same style of corporatist governance that Obama pursues. All you seem to be arguing here is that he'd be better at it.

He and Ryan at least seem to understand what fundamental freedom is, and why it is far more productive than anything managed by government. Yes, Romney has said some things that bother me re the powers of government, but I look at his track record and see results. Right now, if the bleeding isn't stopped, we will be Greece. Our number one priority must be to get people back to work and to get spending under conrol and start paying down the debt. If that doesn't happen, there is no chance for us to remain a free people.

Obama has proved in spades he has no instincts to do that and no intention of even trying. I trust Romney/Ryan far more to at least make a difference in that regard.

I really wish Superman or Jesus Christ were running this year. But since neither are, we should put the country ahead of politics and partisanship and get the best that we can get.

Mitt's track record shows that he's closer to Obama than people are willing to admit. Sure, he got things done in Mass. By raising taxes and squashing freedoms.

Sorry, but I don't see it. Mitt took over a budget that was in serious trouble in Massachusetts and balanced it with a combination of cutting spending and by ending certain deductions and closiing corporate loopholes that had never been intended to exist, and did that without substantially pissing anybody off. And he subsequently promoted and signed legislation to reduce taxes in Massachusetts 17 times.

He did pass Romneycare through bipartisan support in the legislature and with the blessings of most of the people--contrast that with Obama getting no bipartisan support for Obamacare and passing it against the approval of most of the people. The final vote was 239 to 213 which is pathetic considering Obama had a super majority at the time. Only two members of the Massachusetts legislature, one Democrat and one Republican, voted against Romneycare.

When Mitt left office, Massachusetts was 22nd in per capital tax burden, boasted very low unemployment, one of the highest per capita incomes, at or near the best rated schools in the country, and, other than the mandatory part of Romneycare, I fail to see that he trampled on anybody's freedoms. And at the state level, it isn't a restriction of freedom.

The Founders deemed that freedom included the right for the states/local communities to form whatever sort of society they wished to have, and that included the right to do it poorly or wrong. The states are free to organize as they want and the federal government would not step in to stop people from having whatever social contract and society that they want.

Romney and Ryan understand the difference between states rights and federal powers., and Mitt was reassuring about that in the debate. I don't believe Obama does.

I can't imagine Mitt pushing through any major legislation without strong Congressional support and without the approval of the people.

 

[mudwhistle]

It reminded me of the Buster Douglas fight.


Oh. Bit of trivia......Romney used more words in less time than Obama. Obama was allowed 4 mins more to talk but ended up saying less than Romney.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It reminded me of the Buster Douglas fight.


Oh. Bit of trivia......Romney used more words in less time than Obama. Obama was allowed 4 mins more to talk but ended up saying less than Romney.

The last few months of the campaign make me think Romney got off a successful "Rope a dope" move on obama last night

Obama looked stunned.

 

[dblack]

I can't imagine Mitt pushing through any major legislation without strong Congressional support and without the approval of the people.

I can't imagine him doing anything to disrupt the corporatist 'horse-trade' at the core of PPACA. He made the same "deal" with the insurance lobby in his home state. He clearly sees nothing wrong with that kind of governance.

I suppose you've just decided that Romney is a little better than Obama and that justifies making excuses for him. I can't do it.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It reminded me of the Buster Douglas fight.


Oh. Bit of trivia......Romney used more words in less time than Obama. Obama was allowed 4 mins more to talk but ended up saying less than Romney.

You must not have counted the Umms and oohs....

 

[Meister]

I can't imagine Mitt pushing through any major legislation without strong Congressional support and without the approval of the people.

I can't imagine him doing anything to disrupt the corporatist 'horse-trade' at the core of PPACA. He made the same "deal" with the insurance lobby in his home state. He clearly sees nothing wrong with that kind of governance.

I suppose you've just decided that Romney is a little better than Obama and that justifies making excuses for him. I can't do it.

I have a feeling you wouldn't make any excuses for Romney, but still will give a pass to a proven failure. I just don't understand your logic, or lack there of.

 

[Pasco08]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...08335659.16274.108038612554992&type=1&theater

 

[Foxfyre]

I can't imagine Mitt pushing through any major legislation without strong Congressional support and without the approval of the people.

I can't imagine him doing anything to disrupt the corporatist 'horse-trade' at the core of PPACA. He made the same "deal" with the insurance lobby in his home state. He clearly sees nothing wrong with that kind of governance.

I suppose you've just decided that Romney is a little better than Obama and that justifies making excuses for him. I can't do it.

No, I came to my decision that Romney isn't everything I want in a President but is head and shoulders better than Obama after doing my homework, giving it considerable though and prayer, and figuring out which one I can trust. But then I'm not a Paulbot who is willing to throw the country under the bus in order to have his/her way.

And I make excuses for nobody. I evaluate ratonale and reasonis and results versus consequences. There are many things that are just as important as ideology.

 

[Katzndogz]

the hair on my neck says Clinton will jump in here and try to keep this moron from going down the stool

Or, cut obama loose. Have you seen Bill Clinton jump in today to save his bacon? No. Has Hillary said anything? No.

If the Clintons jump ship, obama has nothing.

 

[Foxfyre]

I can't imagine Mitt pushing through any major legislation without strong Congressional support and without the approval of the people.

I can't imagine him doing anything to disrupt the corporatist 'horse-trade' at the core of PPACA. He made the same "deal" with the insurance lobby in his home state. He clearly sees nothing wrong with that kind of governance.

I suppose you've just decided that Romney is a little better than Obama and that justifies making excuses for him. I can't do it.

No, I came to my decision that Romney isn't everything I want in a President but is head and shoulders better than Obama after doing my homework, giving it considerable thought and prayer, and figuring out which one I can trust. But then I'm not a Paulbot who is willing to throw the country under the bus in order to have his/her way.

And I make excuses for nobody. I evaluate ratonale and reasonis and results versus consequences. There are many things that are just as important as ideology.

Romney did not disappoint me last night and reassured me that he is fully aware of the difference between social contract at the state level and federal powers. And he has a much better grasp about what federal powers should be than does Obama.