Presidential Debates: Please remember that you should play nice! lol
- Thread starter uberdark
- Start date
- Status
Master Splinter
New member
Well,
<dons asbestos suit>
as a European I for myself would like another black president's term.
</>
<dons asbestos suit>
as a European I for myself would like another black president's term.
</>
Overall the debate was a tedious argument about details of their individual economic plans. Going in I expected Romney to be do poorly at the debate.
I was very surprised at Obama's poor performance. it reeked of lack of preparation. He didn't attack Romney on the 47% comment nor the lack of tax returns. He didn't make eye contact with his opponent and generally appeared disinterested and at times annoyed. I suspect no-one has spoken to him like that in 4 years.
Romney was prepared, made a good presentation, while his plan details are still sketchy he came out on top on overall performance and prepardness. In the past Romney suffered by letting his opponent define him and he would only react. This time he set the tone and held himself well.
I was very surprised at Obama's poor performance. it reeked of lack of preparation. He didn't attack Romney on the 47% comment nor the lack of tax returns. He didn't make eye contact with his opponent and generally appeared disinterested and at times annoyed. I suspect no-one has spoken to him like that in 4 years.
Romney was prepared, made a good presentation, while his plan details are still sketchy he came out on top on overall performance and prepardness. In the past Romney suffered by letting his opponent define him and he would only react. This time he set the tone and held himself well.
freakinacage
Well-known member
That, they are all lying bastards to a man/woman
Einion
New member
:good: Good précis.klepto said:
About not tackling the 47% comment and the tax returns, maybe he was trying not to seem petty enough to focus on 'em? But I agree it was probably a mistake not to at least bring them up, if not vilify the guy for it (what kind of lesson does it send if a politician does this etc.)
Einion
uglybug
New member
Well the 47% comment would have been a mistake to bring up. The tape was edited and Romney was not writing off 47% of the people. He stated that, a message of cutting taxes would be ineffective on those people. It would have allowed romney to bring up the 4 year old Obama tape which is stupid too and although talk shows want to make it an issue it is old and petty. I knew that Obama had issues speaking without the TelePrompTer but I did not imagine he would come off so bad with his body language too.
The biggest problem with obamas performance last night is that his weakness on stage may reflect his weakness when dealing with foreign leaders. We have heard from other leaders that Obama is inexperienced and they kind of laughed him off as weak. Putin was probably the loudest at mocking him which is why he wants Obama to win again.
The large number of republican primary debates with all of those challengers going after Romney, must really sharpened his skills. I didn't think Romney was going to be that strong, was Gingrich his debate coach? If Obama is caught flat footed and doodling on the desk in either of the next two debates it's over for him.
The biggest problem with obamas performance last night is that his weakness on stage may reflect his weakness when dealing with foreign leaders. We have heard from other leaders that Obama is inexperienced and they kind of laughed him off as weak. Putin was probably the loudest at mocking him which is why he wants Obama to win again.
The large number of republican primary debates with all of those challengers going after Romney, must really sharpened his skills. I didn't think Romney was going to be that strong, was Gingrich his debate coach? If Obama is caught flat footed and doodling on the desk in either of the next two debates it's over for him.
Milosh
New member
I'll bet there is a really fine reason Obama didn't attack the 47% or the Tax returns. One reason could be they didn't want Romney to be able to address them. This way they can do it in the attack adds without the chance for a rebuttal. I'm not saying I am either party but when Bill Maher tweets "I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter" it clearly shows how much ground Romney made up last night. I am actually looking forward to the coming debates.
As it stands, if Obama had mentioned it, it would have appeared petty and self-serving (remember he can't appear to take unreliable information at face value) and he gains way more by not mentioning it. That way, the lack of mention will be noted in the media, followed by another recitation of the video.
Actually he has had several run-ins with press and civilians along much terser lines than what he saw in the debates.
Edit: I believe that Obama's apparent aggravation and attitude was a direct result of his party attempting to cast him as a stronger president in response to the accusations, and apparent truths, that he was weak on policy. Preferring, as he did, to negotiate rather than force a ruling.
I disagree, I felt he allowed the president to attack him while he fended off the attacks by breaking "the covenant" of the political race. You see, both sides fudge the numbers a little in their favor. The "5 trillion in tax cuts" that Obama seemed intent of skewering Romney with is a fudge of the numbers for Romney's 20% tax cut*, which would cost the government almost 4.9 trillion in revenue. Obama tried to spin this by fudging the numbers of the cost and using that instead of the percentage, because a 5 trillion dollar loss in revenue for the government that is already trillions in debt sounds ridiculous, while a 20% tax cut sounds wanted even if they're nearly the same thing. Because Romney knew they were going to play a numbers game (Democrats played their hand already last month), he could sit back while Obama said "5 trillion dollar tax cut" and reliably, though somewhat churlishly, say that "There's no plans for 5 trillion dollars in tax cuts in my economic plan". He could, and probably would have, said the same thing if Obama had stated it was a 4.9 trillion dollar tax cut.
Either way it's an argument on how the situation is stated, and it's one that the Republican party is well versed at.
Remember when we started calling it "Obamacare"? The people to coin the phrase were the republican senators and congressmen in opposition to it. The name stuck. Now, despite the fact that the plan was actually based off of the one created and enforced by Romney in his state, the republicans can completely separate themselves from the entire thing.
Remember "Death Panels"? Another slogan tossed out by the republican party to describe what was named the "public option".
They've become exceptionally good at spin.
*something that would be devastating in it's own right to the country anyways
Look, I want to point something out about taxes. It's not the federal taxes that destroy companies and have them searching for outsourcing, it's state taxes. The Tea Party movement started in New York City as a libertarian movement, and as well it should have. If you travel around the city or any part of upper New York you'll find hundreds, even thousands of small and large businesses that were forced into foreclosure or relocation because of state business taxes within New York. This spawned the first "New Tea Party" demonstrations. These were picked up on by republican talking heads at radio stations around the nation and soon new "Tea Party" demonstrations popped up no matter what the state or local tax rates were. These new movements began to decry overtaxation by the federal government even though the tax rates were, and still are, the lowest in 50 years (which is financially bleeding the country dry). This is where the focus on taxes came in. It's a huge power grab by one party that's based on misinformation and even no-information.
Last edited:
Legacy Account
Active member
Romney is a neo-liberal, tax dodging scumbag who has openly fraternised with Zionists as a means to generate campaign money.
A vote for Romney is a vote for (a pointless) war with Iran and more grief in the Middle East. He is culturally and socially illiterate. The only language he knows is money and 'economics'.
If you're poor, just kill yourself now and save him the trouble of making it a long and painful death.
Not that Obama is much better....
A vote for Romney is a vote for (a pointless) war with Iran and more grief in the Middle East. He is culturally and socially illiterate. The only language he knows is money and 'economics'.
If you're poor, just kill yourself now and save him the trouble of making it a long and painful death.
Not that Obama is much better....
dolenmorgul
New member
In Belgium a debate usually goes as follows: The first politician tells a lie and than the second politician tells the first one that he is lying. Than he will tell his own lie but than immediately the first one will jump back in and will defend his lie and calling the other one on his lie. This will go on for quite a while and when it's all over the janitor will wake up the audience and we all can go home and still don't care.
But I guess that'll be the same the world over with the exception that we have to vote, it's the law :excruciating:. I guess it's the only way the politicians can ensure anyone but themselves turning up to vote or else they would all have 1 vote by the end of the election.
But I guess that'll be the same the world over with the exception that we have to vote, it's the law :excruciating:. I guess it's the only way the politicians can ensure anyone but themselves turning up to vote or else they would all have 1 vote by the end of the election.
I think that one thing that is interesting was not bringing up the 47% comment. This is quite a good idea in hindsight, because it gives Romney more time to goof it up. Of which he did today, by renouncing all of it and saying he was wrong. I really see this as a boon for Obama over the coming weeks. I believe by flip-flopping on it, Obama will be able to hit back at Romney and strike harder at the next debate. Many people have said Romney used weak tactics and Obama's own timid nature that night hurt him. But in the end, Romney won, hands down. A debate is not always won, due to the topics discussed , sometimes it is about how one carries him/herself.
airhead
Coffin Dodger / Keymaster
I think this is truth, worldwide.
You know how to tell when a politician is lying? His mouth is moving.
Sanctimonius
New member
Obama seemed unprepared and hesitant, but he put forward facts and plans. Romney was smooth and controlled and put forward numerous lies and dismissed attacks from Obama about thins he has been campaigning about for months. It was ruled as a victory for Romney, which tells me the vast majority of people aren't interested in what is actually planned by presidential nominees and instead want them to look cool.
Al in all Romney gained ground and Obama made a mistake, he needed to be better prepared. He has come out swinging since and noted that Romney was lying and the employment has improved - maybe he didn't want to call him out too much as it can make you look petulant. We'll see how well the next two debates go, but it should be interesting. Expect a more combative Obama trying some zingers and Romney to try more soundbites.
Al in all Romney gained ground and Obama made a mistake, he needed to be better prepared. He has come out swinging since and noted that Romney was lying and the employment has improved - maybe he didn't want to call him out too much as it can make you look petulant. We'll see how well the next two debates go, but it should be interesting. Expect a more combative Obama trying some zingers and Romney to try more soundbites.
Over here in the UK, Obama comes across as the "Jimmy Stewart" style character in politics quiet, soft spoken and a bit shy but if driven to it theres a toughness at his core.
Romney, well from what I've picked up, he's more about limiting things than fixing things.
Romney, well from what I've picked up, he's more about limiting things than fixing things.
Shawn R. L.
New member
Debates............wish they were something where I could learn about where each candidate stands. I just can't tolerate watching two perfectly couffed people twist language into a pretzel - lie about each other and not give truthful or concrete answers to the questions (goes both ways) - and then to condecend to the audience that we can't see that they are heavily putting spin on EVERYTHING heavily. "A government of the people, by the people and for the people"...........not any more. Come's off to me as a very peculiar sort of surreal sideshow that is going to bestow on someone enormous responsibility.......I don't trust them. I REALLY wish I could.
In conjunction with the initial question, for years it's puzzled/amazed me at the ENORMOUS energy and and HUGE amounts of money these guy's put out, all to get a job. They'll pursue it doggedly for years. Makes me suspicous. I find it hard to believe that in their hearts they're doing it all to serve the public and our country.
In conjunction with the initial question, for years it's puzzled/amazed me at the ENORMOUS energy and and HUGE amounts of money these guy's put out, all to get a job. They'll pursue it doggedly for years. Makes me suspicous. I find it hard to believe that in their hearts they're doing it all to serve the public and our country.
Bloodhowl
Active member
Romney's a liar. He wants to lower taxes on the rich. He will give you cancer after shutting down your place of employment at the same time Ryan throws your grandma off a cliff. And he doesn't hug his garbage man.
Obama doctored the unemployment numbers. The altitude in Denver made him a crappy debater. He is not a US Citizen and only got into college because of affirmative action. He has covered up the facts about Libya and has more important TV interviews to do than meet with world leaders and field questions from the press, then afterwards go vacationing on the taxpayers dime.
I'm sick of all of it. We need to put them both into the UFC octagon and have them fight bare hands only, to the death. Winner gets to be president.
Obama doctored the unemployment numbers. The altitude in Denver made him a crappy debater. He is not a US Citizen and only got into college because of affirmative action. He has covered up the facts about Libya and has more important TV interviews to do than meet with world leaders and field questions from the press, then afterwards go vacationing on the taxpayers dime.
I'm sick of all of it. We need to put them both into the UFC octagon and have them fight bare hands only, to the death. Winner gets to be president.
Last edited:
- Status
