Presidential Debate Thread - Obama vs. Romney (1 Viewer)

[Slapdash]

People are crazy if they think Romney will not be fiscally conservative.

Comparisons to GW are unwarranted.

What Romney says, and what he will actually do will be two different things.

The guy is cut from fiscal conservative cloth, top strategy firm exect, Ivy league MBA etc. No way will he not be fiscally conservative.

I personally love the idea of cutting out the loopholes and deductions, I want more detail, but I love the idea...these are how Warren Buffet gets away with paying 8% effective rate(or whatever it is).

That last president we had that was an executive and held an Ivy League MBA really reigned in the deficit.

 

[Politician Spock]

He's talking about cutting the tax rate on earned income. The top 1% makes very little of their overall income in earned income. They make the vast majority of their income on capital gains income. They get tax deductions regardless of whether their tax liability is from earned income or capital gains income. Getting rid of tax deductions is far more painfui for them than their tax rate on their earned income.

"We are going to cut taxes on everyone by 20 percent including the top 1 percent." Do they have you spin everything he says professionally or is this just a hobby?

Get your head out of the sand. The tax rate on earned income has never hurt the 1%. The higher it is the more it keeps the 99% out of the 1%. It keeps 1% in a class that the working class can never work their way in to. The top 1% care about the capital gains rate, their deductions, and their loopholes. The only people that care what the 1% pay on earned income are the 99%. The 1% couldn't care less what they pay on their earned income.

Ok so by your spin we should see him calling for raising capital gains taxes right? But we haven't. We have seen him say he will do away with Estate taxes. Who does that cut taxes for? Not the average American who is never exposed to the estate tax but it will sure help out the wealthy. So basically what I see here is you filling in the blanks with your own preconceived ideas, not going by anything the campaign has said. He hasn't said he would raise the capital gains tax or do anything about carried interest.The man called for reducing all marginal rates 20%. I would suggest it is you that needs to remove their head from somewhere and I am not talking the sand.

He's calling for congress to eliminate the deductions and loopholes that THEY created. Our issue can't be fixed by the president. Our problem is congress. Obama promising that he is the solution is BS, but the average voter eats that kind of stuff up like candy. Romney's doing the right thing here and putting the burden of fixing the problem back where it started... on congress. I don't believe Romney's promises anymore than I believe Obama's promises. But one of them is promising that the office of the president can implement "CHANGE", and that's not true when it comes to systemic promblems. Congress needs to change the system. The president can only change how he executes the system.

 

[LHUCKS]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

I think he took to heart some of the criticisms and was self aware enough to make some changes on his delivery, tone and speech.

I also think his track record and obvious signs of improvement make it glaringly obvious that he's a hard worker.

I like me some Romney.

 

[LHUCKS]

People are crazy if they think Romney will not be fiscally conservative.

Comparisons to GW are unwarranted.

What Romney says, and what he will actually do will be two different things.

The guy is cut from fiscal conservative cloth, top strategy firm exect, Ivy league MBA etc. No way will he not be fiscally conservative.

I personally love the idea of cutting out the loopholes and deductions, I want more detail, but I love the idea...these are how Warren Buffet gets away with paying 8% effective rate(or whatever it is).

That last president we had that was an executive and held an Ivy League MBA really reigned in the deficit.

Bush never ran a top strategy firm, didn't take over a failing olympic committee...and most importantly, Bush is an idiot.The comparisons to GW are unwarranted and lazy IMHO.

 

[adonis]

Obama, remember your ABC's.AlwaysBeClosingYou had an opportunity here to nail Romney on issues, and you let him walk...not only walk, but walk away with a perceived victory.We realize it's a marathon, not a sprint, but when you can cut the Achilles heel off your opponent near the starting line, why not do it?

Because it doesn't work if the person you're doing it to just claims that it isn't true.

Sure it does.

 

[jonessed]

Didn't watch. Can I get a fairly non partisan breakdown on why Mitt 'won'?

Mitt seemed thoroughly more prepared and that is all it really came down to.

It's almost like Obama has another full-time job.

It was a homefield advantage for Romney, no question.

The guy is a fundraising machine. Do you really think that he couldn't find the time to drop a few fundraisers and maybe practice a bit? Hell, he couldn't even be bothered by a terrorist attack that killed an ambassador. He was too busy flying to Vegas to raise more money.His campaign staff underestimated Romney and he got hosed. It had nothing to do with a lack of time to prepare.

 

[adonis]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

Romney loves the country so much more than his self that his self is willing to say or do anything, even if it is not mathematically possible, in order to gain the presidency. His motto is: "For the love of God, just tell me what I need to say to win the presidency!"He loves this country so much that he's willing to say or do anything to become president. That, my friends, is the very definition of patriotism.

 

[LHUCKS]

The genius behind cutting out the tax loopholes and deductions shouldn't go unnoticed...my old Tax VP constantly hammered this when we talked politics. "It's such an easy fix". He basically blamed Clinton and Bush for not doing more in this area, but mentioned it started with Reagan.

Govt. is just too slow to react to major reforms.

Even the wealthy are in agreement on this one.

If I were Obama, I would get on this train...not fight it.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Obama, remember your ABC's.AlwaysBeClosingYou had an opportunity here to nail Romney on issues, and you let him walk...not only walk, but walk away with a perceived victory.We realize it's a marathon, not a sprint, but when you can cut the Achilles heel off your opponent near the starting line, why not do it?

Because it doesn't work if the person you're doing it to just claims that it isn't true.

Sure it does.

You have to be willing to go on the attack to make it stick though, which clearly wasn't the game plan for last night.

 

[LHUCKS]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

Romney loves the country so much more than his self that his self is willing to say or do anything, even if it is not mathematically possible, in order to gain the presidency. His motto is: "For the love of God, just tell me what I need to say to win the presidency!"He loves this country so much that he's willing to say or do anything to become president. That, my friends, is the very definition of patriotism.

That's a partisan way of looking at it IMHO.Obama blatantly lied about his healthcare intentions in 2007 but for some reason he gets a free pass from the media.What comes around goes around.

 

[NYG Endzone]

People are crazy if they think Romney will not be fiscally conservative.

Comparisons to GW are unwarranted.

What Romney says, and what he will actually do will be two different things.

The guy is cut from fiscal conservative cloth, top strategy firm exect, Ivy league MBA etc. No way will he not be fiscally conservative.

I personally love the idea of cutting out the loopholes and deductions, I want more detail, but I love the idea...these are how Warren Buffet gets away with paying 8% effective rate(or whatever it is).

That last president we had that was an executive and held an Ivy League MBA really reigned in the deficit.

Can this "blame the previous guy" end already? Clinton masterminded the housing bubble and was out of office at the peak of the dot com bubble. Bush was handed the dot com bubble and started long/expensive unwarranted wars. Obama was perfect. We get it.

 

[The Commish]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

Yes, he has, but it can't if he intends on not raising the tax liability on the middle and lower classes. That's the rub. The math doesn't add up and it's been brought up a million times here in the various FFA threads. It's a bold faced lie, much like Obama's lies around healthcare.

Those that suggest the math does not add up are ignoring an important variable. How can we reduce the deficit?1) decrease spending

2) increase taxes

3) grow the economy

You could theoretically decrease taxes AND increase spending, without adding to the deficit, if government policy resulted in a more robust economy. The math can work. Whether Romney's policies would foster economic growth is a separate question.

At best you'd have 10 people paying $1000 in taxes instead of 5 people paying $750 in taxes. That's still a $250 increase in burden to the middle class as a group, which he's claimed over and over he won't do. The math doesn't work for what he's said.

 

[spreagle]

Apparently my 12 year olds political juices are just starting to flow, he really wanted to watch the debate so I reluctantly clicked over while Romney was pounding Obama, in about 2 seconds he said "this isn't debating this is bullying" and that was the end of his interest in politics.

 

[Slapdash]

People are crazy if they think Romney will not be fiscally conservative.

Comparisons to GW are unwarranted.

What Romney says, and what he will actually do will be two different things.

The guy is cut from fiscal conservative cloth, top strategy firm exect, Ivy league MBA etc. No way will he not be fiscally conservative.

I personally love the idea of cutting out the loopholes and deductions, I want more detail, but I love the idea...these are how Warren Buffet gets away with paying 8% effective rate(or whatever it is).

That last president we had that was an executive and held an Ivy League MBA really reigned in the deficit.

Bush never ran a top strategy firm, didn't take over a failing olympic committee...and most importantly, Bush is an idiot.The comparisons to GW are unwarranted and lazy IMHO.

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing. They also share similarities in what "cloth" they are cut from and where they went to school, which were two of the reasons you said his policies didn't matter.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

I find it odd that Obama entered the stage with a figurative gun loaded with all sorts of ammunition that could be used on domestic issues:

47% comments

Bain talking points

Off-shore accounts

Tax Returns

Flip-flopping on record

etc.

Yet he left the stage with virtually few bullets fired. Gotta leave it all out there man...leave it all on the field.

When Romney came out and threw everything he said in the last 18 months in the trash they were caught flat footed. Plus this president just isn't great in debates. But you can see today how it's going to play out. The call outs have already started and they are going to build. Romney left himself vulnerable in many ways and it is going to get exploited.

"Release the Biden."Amirite?

 

[adonis]

Obama, remember your ABC's.AlwaysBeClosingYou had an opportunity here to nail Romney on issues, and you let him walk...not only walk, but walk away with a perceived victory.We realize it's a marathon, not a sprint, but when you can cut the Achilles heel off your opponent near the starting line, why not do it?

Because it doesn't work if the person you're doing it to just claims that it isn't true.

Sure it does.

You have to be willing to go on the attack to make it stick though, which clearly wasn't the game plan for last night.

The Obama team isn't new to politics. It's widely considered to be one of the top campaign teams in recently political history.Anyone with common sense knows that debates are not won by the person who has the best substance, they're won with style. Obama's team knew this, decided not to go the style route for some reason, and is perceived to have lost.Is it part of their long-term gameplan? I'd assume so somehow, but I can't imagine a scenario where they'd actually give up a win at a debate, for a longer term goal, when so much low hanging fruit was out there, ripe for the taking.

 

[LHUCKS]

He's promising castles in the sky and candy gumdrop rain. Tax cuts for everyone, some closing of loopholes, and increased military spending while staying revenue neutral.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. He will be hammered on this and I'll think you'll see more details in the coming weeks.This was the first time he laid out the plan, give him some time to explain it....last night was not the forum for the detail.Remember, the average American can't even define "deduction" .

 

[LHUCKS]

I find it odd that Obama entered the stage with a figurative gun loaded with all sorts of ammunition that could be used on domestic issues:

47% comments

Bain talking points

Off-shore accounts

Tax Returns

Flip-flopping on record

etc.

Yet he left the stage with virtually few bullets fired. Gotta leave it all out there man...leave it all on the field.

When Romney came out and threw everything he said in the last 18 months in the trash they were caught flat footed. Plus this president just isn't great in debates. But you can see today how it's going to play out. The call outs have already started and they are going to build. Romney left himself vulnerable in many ways and it is going to get exploited.

"Release the Biden."Amirite?

God I can't wait for Ryan to take a dump on Biden...it has the potential to be the highlight of this election cycle.

 

[BassNBrew]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

Romney loves the country so much more than his self that his self is willing to say or do anything, even if it is not mathematically possible, in order to gain the presidency. His motto is: "For the love of God, just tell me what I need to say to win the presidency!"He loves this country so much that he's willing to say or do anything to become president. That, my friends, is the very definition of patriotism.

Pretty much following the playbook Obama executed flawlessly in 2008.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

We have a button on our tv that lets you see the words people are saying if you turn the volume down or have no sound. My wife and I are debating an idea where i will turn the tv away from her and read to her what candidates romney and obama are saying but not telling her who is saying them. I think it is easy to get wrapped up in how people look when they say something or how they say it rather then just their words and the ideas behind them. Then my wife will keep score on which answers she thinks are best and will have a totally unbiased scorecard at the end of the night. Obviously i cannot tip her off as to who is answering the questions so I will have to skip the parts when they mention the names. I'm trying to practice right now but can't find a show that would be similar to the debate. It's gonna be a fun night and I picked up some chicken and dumplings to heat up later.

Well we had to pause a bunch of times because it was hard to read out loud at the pace they were speaking but this was a big success i think. I raised my right arm when obama talked and left arm when romney did. When they said something she liked she gave that column a point. She had romney winning 79-62. she said she didnt know who was saying what except when it was obvious and she really tried to keep as neutral as possible. she said i did a great job reading and i am pooped! My wife actually has some experience in economics (home economics)so this was right up her alley. She thought the best thing romney said was about wanting to cut spending but grow the economy and not raise taxes. She liked when obama said education was important. Cant wait until the next one but i think she's going to try to be the reader but that will probably not go to well. lol. we'll see, seeya guys chicken &dumps time!

Love this shtick.

Has to be Nips.

 

[LHUCKS]

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing.

Disagree until we know more details.

 

[NCCommish]

I find it odd that Obama entered the stage with a figurative gun loaded with all sorts of ammunition that could be used on domestic issues:

47% comments

Bain talking points

Off-shore accounts

Tax Returns

Flip-flopping on record

etc.

Yet he left the stage with virtually few bullets fired. Gotta leave it all out there man...leave it all on the field.

When Romney came out and threw everything he said in the last 18 months in the trash they were caught flat footed. Plus this president just isn't great in debates. But you can see today how it's going to play out. The call outs have already started and they are going to build. Romney left himself vulnerable in many ways and it is going to get exploited.

"Release the Biden."Amirite?

I love me some Joe but my guess is the commercials are about ready and that's how they'll do their fighting.

 

[BassNBrew]

The genius behind cutting out the tax loopholes and deductions shouldn't go unnoticed...my old Tax VP constantly hammered this when we talked politics. "It's such an easy fix". He basically blamed Clinton and Bush for not doing more in this area, but mentioned it started with Reagan.Govt. is just too slow to react to major reforms.Even the wealthy are in agreement on this one.

Tax loopholes and deductions exploded under the Clinton presidency because Clinton wanted to do progressive things and it was more palatable for the Republican congress to do it via tax deductions/credits than it was creating a social program. And that's fine. But that's the story. Undoing them isn't complicated. It doesn't take any genius level to figure out how to cut them. The complexity is in replacing them. Because they do generally represent something that the government is trying to incentivize people to do. And despite the conservative carping lately, when pressed against the wall, they'd admit that a market mechanic is better than legislation dictates. So fine. You blow up the tax code. You take out all the deductions. Now you have to handle these things via other means assuming you still want to create incentives for them to be done.Cutting loopholes/deduction is such a shallow answer. Of course it's easy. But doing it another way is even more of a cluster####.

Good point. For example, cut the depreciation deduction for rental property (which doesn't flow through to high incomers) and you damage the housing market.

 

[The Commish]

Seems pretty obvious to me that not increasing the burden on the middle class refers to the burden per person/family. Increasing the size of the middle class, and thereby increasing the total tax revenue from the middle class does not equate to increasing the burden on the middle class.To argue otherwise is to suggest that increasing unemployment in the middle class is lessening the burden on the middle class.

It doesn't to me If that's what he means, then say that. If he says it that way then folks will realize he's counting on job growth in the middle class to offset taxes being placed on their "class" of people and if that growth doesn't happen, they are shouldering more of the bill. In other words, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

 

[NCCommish]

He's promising castles in the sky and candy gumdrop rain. Tax cuts for everyone, some closing of loopholes, and increased military spending while staying revenue neutral.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. He will be hammered on this and I'll think you'll see more details in the coming weeks.This was the first time he laid out the plan, give him some time to explain it....last night was not the forum for the detail.Remember, the average American can't even define "deduction" .

He has been campaigning for years and this was his first chance to get specific. Really? This is your best excuse?

 

[LHUCKS]

Tax loopholes and deductions exploded under the Clinton presidency because Clinton wanted to do progressive things and it was more palatable for the Republican congress to do it via tax deductions/credits than it was creating a social program. And that's fine. But that's the story. Undoing them isn't complicated. It doesn't take any genius level to figure out how to cut them. The complexity is in replacing them. Because they do generally represent something that the government is trying to incentivize people to do. And despite the conservative carping lately, when pressed against the wall, they'd admit that a market mechanic is better than legislation dictates. So fine. You blow up the tax code. You take out all the deductions. Now you have to handle these things via other means assuming you still want to create incentives for them to be done.Cutting loopholes/deduction is such a shallow answer. Of course it's easy. But doing it another way is even more of a cluster####.

I don't disagree, which is why I would like to see details. I don't think it's as difficult as you suggestin in many instances.The offshore tax havens are an easy target for starters.

 

[Slapdash]

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing.

Disagree until we know more details.

Here is a hint: those details are never coming.

 

[Jackstraw]

Next debate is the town hall debate. Think Mitt might have some questions to answer on Bain, 47%, Obamacare repeal, 13% tax rate then? Has to look the rabble in the eyes.

 

[LHUCKS]

He's promising castles in the sky and candy gumdrop rain. Tax cuts for everyone, some closing of loopholes, and increased military spending while staying revenue neutral.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. He will be hammered on this and I'll think you'll see more details in the coming weeks.This was the first time he laid out the plan, give him some time to explain it....last night was not the forum for the detail.Remember, the average American can't even define "deduction" .

He has been campaigning for years and this was his first chance to get specific. Really? This is your best excuse?

Ummm, that's how politics work buddy. Why would you give the opponent your gameplan six months in advance.Classic political strategy down?

 

[LHUCKS]

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing.

Disagree until we know more details.

Here is a hint: those details are never coming.

Great, then he'll be on par with Obama...and all will be balanced again. :theforce:

 

[LHUCKS]

Next debate is the town hall debate. Think Mitt might have some questions to answer on Bain, 47%, Obamacare repeal, 13% tax rate then? Has to look the rabble in the eyes.

I'm looking forward to the foreign policy debate, particularly with regards to Iran. That's a huge issue and I tend to side with liberals on the topic of the Middle East.

 

[Slapdash]

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing.

Disagree until we know more details.

Here is a hint: those details are never coming.

Great, then he'll be on par with Obama...and all will be balanced again. :theforce:

Cutting taxes and increasing military spending without paying for it seems on par with some other president to me...

 

[The Commish]

He's promising castles in the sky and candy gumdrop rain. Tax cuts for everyone, some closing of loopholes, and increased military spending while staying revenue neutral.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. He will be hammered on this and I'll think you'll see more details in the coming weeks.This was the first time he laid out the plan, give him some time to explain it....last night was not the forum for the detail.Remember, the average American can't even define "deduction" .

This "plan" has been out for 6-8 weeks now and every time he's been asked for details he's given the "That's between me and Congress to figure out" response. Don't hold your breath for specifics.

 

[hutchins929]

What's funny about this is the DNC new it was coming... Maybe not to this extent (Obama getting his ### handed to him). But they, the DNC was saying for a few days before the election that Obama would probably lose.

 

[adonis]

"Just imagine everything you want your president to do, and I'll do that. Next, imagine everything you don't want your president to do, and I won't do those things either. Finally, imagine all the things about the current president you don't like, and I will do them right. Vote for me!" - said, every politician.

The problem is that most politicians don't have so many competing factions within their party that want things that are mutually exclusive.

Obama can say the above and have an internally consistent framework for election and government. Romney cannot.

 

[LHUCKS]

The genius behind cutting out the tax loopholes and deductions shouldn't go unnoticed...my old Tax VP constantly hammered this when we talked politics. "It's such an easy fix". He basically blamed Clinton and Bush for not doing more in this area, but mentioned it started with Reagan.Govt. is just too slow to react to major reforms.Even the wealthy are in agreement on this one.

Tax loopholes and deductions exploded under the Clinton presidency because Clinton wanted to do progressive things and it was more palatable for the Republican congress to do it via tax deductions/credits than it was creating a social program. And that's fine. But that's the story. Undoing them isn't complicated. It doesn't take any genius level to figure out how to cut them. The complexity is in replacing them. Because they do generally represent something that the government is trying to incentivize people to do. And despite the conservative carping lately, when pressed against the wall, they'd admit that a market mechanic is better than legislation dictates. So fine. You blow up the tax code. You take out all the deductions. Now you have to handle these things via other means assuming you still want to create incentives for them to be done.Cutting loopholes/deduction is such a shallow answer. Of course it's easy. But doing it another way is even more of a cluster####.

Good point. For example, cut the depreciation deduction for rental property (which doesn't flow through to high incomers) and you damage the housing market.

that's the trickiest one...and that is more impactful for the middle class...I don't think you're going to see it go away.The focus, as stated, was tax loopholes and deductions that allow the wealthiest to avoide the effective tax rates that the middle class have to pay.

 

[The Commish]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

Romney loves the country so much more than his self that his self is willing to say or do anything, even if it is not mathematically possible, in order to gain the presidency. His motto is: "For the love of God, just tell me what I need to say to win the presidency!"He loves this country so much that he's willing to say or do anything to become president. That, my friends, is the very definition of patriotism.

Pretty much following the playbook Obama executed flawlessly in 2008.

This exact same thought came to mind several times last night with some of the "plans" he has.

 

[adonis]

Perhaps the m.o. here is that no one likes an odds-on favorite. Obama was turning into that going into this debate, and had he won, he would've been the overwhelming favorite.

Perhaps by sandbagging this debate, he can come out guns blazing after Romney regains some of his shine, and really knock him down.

The people like their political narratives to have plot twists, and perhaps team-Obama is just delivering the drama the people want. Perhaps he wants people to think the outcome is in doubt and they need to go to the polls to ensure it. Perhaps he wants the narrative to be "Romneys surprise comeback" for a week or two, only to be battered and bashed after 2 weeks to ride the victory to the finish line and the election.

Or perhaps I'm just imagining rationale that never existed in order to make up for a poor performance by Obama and poor strategy by his team...nah.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

They are certainly warranted by the policy he is proposing.

Disagree until we know more details.

Here is a hint: those details are never coming.

Great, then he'll be on par with Obama...and all will be balanced again. :theforce:

The only people who do not know Obama's policies are the same idiots saying his policies are destroying the country.Romney will not lay out his plans in detail because if he gets specific he knows he will be attacked for it - well that and he is a gutless flip-flopper with no philosophical compass to guide himself.

 

[Joe T]

What continues to baffle me is the insistence that tax cuts drive growth as if this is an economic law. If you plot the marginal income tax rates versus GDP growth, they show no correlation. It's a nice idea, though.

what is the r-squared?

I don't have the raw data, but here is one plot: My link

Also, one more thing, the plot shows that most of the time taxes were cut GDP growth spikes. So thanks for posting it.

You might want to recheck that plot.

what is the r-squared?

 

[cstu]

I think the most important attribute of last night's debate is that it was clear that Romney loved this country, and not so much his self.

I think he took to heart some of the criticisms and was self aware enough to make some changes on his delivery, tone and speech.

I also think his track record and obvious signs of improvement make it glaringly obvious that he's a hard worker.

I like me some Romney.

Thanks for convincing me I'm on the right side.

 

[Plorfu]

Apparently my 12 year olds political juices are just starting to flow, he really wanted to watch the debate so I reluctantly clicked over while Romney was pounding Obama, in about 2 seconds he said "this isn't debating this is bullying" and that was the end of his interest in politics.

I believe this really happened.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

When Romney said he'd "better get a new accountant" regarding a tax benefit to sending jobs overseas, Obama had the perfect opportunity to bring up Bain and its holdings in china! It could have been a great moment. But he didn't. Why not? I don't get the strategy.

 

[adonis]

what is the r-squared?

Why would you want to square an r. If you did that, it'd be an o. Respect the individuality of the alphabet.

 

[Rich Conway]

I didn't watch the debate, haven't read the thread.Can I assume the righty nutjobs here think Romney just won the election, and the left thinks Obama won the debate?Let me know how far off the mark I am here. TIA.

Maybe 1/3 of the people on the left here think Obama won the debate. The other 2/3s are right.Seem about on the mark for the right nutjob reaction. The right centrists are taking a more measured approach although Obama's odds of winning the election did take about a 5-8% hit on the different election markets.

Which right wing nutjobs are saying Romney just won the election with his debate performance?

tommyboy for one.

I disagree. tommyboy was pretty clear that Romney was far ahead in the election prior to the debate.

 

[Joe T]

It is pretty telling that 99% of the discussion here is around things Romney said.

 

[adonis]

It is pretty telling that 99% of the discussion here is around things Romney said.

It's pretty telling that 99% of the things Romney said were factually inaccurate or only moderately true.

 

[Zegras11]

My favorite part so far is Romney criticizing Obama for not being more bipartisan in working with Republicans in congress. With all due respect, when Romney was in Mass did he have Democrats in the state legislature who point blank stately publicly that there sole objective was to block the him on everything and make sure he couldn't ever claim any success?

Wow gr8 analysis. I understand you POV now

LOL... I wonder if Romney told them, "elections have consequences" right after he got elected.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Perhaps the m.o. here is that no one likes an odds-on favorite. Obama was turning into that going into this debate, and had he won, he would've been the overwhelming favorite.Perhaps by sandbagging this debate, he can come out guns blazing after Romney regains some of his shine, and really knock him down.The people like their political narratives to have plot twists, and perhaps team-Obama is just delivering the drama the people want. Perhaps he wants people to think the outcome is in doubt and they need to go to the polls to ensure it. Perhaps he wants the narrative to be "Romneys surprise comeback" for a week or two, only to be battered and bashed after 2 weeks to ride the victory to the finish line and the election.Or perhaps I'm just imagining rationale that never existed in order to make up for a poor performance by Obama and poor strategy by his team...nah.

That was not the real Obama last night, that was the Clint Eastwood Obama. He just finally became visible to us all.

 

[adonis]

Perhaps the m.o. here is that no one likes an odds-on favorite. Obama was turning into that going into this debate, and had he won, he would've been the overwhelming favorite.Perhaps by sandbagging this debate, he can come out guns blazing after Romney regains some of his shine, and really knock him down.The people like their political narratives to have plot twists, and perhaps team-Obama is just delivering the drama the people want. Perhaps he wants people to think the outcome is in doubt and they need to go to the polls to ensure it. Perhaps he wants the narrative to be "Romneys surprise comeback" for a week or two, only to be battered and bashed after 2 weeks to ride the victory to the finish line and the election.Or perhaps I'm just imagining rationale that never existed in order to make up for a poor performance by Obama and poor strategy by his team...nah.

That was not the real Obama last night, that was the Clint Eastwood Obama. He just finally became visible to us all.

Maybe I turned it off before the Scooby-doo ending and the person under the costume was revealed.