cybercoma Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 for the critical undecided, he showed a side of his personality that is rarely seen in public: he is filled with himself. What a pile of crap. CNN had a running poll during the debate that showed how undecideds were feeling. At one point it practically flatlined for Romney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Oh and Obama did much better tonight. According to CNN, Romney won on the money side of things and Medicare. Obama won on foreign policy and the debate itself. Romney is in the harder space because he is advocating a more negative position on things than obama is. John king stated that Obama needed to win on economic matters, the deficit, and Medicare, and unfortunately he didn't. It's a weird poll, but that's how they scored it. Not sure how Romney won on the economy. His answers were ridiculous. "How are you going to make sure I have a job after university?" "I'll make sure you have a job." Yeah. Thanks, Willard. You'll make sure people have a job by making sure people have a job. What time does tautology club meet again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Oh Shady: http://www.cbsnews.c...-second-debate/ Ouch. Romney did so well in the economic portion that he fell by 6% immediately following the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 1) Romney has an aggressive plan to eliminate the deficit while Obama's track record on deficits speaks for itself. It speaks for itself because Romney won't tell anyone what it is. Do you people even listen to yourselves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 It speaks for itself because Romney won't tell anyone what it is. Do you people even listen to yourselves? It's more detailed than Obama's plan, which is a blank sheet of paper. Just like 4 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Even MSNBC's voter focus group sided with Romney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) What a pile of crap. CNN had a running poll during the debate that showed how undecideds were feeling. At one point it practically flatlined for Romney. You have to be fair. I watched the entire thing as well and Obama wasn't at the top the whole time either. I'm not sure I'd say that Obama decisively won but he certainly did better than he did two weeks ago. Yet again Obama didn't talk a lot about his own record aside from militarily and he didn't mention what he would do in the next four years.Romney did talk a lot about what he would do which got positive marks but he dipped every time he tried to attack Obama or interrupt the moderator, other than that he was on the positive the whole time. Romney has to keep attacking Obamas record because Obama cannot defend it. The economy isn't better off now then it was 4 years ago and no fancy worlds by Obama will change that. Edited October 17, 2012 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) You have to be fair. I watched the entire thing as well and Obama wasn't at the top the whole time either. Cite examples. I'm not sure I'd say that Obama decisively won but he certainly did better than he did two weeks ago. Definitely undeniable. Yet again Obama didn't talk a lot about his own record aside from militarily and he didn't mention what he would do in the next four years. That isn't at all true. He talked a great deal about what he's done on the economic and domestic policy front. Romney did talk a lot about what he would do which got positive marks If you consider vague generalities to be satisfactory, sure. but he dipped every time he tried to attack Obama or interrupt the moderator, other than that he was on the positive the whole time. ? Romney has to keep attacking Obamas record because Obama cannot defend it. The economy isn't better off now then it was 4 years ago and no fancy worlds by Obama will change that. Except that the above isn't true. I stopped supporting Romney because I can see that he's not the person to do what America needs right now. Obama certainly isn't perfect, but it's almost as if he's got his energy back, and even found new energy. What America needs right now, is to be inspired. Obama the candidate succeeded at that in 2008. Obama the POTUS largely failed at that in the years since. Obama the POTUS and Candidate in 2012 seems to have finally hit his stride. Obama actually has gotten a great deal accomplished. Though he failed to inspire through his presidency thus far, he didn't actually fail to deliver in so many areas. I didn't realize it until I started to hear it from him and Democrats. They have a record, that, while not perfect, has some very definitive bright spots; from providing healthcare to millions of Americans (though not the way I would prefer), to providing tax relief, to ending the massive slaughter that was the job market when Obama took office, to killing Osama bin Laden. The problem for Obama was the perception of inaction. Perception did not match reality. The perception problem was largely the fault of Obama himself, and of Democrats. I think it has a great deal to do with the personality of the POTUS. He is understated, overly accommodating, and not really boastful. In politics, you sometimes need to boast. I think Obama has begun to shed the perception problem. It started with the DNC and though there was the problem of the first debate, the VP debate and this debate show that the energy, the drive, the determination, and the inspiration are back. Romney is not energized, driven, determined, or inspired. He is an empty corporate suit, and that's why he's going to lose. Edited October 17, 2012 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pliny Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Well, no obvious big blunders from either side. Some deceit when Obama had to defend his record trotting out his talking points - I created 5 million jobs, I saved the auto industry...the unemployment rate is falling....Al queda is on the run...blah...blah...blah....everything is on the mend. I don't remember him saying anything about what he would do in the next four years. Can anyone off the top of their head remember any specific plans for the next four years? Didn't think so. Kind of just general stuff like...improve the infrastructure....invest in education....give everyone an Obamaphone... Did Romney's nose grow? He wasn't able to capitalize on the Libya question when he should have been. Obama may have mentioned the term "acts of terror" incidentally in his original speech but for the next two weeks the Benghazi incident was a spontaneous mob attack due to an anti-Muslim film and specifically denied to be a planned act of terrorism. What other lies did he tell? He will eliminate the deficit? Well, he might be able to in 8 years. Obama certainly won't - but said he would cut the deficit in half and doubled it so he can promise anything and no one but the hardcore saps will believe him, he has too many investments to make. Romney will invest in the military - probably not a lie but Obama has no credibility regarding the deficit. And for those who think Romney is lying about what he can accomplish...well...maybe he can maybe he can't. On energy...how soon we forget, Solyndra, the whole green agenda...a complete bust. Gas prices over $4/gal., drilling curtailed, pipelines stopped, coal mines shut down. But apparently, America is on the road to energy independence with Obama. It might just add a few extra trillion per year on the budget but what's an electronic entry on the ledger? I don't think anyone gained any points on that one. Maybe Romney a bit according to a few discussion groups, like the Luntz group in Vegas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pliny Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 I think Obama has begun to shed the perception problem. It started with the DNC and though there was the problem of the first debate, the VP debate and this debate show that the energy, the drive, the determination, and the inspiration are back. Romney is not energized, driven, determined, or inspired. He is an empty corporate suit, and that's why he's going to lose. When are you changing your name to bigL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Cite examples. It was a two hour debate. If you watched the whole thing like I did then you well know that the hidden audience meter wasn't positive for Obama the entire time.That isn't at all true. He talked a great deal about what he's done on the economic and domestic policy front. He talked about some mostly just saying that he would do better. If you consider vague generalities to be satisfactory, sure.be fair, Obama wasn't going into great detail either. A town hall isn't the place for that. Not enough time.? Romney's audience numbers went down each time he argued with the moderator or attacked Obama. As I said if you watched the whole debate you'd know this. Except that the above isn't true. I stopped supporting Romney because I can see that he's not the person to do what America needs right now. Obama certainly isn't perfect, but it's almost as if he's got his energy back, and even found new energy. What America needs right now, is to be inspired. Obama the candidate succeeded at that in 2008. Obama the POTUS largely failed at that in the years since. Obama the POTUS and Candidate in 2012 seems to have finally hit his stride. I thought in 2008 he was supposed to inspire the people? Obama had 4 years to inspire the people.Obama actually has gotten a great deal accomplished. Though he failed to inspire through his presidency thus far, he didn't actually fail to deliver in so many areas. I didn't realize it until I started to hear it from him and Democrats. They have a record, that, while not perfect, has some very definitive bright spots; from providing healthcare to millions of Americans (though not the way I would prefer), to providing tax relief, to ending the massive slaughter that was the job market when Obama took office, to killing Osama bin Laden. The problem for Obama was the perception of inaction. Perception did not match reality. The perception problem was largely the fault of Obama himself, and of Democrats. I think it has a great deal to do with the personality of the POTUS. He is understated, overly accommodating, and not really boastful. In politics, you sometimes need to boast. I think militarily so far he's done well. Cannot be denied but he's very weak on the economy because Americans aren't better off now than they were 4 years ago likely the same or worse off.I see it as anyone's game right now, it could go either way really. 45% is each sides base, it's the last 6% that's up for grabs. It'll be down to the wire to be sure unless one side makes a terrible blunder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 What a pile of crap. CNN had a running poll during the debate that showed how undecideds were feeling. At one point it practically flatlined for Romney. Every time he went after obama , it flatlined. IMO This was a set up, set up that obama could do no wrong, and the mod was pathetic and in obama scorner the whole time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Every time he went after obama , it flatlined. IMO This was a set up, set up that obama could do no wrong, and the mod was pathetic and in obama scorner the whole time. Ahh.....the evil sinister media bias conspiracy ! Maybe it was the same group behind all the conspiracies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 The empty suit Obama is now down 6 points to Romney, according to the new Gallup poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 The empty suit Obama is now down 6 points to Romney, according to the new Gallup poll. Tell us about the LV break down like you did before Shady. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Tell us about the LV break down like you did before Shady. Is not an issue with Gallup daily tracking. Your boy is in some trouble punked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Is not an issue with Gallup daily tracking. Your boy is in some trouble punked. I get it Shady. It is only an issue when Romney is losing. You are so dumb. You actually look at the internals of that daily tracking? Obama is winning every region accept the south which he is losing by 22 points. So when you look at the electoral collage Obama is running up the score. Romney can only win Alabama once even if he wins every vote in the state. Those are just the facts of the Gallup polls. Which is fine I am not worried in the least. I will not cite polls one day and then pretend they are wrong the next because unlike you and Romney I am not a flip flopping mess. Remind me again how many times did Obama call Libya an act of terror? How many times was Romney wrong on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) I was just reading about an interesting coinsidence. In all 3 debates the Democrat has gotten more time to talk at all 3 debates. Like I said, probably just a coinsidence. Edited October 17, 2012 by Shady Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 I was just reading about an interesting coinsidence. In all 3 debates the Democrat has gotten more time to talk at all 3 debates. Like I said, probably just a coinsidence. Maybe or maybe in all three debates Republicans were attacking Democratic policy and so they were given time to respond and clarify their policy? Maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Maybe because vague generalities don't take all that much time to say...even repeated over and over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Oh, sorry. MEDIA BIAS!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Maybe or maybe in all three debates Republicans were attacking Democratic policy and so they were given time to respond and clarify their policy? Maybe? Nope. Answers and responses are suppose to be within the agreed upon time limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Not having a horse in the race I just find it curious that they can't find a neutral moderator. Are they not trying, or is the liberal media bias so strong that they just can't find one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Maybe because vague generalities don't take all that much time to say...even repeated over and over. I agree. Vagueness usually doesn't take long. That's why I'm surprised about Obamas speaking time. He still hasn't outlined what he wants to do if given a second term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Nope. Answers and responses are suppose to be within the agreed upon time limit. SHOW ME THE RULES!!!!! I saw Candy try to explain last night to Romney so I know for a fact your side doesn't know them. I saw Romney try quite a few times to deviate from the rules and have to be brought back to subject. How about you show me the rules because in both debates ROMNEY was the one reminded of the rules. So you can stop with this BS already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.