I thought Romney was purposefully vague and Obama spent too much time defending his presidency. Neither one really gave voters much reason to vote for them imo.
I thought Romney was purposefully vague and Obama spent too much time defending his presidency. Neither one really gave voters much reason to vote for them imo.
changing my signature to change our luck.
I knew there was something on tonight besides Sons of Guns. dangit
seeya
dan
I'm just one stomach flu away from my goal weight.
Even Bill Maher thinks Romney won this one.
I thought Obama sputtered at times. Romney came dangerously close to appearing a bully a couple of times by talking over Lehrer and interrupting him and Obama. Romney did a good job of detailing the dreary economy, but he provided no specifics on how to fix anything.
I thought the whole affair was pretty much par for the course and unlikely to change too many voters' minds at this point. The onus is on Romney to give voters a reason to vote for him, and I didn't see one tonight.
changing my signature to change our luck.
I'll reply with a fellow Kentuckian's post on Facebook...not sure he has come over here or not from Scout....
The President better hope a Kicked Ass is covered under Obamacare.
The President has a record upon which to be attacked. Romney did that. The President did some back pedaling on his record and had little response for the $700Bil cut to Medicare.
No mention of the 47% comment by Obama. Slam dunk win for Romney.
Even Chris Matthews is losing his mind about how bad Obama did. His staunchest media supporters are going ape over his performance. Even they think he lost and they aren't hiding it.
He looked ineffectual, distant, not engaged. When Chris Matthews thinks Obama will lose if he repeats this performance you know it wasn't good.
Mathews lost his mind years ago. Was quite funny to watch Maddow, Sharpton, Schultz and Mathews tonight. It was more fun that watching the Obama beatdownOriginally Posted by CitizenBBN
Aging is an extraordinary process where you become the person you always should have been.--David Bowie.
I thought Romney hit it out of the park, he had facts and clearly won the debate. You will never see a reason to vote for Romney because you refuse to see one IMO. Romney clearly had answers, Obama had more of the same. If you can't see what Obamacare will/is doing to this country then I can't help you. Obamacare is a nuke droped on our econemy, I see the effect of it everyday.
I think that most people that actually watch the debates have already taken sides. They overlook their candidate's stumbles and exaggerate the missteps of the opponent. The debates usually only make them more convinced that they have made the right choice.
There is a small percentage that will watch the debates undecided, but much of their take-away is based on how the candidates behave and their personalities. The spinmeisters and coaches therefore spend an inordinate amount of time on their candidate's subtext and not enough on facts. We have finite attention, and instead of wondering why a candidate might be dodging a question we're busy picturing ourselves having a beer with them. I feel like I just wasted 90 minutes.
changing my signature to change our luck.
Did you even watch the debate? Romney over and over gave his plan to restore this country and the difference between the Obama plan and his plan. And I really liked his idea of working with both parties. You know when you don't want to see you don't.
Yes I would say you wasted 90 minutes.
What were the specifics? I watched the whole thing. What I heard was that Romney apparently has plans to fix the economy, overhaul the tax code, repeal Obamacare and replace it with a better alternative, remake Medicare, pass a substitute plan for the legislation designed to prevent another financial crash, and reduce the deficit. How he's going to do all this however is anyone's guess, because he wouldn't or couldn't say. Can you?
Like I said, most of us will only be more convinced that our choice was correct.
changing my signature to change our luck.
Even the democratic pundits concede Romney took this one. You're on an island if you think the president helped his cause with undecideds.
I don't think this one will have much of an impact on the polls. I think Romney took the offensive, which to most people indicates the winner. I think Obama looked more presidential, although I thought he was a little too submissive. Romney looked like he was on meth at times with those wide eyes.
changing my signature to change our luck.
I came into the debate hoping Romney made a decent showing, hoping he would not be blow away by the much more charismatic Obama. I figured if Mitt held his own it would be labelled an Obama victory and I was fine with that. Like a title fight, the challenger must win decisively to claim victory. By ALL account, even the blubbering fools like Mathews and moddow and sharpton acknowledge that the clear winner was Romney. But win or lose, Romney showed many things such as he will stand up to the bold face lies that the liberals are spouting. Anybody who thinks this made no difference is fooling themselves. Romney may not win the election but tonight's performance certainly help that 5% of the electorate that he needs to pull make up their mind. That 47% that Romney spoke about, that is the 47 out of 100 people who say the debate didn't matter because the have already set their democrat vote in stone.
To much to go into, but he clearly said the middle income would not be effected, the rich would pay more, health care would be reformed. When Obama took office my wife and I paid a little less than $500 a month premium, now we are over $1300 because of the Obamacare. Doctors are droping like flys, we have gone from 12 general surgeons to 8 and the numbers are going down and down and down. Doctors will retire much earlier, health care will be nothing like it used to be. My wife and I spend somewhere between $18,00 to $25,000 a year in health care. I am watching construction companies that have been in business over 60 years close etheir doors (look for more of that). If you watched the debate Romney outlined his plan, sorry you closed your ears to this part.
I see both of them as evil. As a middle class member, one will sell me out to the poor, one will sell me out to the wealthy.
The train hits me earlier with the former, later with the latter. My kids will be the ones that will truly suffer as a result of the last few elections.
I'm of a Libertarian mind. Stay out of my bedroom, my home, off my land, defend the borders, don't waste my tax dollars. Neither candidate fits my view, in fact both hold opinions directly opposed to some of my views.
I'm more excited by a good nights sleep than what is happening these days. Those are my reactions to politics in general
I'm an unapologetic Libertarian, and so are 60% or so of Americans. The problem is neither political party is Libertarian, and the GOP (which is closer) doesn't have the guts to go there.
Romney and the GOP is a lesser of evils. Well really it's between evil and bad or "not good" maybe. I'd rather be having a compromise between the Tea Party and Romney than Obama and anyone else. It moves the ball back away from the tax and spend side as much as possible given the options.
Reagan isn't walking through that door, and neither is John Adams, so we just have to muddle through till the big Libertarian revolution. lol.
Carl, you will not change catfans opinion, he has a closed mind which he accuses all GOP supporters of having, pot, kettle, black, whatever.
Romney was a clear winner the the democrats were in full denial mode and spin afterward. When BIll Mahr sends out a tweet that his man got clobbered you know it isnt good.
And the focus group of Luntz on Fox afterward was mostly Obama voters from 4 years ago and the vast majority said they have changed their minds. That was huge.
One thing none talked about afterward on Fox or very little. obama talked quite a bit about the Cleveland Clinic and how great they are and then stupidly started talking about all the innovations they have done on their OWN, and how they are working to improve the facility and take better care of patients on their OWN. And Romney hammered him on it showing that private business does it better w/o government intervention. Huge mistake by Obama and whoever told him to put that in their should be taken out to the wood shed and whipped. And Obama should get whipped next for being stupid enough to go along with it.
Romney laid out his plan on taxes and how he would do it, could have taken a better shot at Obama for being a organizer that went after banks and helped force them into giving bad loans when Obama talked about banks, laid out his plan on medicare. He was on top of every point.
For me, I loved the fact that Jim L let them go at it, once he realized he wasn't going to control it totally it then became a debate, a good one instead of 2 min sound bites. My wife asked me about it after ward and that is what I told her, glad Greta agreed with me.
Carl, you will not change catfans opinion, he has a closed mind which he accuses all GOP supporters of having, pot, kettle, black, whatever.
Romney was a clear winner the the democrats were in full denial mode and spin afterward. When BIll Mahr sends out a tweet that his man got clobbered you know it isnt good.
And the focus group of Luntz on Fox afterward was mostly Obama voters from 4 years ago and the vast majority said they have changed their minds. That was huge.
One thing none talked about afterward on Fox or very little. obama talked quite a bit about the Cleveland Clinic and how great they are and then stupidly started talking about all the innovations they have done on their OWN, and how they are working to improve the facility and take better care of patients on their OWN. And Romney hammered him on it showing that private business does it better w/o government intervention. Huge mistake by Obama and whoever told him to put that in their should be taken out to the wood shed and whipped. And Obama should get whipped next for being stupid enough to go along with it.
Romney laid out his plan on taxes and how he would do it, could have taken a better shot at Obama for being a organizer that went after banks and helped force them into giving bad loans when Obama talked about banks, laid out his plan on medicare. He was on top of every point.
For me, I loved the fact that Jim L let them go at it, once he realized he wasn't going to control it totally it then became a debate, a good one instead of 2 min sound bites. My wife asked me about it after ward and that is what I told her, glad Greta agreed with me.
Skip not sure what debate Catfan watched but it seems you and I watched the same one.
I'm not saying that Romney didn't win the debate guys. I'm saying that I doubt it will help him much. If he can repeat the performance in the next one it might swing a few votes, but I bet if you asked everyone you know if that debate changed their mind on who they're voting for you could probably count those votes on one hand.
I thought Obama looked tentative and listless. I think the challenger usually has the advantage in these things since they've been debating and stumping in the primaries while the incumbent is busy running the country. Obama looked pretty listless in the first debate against McCain also though IIRC. Romney was sharp and his performance might get some of that big money moving again that had been holding back. I think that will be the GOP's biggest benefit from last night.
changing my signature to change our luck.
I purposely watch MSLSD after the debate. It was very funny. Whoever the Ed guy is was brutally honest about Obama's poor performance. Maddow just stuttered around. The producers didn't have time to program her after the debate.
Do you understand "leadership"? The reason we have gridlock in DC is that there is no room to negotiate with Pelosi, Obama and Reid. Obama takes sides. He doesn't lead. Romney did something much more important than lay out some specific plan. He iterated the principles by which he would lead in the negotiations with Congress on taxes, the budget, and the monstrous debt that the democrats have amassed. The principles which were heartfelt and very clearly stated made perfect sense. They showed that he was willing to listen and that his specific position on an issue could be modified, but not his principles. That's what leaders do. Obama has no clue.
I didn't see the debate. Seems like they never really move the needle one way or the other. I'm reminded of how Reagan was judged to have lost his 1st debate in 84 against Mondale, but came back strong in the next one and went on to a 49-state landslide.
But sometimes they do. In 80 Reagan came out in the 1st debate with Carter and came across as a rational, intelligent human being, which was completely different from the way he had been portrayed by Carter. IMHO he basically won the election right then because it gave people reassurance they could turn to him and away from the failed Carter Administration.
So Romney had a good night by all accounts, but if he's going to have a chance he has to keep it up in the next 2 and make sure his ground game is strong in the swing states. IMHO this is going to come down to turnout.
U really think players are going to duke without being paid over Kentucky?--Gilbert Arenas, 9/12/19
BTW, just want to point out the VP debate (where I expect the smacketh downeth to be liberally applied--pun intended--by Ryan) will be in Danville at my alma mater, good ol' Centre College!
http://www.centre.edu/centredebate2012/
U really think players are going to duke without being paid over Kentucky?--Gilbert Arenas, 9/12/19
Carl, catfan watched the debate, he just didn't listen or pay attention to the debate.
As Mick said, Romney showed leadership, Obama showed he is all about the government take over of everything from health care, to education, to banks, walstreet, energy. I would have liked for Romney to hammer him on coal, he came close but didn't close the deal.
And the $90 billion for clean energy, Obama said nothing, just stood there and smiled as if to say, you got that one right.
Romney listed how he would pay for things, cut those that had to borrow from China and made no sense. If one listens to Obama when he talks about raising taxes on teh wealthy, he also talks about how much he is going to spend and the increase in taxes won't take care of what he spends.
Obama has had 4 years to do the things he now wants to do the next 4 years, he didn't do any of them the first 4 and he won't the next 4 except make government even bigger and screw the seniors in favor of those that don't pay anything.
Obamas traveling press sec said this morning that Romney just did a good job because he practiced a lot. They have nothing to offer so it was just a good result of practice. SPIN.
but on Foreign affairs, Romney must be just as sharp, and hammer the ME events of the last month. He needs specifics on what has happened, what the administration failed to do, and how he would have done if he had been president. the first thing I would say is after two bombing attempts on our consulate, two attempted assasination attempts on the British Ambassador, with our ambassador asking for more protection and 9/11 coming up, I would have beefed up security, had the marines armed and more sent in, and I would say that I would have been to every daily briefing with my intelligence versus Obama only going to 37% of them, and the day after also skipping that briefing and going to Vegas for a fund raiser and failing to meet with world leaders at the UN duing a time of crisis in the ME over the murder of our ambassador, the slaughter in Syria and the trouble brewing on Israels borders and Iran.
Romney will have plenty of ammo, he needs to come out firing as if he had just purchased the Homeland Securitys next 4 years worth of bullets.
Jazy, you still don't get it. I'm not a Romney hater. In fact, I'm still open to voting for him, but I need to see some specifics. He needs to give voters like me a reason why.
I hear a lot about what the outcomes of his plans will be, but the road to get there is all very hazy and vague. If he has a map, I'd like to see it. Otherwise I'll have to opt for continuing to follow Obama's compass.
changing my signature to change our luck.
CatFan did you vote for Obama in 08? If so, did you demand to see his plans for hope and change? That's all he ever talked about. No specifics at all and the media gave him a pass on it. In the debate he showed, he has nothing to stand on.
Now 4 years later, everyone wants Romney's specific inner thoughts....which is a ridiculous concept to me. Obama had his chance, he blew it, Next.
I voted for W in 2004, Obama in 2008. McCain and Palin weren't much of an alternative.
changing my signature to change our luck.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks