• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2012 Debates

Halfcentaur said:
Since when was Romney such a centrist on so many issues? It seemed to be news to Obama as well.

I guess if you present one image of yourself for a year or more, you can always change it a few months before the election. It's not as if your supporters support you based on precise policy, they love you for tribalism. You're one of them.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I can't see how he didn't figure this out sooner. Move to the middle to give yourself a chance. It is funny how conservatives are now praising Mitt for policies that if said by Obama, regulations for example, they would decry. It just continues to prove that it isn't about what your candidate stands for, its about that your candidate stands for it. For example, Mitt's Mormonism would have been an issue if he wasn't their candidate, now the bar has been lowered that, although they believe his faith to be a cult, it is that he has "faith," and that this is enough.
 
logger said:
Yes thats it, Obama is going to win this on Mitts flip flops

Obama has nothing, its the economy stupid

Obama finally doesn't have the press kissing his ass, no teleprompter, just him :)

It will be a sad day when you libs wake up and see what you have in this light weight.
Click to expand...

Seriously, you look at the actually impressive job he has done saving the country from the brink of collapse and call him a lightweight?

You couldn't do even part of his job.
 
Rebel Yellow said:
Exactly, I can't see how he didn't figure this out sooner. Move to the middle to give yourself a chance. It is funny how conservatives are now praising Mitt for policies that if said by Obama, regulations for example, they would decry. It just continues to prove that it isn't about what your candidate stands for, its about that your candidate stands for it. For example, Mitt's Mormonism would have been an issue if he wasn't their candidate, now the bar has been lowered that, although they believe his faith to be a cult, it is that he has "faith," and that this is enough.
Click to expand...
Indeed. What gives me pause to think is that if this actually works, I kind of feel like we deserve what we get. But I'm still surprised the country turned on Bush after he was elected twice.

I kind of want to see if Romney has been pandering to the right wing all this time and really will govern as a centrist with slightly right wing policies, a lot like Obama. And I could see the economy taking around 5-6 years to finally recover, and the guy in office at the time of that recovery will take credit for it as if his recent policies turned everything around.
 
It's bizarre that these words went unspoken:

Nobody said:
47%

Swiss bank accounts (when discussing loopholes)

First you say one thing, then another, and now a few weeks before the election, something different. How are voters supposed to understand what your position actually is? (wrt healthcare)
Click to expand...
(Romney did use the number 47 on three occasions, unrelated to 47%.)
 
BenBurch said:
Seriously, you look at the actually impressive job he has done saving the country from the brink of collapse and call him a lightweight?

You couldn't do even part of his job.
Click to expand...

I can golf as offten! (but I always have trouble with the windmill):eek:
 
varwoche said:
It's bizarre that these words went unspoken:
Click to expand...

Simply not enough time to get at tangential issues. These are the things that ought come up in a town hall style debate where normal people ask questions more about fitness to be president. This was strictly a short debate on domestic policy.

I think when Romney mentioned his own accountant (who is apparently ignorant of the fact that companies can get tax deductions for moving jobs overseas), he opened himself up to remarks about his personal finances, but there wasn't time for getting into it, and that's probably a challenge that should be made by people other than the President.
 
Rebel Yellow said:
It is funny how conservatives are now praising Mitt for policies that if said by Obama, regulations for example, they would decry.
Click to expand...


I'm sure this made many conservatives very uncomfortable with Mitt. Also, some of them are already planning to vote against Obama rather than for Romney anyway.
 
Tony said:
Curious. What is your business Kookbreaker? I see in your sig that you can't advertise it anymore. Send me a link via PM, I will definitely buy something for my son when he is old enough. :)
Click to expand...

He has a most awesome store.

Edited by jhunter1163: 
Edited for Rule 6.


I recommend it!

Still saving for my 12" Dobsonian telescope...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tricky said:
LOL. Kookbreaker owns a successful business. But keep it up. This is just as accurate as anything else you've said.
Click to expand...

Tricky,
Meant to ask you your take on the oil subsidy argument. Romney claimed those subsidies benefited small companies best. Is this true? I can see the ethanol subsidy(if it still exists) could be said that it may benefit small farmers and benefit the construction pele who had to build the distribution centers, but I didn't know if that is was he was referring to.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Simply not enough time to get at tangential issues. These are the things that ought come up in a town hall style debate where normal people ask questions more about fitness to be president. This was strictly a short debate on domestic policy.
Click to expand...
The sound bites can be worked in without going down the tangents.
 
joobz said:
Tricky,
Meant to ask you your take on the oil subsidy argument. Romney claimed those subsidies benefited small companies best. Is this true? I can see the ethanol subsidy(if it still exists) could be said that it may benefit small farmers and benefit the construction pele who had to build the distribution centers, but I didn't know if that is was he was referring to.
Click to expand...

I think he may be referring to the oil depletion allowance. You do not get that if you also own a refinery, so generally only smaller companies will have that benefit.
 
Obama's spin on the debate:

"We had our first debate last night, and when I got onto the stage I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney," Obama told the crowd of roughly 12,300. "But it couldn't have been the real Mitt Romney."

The "real" Romney, he said, has traveled the country promoting tax cuts for the wealthy, education plans that would hurt teachers and was a pioneer of outsourcing jobs overseas. However, Wednesday night, Obama said Romney reversed those views because he "doesn't want to be held accountable for the real Mitt Romney" and "what he's been saying for the last year."
Click to expand...
 
joobz said:
Tricky,
Meant to ask you your take on the oil subsidy argument. Romney claimed those subsidies benefited small companies best. Is this true? I can see the ethanol subsidy(if it still exists) could be said that it may benefit small farmers and benefit the construction pele who had to build the distribution centers, but I didn't know if that is was he was referring to.
Click to expand...
No, that is a flat out lie. Big oil (including my company) is lobbying heavily to keep their subsidies, and I can assure you it is not because they are going to give it to mom-and-pop gas stations.

But then, he might try to weasel around saying "most" isn't necessarily "best".
 
"Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive."
--Neil deGrasse Tyson
​
 
NotJesus said:
Obama's spin on the debate:
Click to expand...
Here's the problem I have with waiting until the next day to call out Romney.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it's my perception people look at a politicians stump speeches as a candidate saying whatever they like knowing there is no one to challenge them. Who is going to watch a stump speech? The other party? Independents? Probably not.

The debates, however, have both candidates and a moderator present, which should provide a neutral, level playing field ensuring blatant untruths will be called out. Who is going to watch the debate? Supporters of both parties and independents.

Hopefully he'll take comments like those you quoted, to the next debate. I recognize the president needs to maintain his decorum and not get into a childish tit for tat fight. But he needs to challenge Romney on the facts.

Another performance like last night and I think he can lose the election.
 
Tricky said:
"Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive."
--Neil deGrasse Tyson
​
Click to expand...
Indeed, I was surprised he made such a big deal about it but then figured it was a strong nod directed to his base. I suspect he also felt challenging the moderator like that might make himself seem strong.
 
IMHO, last night's debate showed more of the candidates' natures than expected: the professor vs the used car salesman. Obama started off hesitantly (I think those pauses were him stopping to think) and got a little better towards the end. Romney started off strong but degenerated into word salad at the end - the dazzle them with BS approach. The moderator gave up after the first few rounds.

While it didn't change my opinion of Obama, it did of Romney: he's too comfortable saying whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear, with not regard for any core beliefs of his own (other than that he should be president) or what he's said in the past. There's no there there.
 
And when did he say he wasn't for doing this in the debate?



Romney's framed his tax plan as revenue neutral several months ago. It isn't a new revelation:



http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3695
Click to expand...

Romney during the debate: "So I reject the idea that I don’t believe in great teachers or more teachers"

I'm confused by your second quote. See it says:

"2) then cut individual income tax rates 20 percent below the Bush levels, reducing the Bush top rate of 35 percent to a new top rate of 28 percent;"

Romney during the debate: "But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high- income people. High-income people are doing just fine in this economy."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/u...ial-debate-in-denver.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom