Debate #1
 

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?

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


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

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.

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

me too, I wish it went another hr.

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.

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.

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:

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…

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

-spence