Well, what do you guys think?

Who did better?

I think one guy in a red tie rose to the occasion and the other in the blue tie did not.......

Romney looked mahvalous
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I want Spence to tell me what I think :tooth:

I think Mitt got that one. I do not expect Obama's camp to let that happen again (though we know Biden-Ryan will be a laugher)

First impression was Obama looked shell-shocked.

My favorite line from Romney was how he was against "trickel down government."

"Romney was focused, clear, interesting, and engaged, while President Obama repeatedly came across as distracted, irritated, and vague in their first debate." J Jacoby Boston Globe captured it.

reading around the reviews, I can't recall a Presidential debate where there was such agreement from both sides on the extent of the lopsidedness of the affair....

Clint was right! Empty chair!

I haven't watched it yet fell asleep at 8
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It was one of the best debates I've seen. Usually I say to myslef that I cant believe we have these 2 morons on the stage but at least both were somewhat respecables.
Romney made the entire audience laugh out loud 3 times, Obamas attempt at laughs fell silent. So much for Romney not able to connect to the common person.
I've stated before that I am not a huge romney fan but I agree with what he said. Great line that he will evalaute each program and determine if its worth borrowing from China to fund it. Right on!
Obama was pissed from the start, disenganged. Romney had him the whole way. I love the first fact check from CNN after the debate was on Obamas claim of Romney adding 5 trillion from tax cuts - a talking point he repeated at least 5 times. They said it was false since it would be offset.
Obamas closing - I said I would work hard for you and the middle class and I will continue to, thanks..........serioulsy?

Anyone catch MSNBC's unbiased discussion - especially Chris Matthew - after the debate?

Anyone catch MSNBC's unbiased discussion - especially Chris Matthew - after the debate?

I can only imagine, any highlights you can share?

I can only imagine, any highlights you can share?

No - you should really Youtube it.

ahhh, I see

Chris Matthews MSNBC Meltdown after Presidential Debate - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wgJoepQmS4)


So apparently, the real brains in the country are on MSNBC and the president should be watching them so he learns. I get it.....

I don't think there is any doubt who fired up their base.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Romney did well, Obama was atrocious. Obama is not used to people disagreeing with him, he doesn't like it, he has no experience with it, and he has no idea how to react to it.

Obama should be glad that he wasn't opposing Gingrich.

CNN did a quick poll. 67% of the CNN responders said that Romney won the debate. And that's not an impartial audience, that's a left-leaning audience.

Obama may do better in round 2, but what can he say? He added $5 trillion to the debt, and all we have to show for it is fewer jobs, lower median income, and a Middle East that's burning around us. Hard to spin your way out of that. By far, his biggest success has been in the war on terror, and all he has done there is continue the policies of the previous administration, and utilize the security infastructure built by the previous administration.

The MSNBC reaction was priceless.

I don't know what this translates to in the polls. But it reinforces what we have all known all along, this emperor has no clothes.

Lets see what happens in round #2.

Romney was the "Master Debater" last night......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I want Spence to tell me what I think :tooth:
Sure :fishin:

Romney certainly had a better performance. Obama wasn't engaged and didn't put up a fight when he should have.

It was really a lame debate. The questions were bland, the time management terrible and Lehrer didn't challenge anything that was said.

Romney's claims of Obama gutting Medicare or that his tax plan doesn't add 5T to the deficit were easy to counter...Obama said the right things, he just didn't do it with any assertiveness.

The lack of specifics by Romney/Ryan on their tax plan is a massive liability in their platform.

Romney's assertion that he wouldn't approve any tax breaks that would require deficit spending is about as close to a blatant lie as you can get.

-spence

Obamas opportunity was last night, on domestic issues. He lost the opportunity.
I believe the next debate is on international?
Mitt has no history to attack and if he attakcs on Mitt's lack of experience, he can throw it back that Obama had none 4 yrs ago. The reality is O went on a mid-east apology tour and dispite his nobel prize, we've seen nothing but violence.

The lack of specifics by Romney/Ryan on their tax plan is a massive liability in their platform.

-spence
lame debate? why, because your man was crushed? reading most pundits, it was one of the best debates in 30 yrs. No rhetoric, very substantive. Each got plenty of speaking time.


I guess you missed:

1. Lower rates and discontinue deductions so revenue is flat. Spurs small business, does not hurt middle class.
So, what deductions will you discontinue? Paraphrase - I dont want to ram my plans down the countrys throat I want to work with Dems and repubs to come up with the right deductions.
2. Every program gets a smell test - if we need $$ from China to fund and its not benefitting the economy - it goes
3. we grow the tax revenue by growing the economy - more people working, more tax revenue (thats what created Clintons surplus, no thigher taxes!)

I love when Mitt threw Simpson Bowles at Obama (where is Bryan on this?). Mitt said he should have taken it to congress, worked out kinks and passed, but mr pres, you wasted 2 yrs!
So, what specifics do you need? he was very specific.
Obamas plan - I'll continue to work hard for you....

Lame??? I didn't want it to end.....

Obama says today is Wednesday.

Romney says today is Thursday.

Spence agrees with Obama and argues that today is indeed Wednesday.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lame??? I didn't want it to end.....

Obama says today is Wednesday.

Romney says today is Thursday.

Spence agrees with Obama and argues that today is indeed Wednesday.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

me too, I wish it went another hr.

1. Lower rates and discontinue deductions so revenue is flat. Spurs small business, does not hurt middle class.
Making the Bush cuts permanent and cutting another 20% adds 5 TRILLION to the deficit over 10 years. This is from the CBO.

There are not enough deductions to offset this and make it revenue neutral...nor is there any way that Congress would allow tax breaks like the mortgage interest deduction to simply be eliminated as the Middle Class would get hammered.

What Romney is assuming is that the tax cuts will magically spur massive growth to offset lost revenues. I've seen no global economic scenario that suggests this is even remotely possible.

Further, Romney would inherit a large deficit just like Obama did and Romney would run a large deficit throughout his entire term regardless of what spending cuts they may propose.

The idea he can dramatically lower taxes without incurring additional deficit spending is mathematically impossible unless you believe in fairy dust.

Do you believe in fairy dust?

-spence

Spence's analysis of it is the only lame thing about the debate.

Romney's assertion that he wouldn't approve any tax breaks that would require deficit spending is about as close to a blatant lie as you can get.

-spence

The only more obvious lie would be to assert that Romney is callous for proposing to "diminish" SS and Medicare, without being able to explain, if you're not going to diminish them, from where you get $40 trillion to fund them.

Still hiding under your desk on that one?

Spence says that there wasn't much to see in that debate, other than Romney's lies. I hope Obama agrees. I hope Obama agrees with Spence that it wasn't a disaster, and that he doesn't need to change anything.

Making the Bush cuts permanent and cutting another 20% adds 5 TRILLION to the deficit over 10 years. This is from the CBO.

-spence

yawn, you used to be above partisan talking points
- from Factcheck.org

To be clear, Romney has proposed cutting personal federal income tax rates across the board by 20 percent, in addition to extending the tax cuts enacted early in the Bush administration. He also proposes to eliminate the estate tax permanently, repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, and eliminate taxes on interest, capital gains and dividends for taxpayers making under $200,000 a year in adjusted gross income.

By themselves, those cuts would, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, lower federal tax liability by “about $480 billion in calendar year 2015” compared with current tax policy, with Bush cuts left in place. The Obama campaign has extrapolated that figure out over 10 years, coming up with a $5 trillion figure over a decade.

However, Romney always has said he planned to offset that massive cut with equally massive reductions in tax preferences to broaden the tax base, thus losing no revenue and not increasing the deficit. So to that extent, the president is incorrect: Romney is not proposing a $5 trillion reduction in taxes.

And yes, I do believe in fairy dust

I cant wait for Big Bird to make an appearance at an Obama rally.

Romney crushed that socialist. The most striking thing was how Romney's responses with specifics were so accurate that Obama couldn't even respond at all , he was stupified. I loved the part where Romney started teaching Obama that most small business owners get taxed as individuals at individual rates , not at corporate rates. That is 100% true. As a small business owner that was how I paid taxes for 13 years. This irrefutable fact just shut Obama down like Romney had thrown a switch.

Crushing victory for Romney!!

I look for Obama to come out swinging next debate with no holds barred. He'll be throwing out every lying soundbite he can muster just to try to look like he showed up instead of the total mummy act he put on last night.

Spence , your guy looked bad. He looked like a bag of wind with nothing but rhetoric in the face of withering facts from Romney It wasn't a bad debate , it was a great debate but totally lopsided. Obama should be ashamed of himself.

Left wingers thing the government should take 5 trillion and then squander 2 and give back 3 in the form of stimulus money. Romney wants to leave the 5 trillion in the hands of the people , not let the government take there wasteful cut out of it. Don't believe a word about the "the math doesn't add up". Romney is a business man whose carreer was about how things do add up and I'm totally confident that his plan for tax cuts offset by closing of loopholes and increased revenues do to economic growth stimulated by those tax cuts is far more realistic than the "I have a dream" rhetoric Obama is trying to sell.

Anyway , I found the debates to be excellent . Romney had the best performance and most lopsided victory by a presidential debate participant since Reagan kicked Mondales butt.

I loved it. :) :) :) :) :) :rotf2:

He looked like a bag of wind with nothing but rhetoric in the face of withering facts from Romney
I loved it. :) :) :) :) :) :rotf2:

The reason Obama looked that way, is because that's exactly what he is, and that's all that he is. It's just not that often that he gets exposed for what he is, which is why Obama prefers to go on "The View" where those hideous gasbags fight each other over who gets to tell Obama how handsome he is.

Great comment Saltheart, particularly from someone who (unlike me) isn't a committed partisan.

If you want to see a true rout, watch Ryan debate Biden. About as fair as a knife fight between Don Knotts and Mr. T. All Joe can do is scream, bang his fists on the podium, and throw papers up in the air, and howl at the moon. I'd like to see Biden claim that Ryan doesn't care about the poor, at which point I pray that Ryan points out that Joe gives about $500 a year to charity, with taxable income of $300,000. Ryan is going to eviscerate Biden.

This pretty much sums up the fundamental differences between the two candidates. Excerpts from last night. First BO…

OBAMA: The first role of the federal government is to keep the American people safe. That's its most basic function. And as commander-in-chief, that is something that I've worked on and thought about every single day that I've been in the Oval Office.

Ya… Blah Blah Blah…everybody knows that.

But I also believe that government has the capacity, the federal government has the capacity to help open up opportunity and create ladders of opportunity and to create frameworks where the American people can succeed.

Really? Are Americans really that dumb where the Government needs to help us to succeed? Ladders and frameworks = hand-outs and entitlements.

Look, the genius of America is the free enterprise system and freedom and the fact that people can go out there and start a business, work on an idea, make their own decisions.

Make their own decisions? Where did that come from?

But as Abraham Lincoln understood, there are also some things we do better together. So, in the middle of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln said, let's help to finance the Transcontinental Railroad, let's start the National Academy of Sciences, let's start land grant colleges, because we want to give these gateways of opportunity for all Americans, because if all Americans are getting opportunity, we're all going to be better off. That doesn't restrict people's freedom. That enhances it.

I suppose some Federal programs were beneficial back in the day, TVA, Hoover Dam, Panama Canal, NASA. But the key word here is “GIVE.” Whatever happened to working hard for opportunity?

Here is Romney’s response. No need to comment it speaks for itself.

The role of government: Look behind us. The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The role of government is to promote and protect the principles of those documents.

First, life and liberty. We have a responsibility to protect the lives and liberties of our people, and that means a military second to none. I do not believe in cutting our military. I believe in maintaining the strength of America's military.

Second, in that line that says we are endowed by our creator with our rights, I believe we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. That statement also says that we are endowed by our creator with the right to pursue happiness as we choose. I interpret that as, one, making sure that those people who are less fortunate and can't care for themselves are cared by -- by one another.

We're a nation that believes that we're all children of the same god and we care for those that have difficulties, those that are elderly and have problems and challenges, those that are disabled. We care for them. And we -- we look for discovery and innovation, all these things desired out of the American heart to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens.

Here’s the best part….WAIT FOR IT...WAIT FOR IT...

But we also believe in maintaining for individuals the right to pursue their dreams and not to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals. And what we're seeing right now is, in my view, a -- a trickle-down government approach, which has government thinking it can do a better job than free people pursuing their dreams. And it's not working.
And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is 1 out of 6 people in poverty. The proof of that is we've gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work.

Nuff said…

Romney is not proposing a $5 trillion reduction in taxes.

And yes, I do believe in fairy dust
Clearly, because without specifics that's exactly what he's proposing.

-spence

Clearly, because without specifics that's exactly what he's proposing.

-spence

Spency, what about that $40 trillion gap I asked you about? Nothing to say? Not at all? Can you at least admit that you have no idea how to address that gap, and that therefore those programs might genuinely need a haircut in order to be saved? Would it literally kill you to admit that?

Now I know why Obama stunk last night. I needed Al Gore to explain it...it was the high altitude in Denver. I guess the atmosphere is racist.

Gore blames Denver altitude for Obama's debate performance | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/04/gore-blames-denver-altitude-for-obama-debate-performance/)

Spency, what about that $40 trillion gap I asked you about? Nothing to say? Not at all? Can you at least admit that you have no idea how to address that gap, and that therefore those programs might genuinely need a haircut in order to be saved? Would it literally kill you to admit that?
Nobody has a plan to fully address the increase in estimated spending.

There was a good report I saw the other day that showed the Obama and Ryan plans for Medicare had about the same impact, just achieved via different means. Romney is even worse as he's making promises he can't keep to maintain spending levels longer than Obama.

-spence

Nobody has a plan to fully address the increase in estimated spending.

There was a good report I saw the other day that showed the Obama and Ryan plans for Medicare had about the same impact, just achieved via different means. Romney is even worse as he's making promises he can't keep to maintain spending levels longer than Obama.

-spence

"Nobody has a plan to fully address the increase in estimated spending."

Paul Ryan does. Your side attacked him for it, and offered exactly nothing as an alternative.

It's times like these that I wish Ross Perot had the stones to stay in the race back when he ran instead of dropping out then getting back in after the media investigated his family(he should have expected thatand had thinker skin to deal with it) Perot would have gotten this country out of debt I believe. He was on the right track.
But then again, once the democrats got back in power, it would have all gone to heck anyway:wall:

I think Romney won this debate

"Nobody has a plan to fully address the increase in estimated spending."

Paul Ryan does. Your side attacked him for it, and offered exactly nothing as an alternative.

He really doesn't. His plan relies on ridiculous revenue increases and spending cuts that would have to be absorbed by states none of which are prepared.

I can give you a plan...doesn't mean it's a feasible one.

-spence

Stop all this BS spending, that is a great start. I'm in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Stop all this BS spending, that is a great start. I'm in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Yes, Romney's proposal to cut PBS has great merit. He's really focused on the problem.

-spence

Yes, Romney's proposal to cut PBS has great merit. He's really focused on the problem.

-spence

You make me giggle.......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are Americans really that dumb where the Government needs to help us to succeed? Ladders and frameworks = hand-outs and entitlements.[/COLOR]






And there in lies what this election is all about.
Do away with all the rhetoric and BS and it comes down to this :

Do you want to be independent, free to make your own choices and decesions
or have a Government do it for you with all it's consequences?

America was founded on the former after having had enough of the latter.

He really doesn't. His plan relies on ridiculous revenue increases and spending cuts that would have to be absorbed by states none of which are prepared.

I can give you a plan...doesn't mean it's a feasible one.

-spence

Spence, you didn't have to tell me (or anyone here) that you don't like Ryan's plan. The point is, Ryan is a congressman from Wisconsin, and he had the political courage to announce a plan that he knew he would get attacked for.

What better alternative has Obama suggested in 4 years? None. And if Obama isn't going to change the plans, how has he said he'd get the $40 trillion? Not a peep.

And that's fine with you. You are critical because you don't like Ryan's plan, but you are in love with Obama, who has offered exactly nothing. Actually, by taking billions from Medicare to fund Obamacare, he is making it worse, but why quibble?

Good day.

Yes, Romney's proposal to cut PBS has great merit. He's really focused on the problem.

-spence

Last time I checked there was no requirement in the Constitution for taxpayers to support a public tv station. Privatize it. Romney's comments were symbolic...anyone could see that.

Yes, Romney's proposal to cut PBS has great merit. He's really focused on the problem.

-spence

0.00012% of the budget saved!
BIG MONEY! NO WHAMMIES!

Big Bird will be fine. Jack up Elmo's licensing fees by 2-3% and you'll probably cover the meager funds federal government spends on Public Broadcasting.

The point was - for those that chose to ignore it - if we are going to continue to borrow money from our children and children's children we should at least see if it passes the smell test. We are spending far too much to be borrowing on anything and everything. Both Parties are responsible for this.

Big Bird will be fine. Jack up Elmo's licensing fees by 2-3% and you'll probably cover the meager funds federal government spends on Public Broadcasting.

The point was - for those that chose to ignore it - if we are going to continue to borrow money from our children and children's children we should at least see if it passes the smell test. We are spending far too much to be borrowing on anything and everything. Both Parties are responsible for this.

He used a super right hyped item that the mouth breathers salivate over.
Nothing more, nothing less.

The fact that the dog and pony show is being discussed any more than "wow, that was a waste of time, neither brought anything new to the table" is amazing.

Romney is a business man, of course he's going to win a debate, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end. Obama is a politician, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end.

Clearly, because without specifics that's exactly what he's proposing.

-spence

as opposed to the concrete plan of hope and change 4 years ago......:yak5:

Romney is a business man, of course he's going to win a debate, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end. Obama is a politician, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end.

I love your perception of business men - I have seen some of the best and brightest "disappear" when they dont produce results. Business has no conscience, produce results or you're shown the door. Romney's shareholders will be the American people, he will need to produce results or be shown the door. Obama has shown us his results, there is the door.

I'm confused, where did the "severely conservative" go? This is the guy I could vote for - but how can I be sure he won't change his stripes again?

He used a super right hyped item that the mouth breathers salivate over.
Nothing more, nothing less.

The fact that the dog and pony show is being discussed any more than "wow, that was a waste of time, neither brought anything new to the table" is amazing.

Romney is a business man, of course he's going to win a debate, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end. Obama is a politician, his job is to make you feel all warm and fuzzy while jamming it up your back end.

For someone who only casually watches the news, they might think that Obama is some brilliant, slightly-more-than-human, walks-on-water Messiah. That's how Obama sees himself, and the media bends over backwards to reinforce that.

This debate debunked that myth. This debate showed exactly what happens when you pair off one guy who got where he is because he is black and knows how to use that to his advantage, against another guy who made it to the top of the hyper-competitive business world thanks to his brains and his sweat.

No idea what this means in the polls. But it shows what an empty suit Obama is.

What was Obama's excuse? What did Obama say the next day? Some deranged claim that "it wasn't Mitt Romney" who Obama debated. That's the best the Messiah could come up with.

I'm confused, where did the "severely conservative" go? This is the guy I could vote for - but how can I be sure he won't change his stripes again?

I never saw r as severly conservative. he has changed his stripes on some issues, but so has obama (gay marriage?)

I never saw r as severly conservative. he has changed his stripes on some issues, but so has obama (gay marriage?)

While Romney said it, I never believed him. Atleast Obama said his thoughts evolved.

While Romney said it, I never believed him. Atleast Obama said his thoughts evolved.

so if you dont believe what Romney says, do you judge him on his actions?
The guy was the governor of one of the most liberal states, had first state healthcare, supported education. Those were his actions?
Just curious.

I saw this last night...is this the leader we want to bring this country together...you decide!

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans/#ooid=I0ZXEyNjpnfCdoMXulS8XIOcpzf13thD

so if you dont believe what Romney says, do you judge him on his actions?
The guy was the governor of one of the most liberal states, had first state healthcare, supported education. Those were his actions?
Just curious.

Depends on a lot of things. Did he change his mind based on more facts. Did he try to do what he said he would do and couldn't get it done. Did he deny he did some of the things he did. Etc.

If he ran on his record in Mass, I'd vote for him. Not so sure now.

Depends on a lot of things. Did he change his mind based on more facts. Did he try to do what he said he would do and couldn't get it done. Did he deny he did some of the things he did. Etc.

If he ran on his record in Mass, I'd vote for him. Not so sure now.

to be honest, he changed his story to secure the right wing and get the Repub nomination.

For someone who only casually watches the news, they might think that Obama is some brilliant, slightly-more-than-human, walks-on-water Messiah. That's how Obama sees himself, and the media bends over backwards to reinforce that.

Please show us examples of your opinions. Thanks.

I love your perception of business men - I have seen some of the best and brightest "disappear" when they dont produce results. Business has no conscience, produce results or you're shown the door. Romney's shareholders will be the American people, he will need to produce results or be shown the door. Obama has shown us his results, there is the door.

I love your perception of your own grandiose thoughts on politics and business.

Oooooh "best and brightest"! Buzzwords at their best.
I suppose Romney is gonna tell us next how he will unilaterally save the economy while rocking his bizmeth skills to restructure government then make taxes multi-centric?!

Please show us examples of your opinions. Thanks.

Sure.

At his 2008 covention speech, he stood between 2 Greek columns like he was a Greek God. At his inauguration speech (I think), he said something to teh effect of "let today be the day we remember as the day the earth began to cool,and the waters stopped rising".

Likwid, people were claiming to be fainting at every speech the guy gave.

Chris Mathews (MSNBC) said he got a tingle up his leg every time Obama speaks.

We elected a guy whose resume included 3 years in the Senate where he did exactly notihng except run for President. I'm not sure on what basis you elect a guy President who has never done a single significantthing, but this is what we get.

Please show us examples of your opinions. Thanks.



I love your perception of your own grandiose thoughts on politics and business.

Oooooh "best and brightest"! Buzzwords at their best.
I suppose Romney is gonna tell us next how he will unilaterally save the economy while rocking his bizmeth skills to restructure government then make taxes multi-centric?!

not grandiose, i have seen harvard/yalegrads, with years of experience, shown the door, ceos turn over all the time. You have to perform in business. Results matter. You dont have to perform as a law professor. its a different game.

Please show us examples of your opinions. Thanks.



I love your perception of your own grandiose thoughts on politics and business.

Oooooh "best and brightest"! Buzzwords at their best.
I suppose Romney is gonna tell us next how he will unilaterally save the economy while rocking his bizmeth skills to restructure government then make taxes multi-centric?!

Likwid, Romney was a hugely successful businessman. That takes some talent. Unlike Obama, he didn't get to be the CEO of Bain Capital because of affirmative action. Romney was at the helm of a firm that made a lot of money. You can't deny that. If Romney was as incompetent as Obama, Bain would have gone bankrupt. Romney didn't add $5 trillion to Bain's debt. He actually created wealth. More than we can say for the Messiah.

We can argue about whether or not business success is a valid credential for being a President, but Romney's business success is a zillion times more tangible than anything Obama did before getting elected.

Where am I wrong?

Likwid, Romney was a hugely successful businessman. That takes some talent. Unlike Obama, he didn't get to be the CEO of Bain Capital because of affirmative action. Romney was at the helm of a firm that made a lot of money. You can't deny that. If Romney was as incompetent as Obama, Bain would have gone bankrupt. Romney didn't add $5 trillion to Bain's debt. He actually created wealth. More than we can say for the Messiah.

We can argue about whether or not business success is a valid credential for being a President, but Romney's business success is a zillion times more tangible than anything Obama did before getting elected.

Where am I wrong?

and if Romney performed poorly he we would be fired. Just like every other ceo that performs poorly. So BS may get them in the door, but they have to deliver.

and if Romney performed poorly he we would be fired. Just like every other ceo that performs poorly. So BS may get them in the door, but they have to deliver.

Wasn't Bain his company....?

The most striking thing was how Romney's responses with specifics were so accurate that Obama couldn't even respond at all , he was stupified.
I think he was stunned by the level of BS Romney was spewing forth.

I loved the part where Romney started teaching Obama that most small business owners get taxed as individuals at individual rates , not at corporate rates. That is 100% true. As a small business owner that was how I paid taxes for 13 years.
What it showed was that Romney doesn't have a basic understanding of marginal tax rates. We all understand that many small business owners are taxed as individuals...but how many are paying themselves over $250k without filing as an LLC or pass through?

If you're in that 3% and Obama's plan is going to kill your business I'd really suggest you seek a qualified accountant!

Spence , your guy looked bad. He looked like a bag of wind with nothing but rhetoric in the face of withering facts from Romney It wasn't a bad debate , it was a great debate but totally lopsided. Obama should be ashamed of himself.
I agree Obama didn't have a good showing, but Romney wasn't offering many facts.

Obama doubled the deficit = false
Obama stole 750B from Medicare = false
Romney's health care plan covers pre-existing conditions = false
1/2 of green stimulus companies have gone under = false

and on and on...

Left wingers thing the government should take 5 trillion and then squander 2 and give back 3 in the form of stimulus money. Romney wants to leave the 5 trillion in the hands of the people , not let the government take there wasteful cut out of it. Don't believe a word about the "the math doesn't add up". Romney is a business man whose carreer was about how things do add up and I'm totally confident that his plan for tax cuts offset by closing of loopholes and increased revenues do to economic growth stimulated by those tax cuts is far more realistic than the "I have a dream" rhetoric Obama is trying to sell.
I've yet to read ANYTHING that suggests Romney really has a plan.

His tax promises are mathematically impossible.

If he was as good of a business person as you suggest he'd be offering a solution to navigate the business, not selling a pipe dream. Romney's career was made by parting companies out for a profit, not structuring them for sustained growth...and there's a BIG difference.

-spence

and if Romney performed poorly he we would be fired. Just like every other ceo that performs poorly. So BS may get them in the door, but they have to deliver.
A lot of CEO's perform poorly...

They usually get golden parachutes and millions in stock options while their companies lay off people by the thousands.

And then their buddies will offer up another position and tell the board that you really need to pay tens of millions or you're just not going to get the kind of talent necessary to run a large company.

It's another world...

-spence

Wasn't Bain his company....?
No...

-spence

Romney's career was made by parting companies out for a profit, not structuring them for sustained growth...and there's a BIG difference.
-spence

Check out a company called Staples........

Not mention being a Governor
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Check out a company called Staples........
Staples was one of Bain's earliest and biggest success stories.

But the point is still sound, the objective of private equity is rarely to take long-term risk, it's to structure a short-term deal that they can derive profit from.

Romney has executive experience certainly, but to say his business background somehow gives him grand insight into what the US needs to be successful is a bit of a stretch.

-spence

If I had a leaky pipe I wouldn't call an electrician.
The country has an economic problem trying compete globally. We hired a community organizer to do the job. His expertize was in spending other peoples money. We got exactly what we paid for.
Might be a good idea to hire a successful businessman to help us out.Only with a strong economy and strong tax base will we ever be able to get out of debt.
Hell I'd Warren Buffett before I'd re-elect the President
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Likwid, Romney was a hugely successful businessman. That takes some talent. Unlike Obama, he didn't get to be the CEO of Bain Capital because of affirmative action. Romney was at the helm of a firm that made a lot of money. You can't deny that. If Romney was as incompetent as Obama, Bain would have gone bankrupt. Romney didn't add $5 trillion to Bain's debt. He actually created wealth. More than we can say for the Messiah.

We can argue about whether or not business success is a valid credential for being a President, but Romney's business success is a zillion times more tangible than anything Obama did before getting elected.

Where am I wrong?

Please do not squeeze lidwids nuts to tite ...he is screaming now...:)

Staples was one of Bain's earliest and biggest success stories. But the point is still sound, the objective of private equity is rarely to take long-term risk, it's to structure a short-term deal that they can derive profit from. Romney has executive experience certainly, but to say his business background somehow gives him grand insight into what the US needs to be successful is a bit of a stretch. -spence


"Romney has executive experience certainly, but to say his business background somehow gives him grand insight into what the US needs to be successful is a bit of a stretch"

WOW. OK, Spence. So in 2008, what was on Obama's resume that convinced you he had the grand insight into what the US needs? What had Obama done before 2008, that was more relevent to being POTUS than Romney's executive experience?

Spence, when you post here, you would do well to remember that we aren't all thoughtless lemmings.

P.S. If you don't htiunk that executive experience in the business world makes him qualified, how about his executive experience in the political world? The man was governor of Massachusetts.

Come on. What's the beef with someone being successful...honestly. Aren't you tired of ripping successful people. This is the USA for cripes sake. We are flush with successful people. Land of opportunity remember. This BS about "he/she makes more money than me (or is more successful than me) and I want some of if" has to go. Wah, wah, wah...Boo frickity whoo! Try this... get a job, start at the bottom, work your ass off...voila! That's what my wife and I did. Married at 22. Moved into an apartment with my belongings in a shoebox and $500 from our wedding. I'm not rich by any means but we saved for a modest house...raised two great kids...and socked a little coin away for the golden years and maybe a new reel. No handouts from anyone...been working our butts off (and paying our share of income taxes) since we were 16. See it can be done! Success!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think he was stunned by the level of BS Romney was spewing forth.


If Romney was spewing a ton of BS and Obama was stunned by it - in a debate - by a boring moderator - then maybe he should remove himself from consideration for not being up to task. That was a debate, it wasn't a meeting with skilled leaders from across the world in a Yalta like moment.

Come on. What's the beef with someone being successful...honestly. Aren't you tired of ripping successful people. This is the USA for cripes sake. We are flush with successful people. Land of opportunity remember. This BS about "he/she makes more money than me (or is more successful than me) and I want some of if" has to go. Wah, wah, wah...Boo frickity whoo! Try this... get a job, start at the bottom, work your ass off...voila! That's what my wife and I did. Married at 22. Moved into an apartment with my belongings in a shoebox and $500 from our wedding. I'm not rich by any means but we saved for a modest house...raised two great kids...and socked a little coin away for the golden years and maybe a new reel. No handouts from anyone...been working our butts off (and paying our share of income taxes) since we were 16. See it can be done! Success!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"What's the beef with someone being successful"

The liberal beef with success/wealth is based on the liberal lie that wealth is finite, meaning that the more money the rich have, the less there is for the rest of us. The fact that that notion is demonstrably false does not matter to these people.

Liberalism depends upon making large enough numbers of people feel that the government, and only the government, is capable of fairly distributing the limited wealth that's out there.

Liberals don't want people to know this simnple truth...want to be self-sufficient for life? Get B's in high school, go to a state university and major in nursing or physical therapy. There. You are self sufficient for life, if you are willing to work hard. Guaranteed middle-class lifestyle that's within reach of 95% of Americans, IF YOU ARE WILLING to work a bit and be show some responsibility.

To the people who bash the successful/wealthy...rich people are not the problem. If you want to identify the problem, chances are you'll see it by looking in the mirror.

"What's the beef with someone being successful"


Liberalism depends upon making large enough numbers of people feel that the government, and only the government, is capable of fairly distributing the limited wealth that's out there.

.

My only disagreement here is that its called "socialism" , not "liberalism".

My only disagreement here is that its called "socialism" , not "liberalism". Saltheart, whatever you want to call it, it's a pillar of Obama's core beliefs.

You guys are funny...

The vast majority of Democrats and even most progressives are capitalists any way you cut it. Belief that slightly more regulation or limited constraints on a free market doesn't make you a socialist...not even close.

-spence

You guys are funny...

The vast majority of Democrats and even most progressives are capitalists any way you cut it. Belief that slightly more regulation or limited constraints on a free market doesn't make you a socialist...not even close.

-spence

Slightly more regulations and limited constraints you say...how about close to 40 percent of what my wife and I make a year. That's not so funny!

Slightly more 're
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Looking at economics globally...yes, slightly more.

-spence

You guys are funny...

The vast majority of Democrats and even most progressives are capitalists any way you cut it. Belief that slightly more regulation or limited constraints on a free market doesn't make you a socialist...not even close.

-spence

"Belief that slightly more regulation or limited constraints on a free market doesn't make you a socialist...not even close."

But believing that the feds are entitled to anywhere near half of what anyone earns in a year, does make one a socialist.

Believeing that the solution to our problems is taxation, makes one a socialist.

Believing these things, despite the fact that they have a failure ratre of 100%, makes one an idiot.

Limited restraints on the economy or free markets may not make you a socialist but an agenda that survives only because he promises the redistribution of wealth certainly does make you a socialist.


Now I can respect the ideals of a truly devoted socialist but a guy who promotes the redistribution of wealth only to pander to a segment of voters he must have above all other voting segments to get reelected is a phony politician.

I'd much prefer the guy who says we should all be able to make our own decisions about how we want to redistribute our wealth and not be forced to by government mandate (taxes). Romney says you should have a choice as to what you do with your money then gives millions and millions of his money to charity willingly. That's the kind of guy we want for President!

Limited restraints on the economy or free markets may not make you a socialist but an agenda that survives only because he promises the redistribution of wealth certainly does make you a socialist.
President Obama's remark about redistribution was in the context of ensuring everybody has a shot, but praised innovation and competition as being critical to the economy.

It's quite possible that without a redistributive system -- that all parties have implicitly endorsed for decades -- we wouldn't have a middle class.

Romney says you should have a choice as to what you do with your money then gives millions and millions of his money to charity willingly. That's the kind of guy we want for President!

I'd think if any of us had tens of millions of dollars we'd be just as charitable. It's easy to give away millions when you don't need any of it.

-spence

President Obama's remark about redistribution was in the context of ensuring everybody has a shot, but praised innovation and competition as being critical to the economy.

A shot at what? The vast amount of "redistribution" does not give everybody a shot at innovation and competition. Those are qualities that depend on individual effort and responsibility. Redistribution waters down those efforts at innovation and competition. Redistribution may give some more buying power to purchase products of innovation and competition, but when redistribution is merely a handout from a rich third party, it artificially raises the pool of money available to market those products at a higher price so the net gain may be very little, or, worse, the economy may inflate making the value of currency less thus forcing prices even higher and making third world foreign production more attractive thus shrinking the job rate in the U.S., thus requiring more handouts and continuing the downward spiral of currency and shrinking jobs and "shots" for everybocy. Artificial government redistribution does not ensure everybody a "shot," neither in context nor in reality. Organic redistribution through market forces creates the best shot.

It's quite possible that without a redistributive system -- that all parties have implicitly endorsed for decades -- we wouldn't have a middle class.

If the so-called "middle class" depends on a government redistributive system, then that system has an internal problem that will not only lead to a collapse of the "middle class," but of the whole system. A system that depends on government redistribution to survive would most likely have as a goal an end to class structure so that there would be no "middle class." The "trajectory" or "vector" of government redistribution, beyond a very basic safety net, would be a leveling effect. Ironically, the goal of the Founders did not explicitly consider the creation or maintenance of a class structure. Various "classes" might be a natural result of freedom and free market, but the original goal was individual freedom with the only garanteed equality being before the law.

I'd think if any of us had tens of millions of dollars we'd be just as charitable. It's easy to give away millions when you don't need any of it.

-spence

Then why is it necessary to progressively tax the rich at higher and higher amounts? Let them spend or give away their money as they choose, and the results will be far more varied, productive, and sustaining than forced government redistribution.

President Obama's remark about redistribution was in the context of ensuring everybody has a shot, but praised innovation and competition as being critical to the economy.

It's quite possible that without a redistributive system -- that all parties have implicitly endorsed for decades -- we wouldn't have a middle class.



I'd think if any of us had tens of millions of dollars we'd be just as charitable. It's easy to give away millions when you don't need any of it.

-spence

"President Obama's remark about redistribution was in the context of ensuring everybody has a shot"

Spence, we all want everybody to have a shot. Today, most people have a shot. There will never, ever be a day when no one slips through the cracks. And here is what you and Obama, for some reason, do not grasp. Those that don't have a viable shot, for the most part, do not have problems that can be solved by the feds spending money. What you also don't understand is this - if the feds continue to borrow $1 trillion from China every year, and we refuse to address entitlement reform, then you are guaranteeing that in future generations, fewer people will have a shot.

Try making that wrong.

Put down the Kool Aid for 5 damn seconds, and think rationally.

Come on. What's the beef with someone being successful...honestly. Aren't you tired of ripping successful people. This is the USA for cripes sake. We are flush with successful people. Land of opportunity remember. This BS about "he/she makes more money than me (or is more successful than me) and I want some of if" has to go. Wah, wah, wah...Boo frickity whoo! Try this... get a job, start at the bottom, work your ass off...voila! That's what my wife and I did. Married at 22. Moved into an apartment with my belongings in a shoebox and $500 from our wedding. I'm not rich by any means but we saved for a modest house...raised two great kids...and socked a little coin away for the golden years and maybe a new reel. No handouts from anyone...been working our butts off (and paying our share of income taxes) since we were 16. See it can be done! Success!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


X2 with three kids including working as a janitor and 2 jobs many years.
Working leads to contacts and hard workers are noticed and get better
offers.