What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

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

bigbottom

I put on my robe and wizard hat
5 things to watch in tonight's debate

Denver (CNN) -- President Barack Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney face off on Wednesday in the first of three presidential debates.

While Obama holds a lead in several key battleground states, the race nationally has been locked in a dead heat for months. The debate offers an opportunity for Obama or Romney to gain some momentum and break the logjam.

Here are five things to watch for on Wednesday:

1. Who's presidential?

The first and most important test for the president and Romney in this opening debate is to act like they belong in the job.

We've heard a lot of bickering on the campaign trail, and there's plenty of talk that zingers could decide who wins or loses the showdown in Denver. But to most Americans, this debate is really about which candidate has the composure and stature to serve in the Oval Office.

"If either the president or Romney can't pass this test, the rest really don't matter. Big ideas from a small person won't make you president of the United States," says Republican strategist and CNN contributor Alex Castellanos. "When the moment comes, this is like proposing to your wife. This is a big moment."

Thanks to already serving nearly four years in the White House, Obama starts with the advantage, but he can't afford to play it safe at the debate.

"Playing it safe allows Romney to dominate the agenda and put Obama on defense. Either you're on offense or defense, and defense loses," adds Castellanos, who was a senior adviser to Romney in 2008 election.

By comparison, Romney has to do double duty: Stay on offense but also look presidential.

What does Obama have to do?

"Keep cool -- which comes naturally to him," says Democratic strategist and CNN contributor Paul Begala. "Make it about the middle class, not himself or Romney."

2. Can Romney get Libya into the discussion?

The first debate is officially devoted to domestic policy.

The listed topics, according to the Commission on Presidential Debates, are the economy, health care, the role of government and governing -- whatever that means.

Matters of national security and foreign policy are being left to later debates, but Romney may not be content to wait that long with the drip-drip-drip of conflicting news continuing to emerge from Libya, where four Americans -- including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens -- were killed in an apparent terrorist attack last month.

Serious questions have been raised for the Obama administration in the wake of the Libya attack: Was the American compound in Benghazi secure before the attack? Did U.S. officials fail to heed warnings or concerns about possible violence? Why has the president been so hesitant to describe the incident as a "terrorist attack"? Why is the scene still not secure, more than two weeks after the attack?

"We've seen a confused, slow, inconsistent response to what is now very clearly known as a terrorist act," Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan said on Monday. "It's really indicative of a broader failure of this administration's foreign policy and the crisis that is taking place across the Middle East."

Polls indicate that the economy remains the top issue for voters, and Romney advisers in Boston believe the same. And when it comes to foreign policy, more voters trust Obama than Romney, polls show.

But there are hints of vulnerability for the president on Libya crisis. In a recent Fox News poll, 43% of voters said they disapproved of Obama's performance on Libya, while 39% approved.

With his campaign scrambling for traction and looking for any opportunity to shrink the trust gap between himself and the president, it won't be a shocker if Romney brings up the Middle East turmoil on Wednesday night and ties it to a broader critique of the president's leadership.

3. Who makes the case on the economy?

In a debate focusing on domestic concerns, the economy is the issue that should dominate the debate. The economy remains the top issue on the minds of American voters and according to a new CNN/ORC International poll, likely voters are split on whether the president or the Republican nominee would do a better job fixing the economy over the next four years.

Expect to hear two very different narratives on Wednesday night. The president will continue to argue that the country's making progress and that now is not the time to go back to the policies of the George W. Bush years that got us into the current mess. And he'll say that now's not the time to go back to helping the millionaires and Wall Street.

Expect a very different narrative from Romney.

In his year and a half long bid for the White House, one of the former Massachusetts governor's main arguments is that thanks to his business background, he can do a better job creating jobs than Obama has done over the past four years. The debate in Denver gives Romney a well-watched platform to make his case.

Romney "has to explain a rationale that he's offering change that would make things better over the next four years," says Castellanos. "This is his opportunity to present his counternarrative, that Obama's growing the wrong economy. He need say that Washington's economy is doing just fine, and ask how your economy's doing."

Whichever candidate better presents and sells his economic narrative will go a long way toward determining who wins the debate, and more importantly, who wins the minds of undecided voters.

4. Can Obama get women and Latinos into the discussion?

Romney carved out positions during the Republican primaries that have landed him in a deep hole with Hispanic and female voters.

Remember the so-called "war on women"? In the course of trying to out-conservative his GOP rivals, Romney vowed to end federal funding for Planned Parenthood, came out against a law that mandates insurance companies cover contraception services and did not take a stand on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that Obama signed in 2009. He has also said he wants the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Romney also rankled Hispanics by calling elements of Arizona's tough immigration law a "model" for the nation, floating the notion of "self-deportation" and promising to veto the DREAM Act, which would offer a path to citizenship for young illegal immigrants.

The Obama campaign has exploited these positions to great effect, pushing them to women and Hispanics in swing state campaign appearances, targeted e-mails and niche media efforts. (Don't know who Cristina Saralegui is? Google her.)

Republicans have criticized those tactics as a cynical distraction from the sagging economy, but they're working.

A Quinnipiac poll of Ohio likely voters released last week, for instance, showed Romney losing women to Obama by a staggering 25-point margin.

Internal Romney polling, meanwhile, has him badly trailing Obama among Hispanics -- and it's been that way all year.

With more than 50 million people expected to tune in Wednesday evening, don't expect the president to pass up a golden opportunity to keep female and Hispanic-oriented issues in the national spotlight.

5. Taking the zing out of zingers

It was just one line in a New York Times story last weekend about each candidate's debate cram sessions, but it grabbed a lot of attention.

"Mr. Romney's team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August," reporters Ashley Parker and Peter Baker wrote in the paper.

Romney advisers are correct that voters are likely to walk away from the debate talking about distinctive moments -- audible sighs, body language, repeated use of phrases such as "lock box" -- rather than factoids about Medicare Advantage or sequestration.

But zingers?

The Obama team predictably pounced on that one.

"We also saw in reports that Mitt Romney and his team have been working on zingers and special lines for months," Obama spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki told reporters over the weekend. "That's not what the president's focus is on. So if you're expecting that, that's probably not what he's going to deliver on."

Romney delivered his lines with precision during the Republican primary debates and probably will again on Wednesday.

But if it comes to pass that Romney jabs at Obama with a sharp attack or humorous quip, you can be sure the president's allies will be ready to mock Romney's reliance on prepared "zingers" to diminish his stature and performance.
Link
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fennis

Footballguy
Geroge Will had a really good list of questions that should be asked of both candidates, but wont be asked.

The spectacles we persist in dignifying as presidential “debates” — two-minute regurgitations of rehearsed responses — often subtract from the nation’s understanding. But beginning Wednesday, these less-than-Lincoln-Douglas episodes might be edifying if the candidates could be inveigled into plowing fresh ground.Concerning the judiciary Although the average age of the Supreme Court justices (66) is less than that of the Rolling Stones (68), three justices will be in their 80s before the next presidential term ends, so the next president probably can solidify today’s conservative majority or create a liberal majority.For Mitt Romney: Many conservatives advocate “judicial restraint.” They denounce “judicial activism” and define it as not properly deferring to decisions by government’s majoritarian branches. Other conservatives praise “judicial engagement” and define it as actively defending liberty against overbearing majorities. Do you favor “restraint” or “engagement”? Do you reject the Kelo decision, in which the Supreme Court deferred to governments’ desire to seize private property and give it to wealthier private interests who would pay higher taxes?For Barack Obama: You deplore the court’s Citizens United decision. What is your constitutional basis for rejecting the decision’s principle that Americans do not forfeit their First Amendment rights when they come together in corporate entities (mostly nonprofit advocacy corporations such as the Sierra Club) to speak collectively? You say you would “seriously consider” amending the First Amendment to empower Congress to regulate political speech. Explain why you would choose to make the Bill of Rights less protective.For Romney: The Republican platform endorses using “whatever legislative method is most feasible” to ban flag desecration. Can you distinguish this from the ­anti-blasphemy laws in some Islamic countries? Should we criminalize expressive acts that offend?Concerning foreign policy For both: On Oct. 7, we begin the 12th year of the war in Afghanistan, and 51 recent NATO fatalities have been at the hands of our supposed Afghan allies, causing U.S. commanders to indefinitely suspend many joint operations. Why are we staying there 27 more months?For Romney: You envision “countervailing duties” to punish China for manipulating the value of its currency. Do the “quantitative easings” by Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve, which vastly expanded the money supply, constitute currency manipulation? Would duties increasing the prices Americans pay for Chinese imports violate your vow to not raise taxes? For Obama: Your campaign boasts about increasing the number of unfair-trade charges against China. How would Americans’ welfare be enhanced by raising the prices they pay for consumer goods and production materials from China?For both: You are correct that China subsidizes politically connected businesses. Does not our Export-Import Bank do this?For Obama: Are GM and Chrysler subsidized? Are they politically connected businesses?Concerning domestic policy For Obama: Your opponent proposes cutting income tax rates 20 percent and implies that he would pay for this partly by means-testing some deductions (e.g., mortgage interest payments and charitable giving). Do you oppose his plan for making the income tax more progressive? For Romney: You say “redistribution” has “never been a characteristic of America.” You’re kidding, right? Is redistribution not one purpose of progressive taxation? Is not most of what government does — from agriculture subsidies to subsidized student loans to entitlements — the redistribution of wealth from one cohort or region to another?For Obama: You recently said that changing Washington “from the outside” is “how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done — mobilizing the American people.” You’re kidding, right? A majority of the American people never supported passage of Obamacare. Did you not secure passage by deals with Big Pharma and other ­inside-Washington players?For both: Do you agree that a financial institution that is too big to fail is too big to exist? If not, why not? The biggest banks emerged from the Great Recession bigger. At the end of 2011, the five biggest (JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs) held more than $8.5 trillion in assets, which is 56 percent of the 2011 gross domestic product. Why should they not be broken up? For Obama: Your deep-blue Illinois — like another essentially one-party Democratic state, California — is buckling under the weight of its portion of the estimated $2.5 trillion in unfunded state pension obligations. Will you promise to oppose attempts to force the taxpayers to bail out badly governed states?For both: Do you assume that the Almighty is not paying attention whenever you say “I approve this message”?
 

Joe T

Footballguy
'bigbottom said:
5 things to watch in tonight's debate

Denver (CNN) -- President Barack Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney face off on Wednesday in the first of three presidential debates.

While Obama holds a lead in several key battleground states, the race nationally has been locked in a dead heat for months. The debate offers an opportunity for Obama or Romney to gain some momentum and break the logjam.

Here are five things to watch for on Wednesday:

1. Who's presidential?

The first and most important test for the president and Romney in this opening debate is to act like they belong in the job.

We've heard a lot of bickering on the campaign trail, and there's plenty of talk that zingers could decide who wins or loses the showdown in Denver. But to most Americans, this debate is really about which candidate has the composure and stature to serve in the Oval Office.

"If either the president or Romney can't pass this test, the rest really don't matter. Big ideas from a small person won't make you president of the United States," says Republican strategist and CNN contributor Alex Castellanos. "When the moment comes, this is like proposing to your wife. This is a big moment."

Thanks to already serving nearly four years in the White House, Obama starts with the advantage, but he can't afford to play it safe at the debate.

"Playing it safe allows Romney to dominate the agenda and put Obama on defense. Either you're on offense or defense, and defense loses," adds Castellanos, who was a senior adviser to Romney in 2008 election.

By comparison, Romney has to do double duty: Stay on offense but also look presidential.

What does Obama have to do?

"Keep cool -- which comes naturally to him," says Democratic strategist and CNN contributor Paul Begala. "Make it about the middle class, not himself or Romney."

2. Can Romney get Libya into the discussion?

The first debate is officially devoted to domestic policy.

The listed topics, according to the Commission on Presidential Debates, are the economy, health care, the role of government and governing -- whatever that means.

Matters of national security and foreign policy are being left to later debates, but Romney may not be content to wait that long with the drip-drip-drip of conflicting news continuing to emerge from Libya, where four Americans -- including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens -- were killed in an apparent terrorist attack last month.

Serious questions have been raised for the Obama administration in the wake of the Libya attack: Was the American compound in Benghazi secure before the attack? Did U.S. officials fail to heed warnings or concerns about possible violence? Why has the president been so hesitant to describe the incident as a "terrorist attack"? Why is the scene still not secure, more than two weeks after the attack?

"We've seen a confused, slow, inconsistent response to what is now very clearly known as a terrorist act," Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan said on Monday. "It's really indicative of a broader failure of this administration's foreign policy and the crisis that is taking place across the Middle East."

Polls indicate that the economy remains the top issue for voters, and Romney advisers in Boston believe the same. And when it comes to foreign policy, more voters trust Obama than Romney, polls show.

But there are hints of vulnerability for the president on Libya crisis. In a recent Fox News poll, 43% of voters said they disapproved of Obama's performance on Libya, while 39% approved.

With his campaign scrambling for traction and looking for any opportunity to shrink the trust gap between himself and the president, it won't be a shocker if Romney brings up the Middle East turmoil on Wednesday night and ties it to a broader critique of the president's leadership.

3. Who makes the case on the economy?

In a debate focusing on domestic concerns, the economy is the issue that should dominate the debate. The economy remains the top issue on the minds of American voters and according to a new CNN/ORC International poll, likely voters are split on whether the president or the Republican nominee would do a better job fixing the economy over the next four years.

Expect to hear two very different narratives on Wednesday night. The president will continue to argue that the country's making progress and that now is not the time to go back to the policies of the George W. Bush years that got us into the current mess. And he'll say that now's not the time to go back to helping the millionaires and Wall Street.

Expect a very different narrative from Romney.

In his year and a half long bid for the White House, one of the former Massachusetts governor's main arguments is that thanks to his business background, he can do a better job creating jobs than Obama has done over the past four years. The debate in Denver gives Romney a well-watched platform to make his case.

Romney "has to explain a rationale that he's offering change that would make things better over the next four years," says Castellanos. "This is his opportunity to present his counternarrative, that Obama's growing the wrong economy. He need say that Washington's economy is doing just fine, and ask how your economy's doing."

Whichever candidate better presents and sells his economic narrative will go a long way toward determining who wins the debate, and more importantly, who wins the minds of undecided voters.

4. Can Obama get women and Latinos into the discussion?

Romney carved out positions during the Republican primaries that have landed him in a deep hole with Hispanic and female voters.

Remember the so-called "war on women"? In the course of trying to out-conservative his GOP rivals, Romney vowed to end federal funding for Planned Parenthood, came out against a law that mandates insurance companies cover contraception services and did not take a stand on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that Obama signed in 2009. He has also said he wants the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Romney also rankled Hispanics by calling elements of Arizona's tough immigration law a "model" for the nation, floating the notion of "self-deportation" and promising to veto the DREAM Act, which would offer a path to citizenship for young illegal immigrants.

The Obama campaign has exploited these positions to great effect, pushing them to women and Hispanics in swing state campaign appearances, targeted e-mails and niche media efforts. (Don't know who Cristina Saralegui is? Google her.)

Republicans have criticized those tactics as a cynical distraction from the sagging economy, but they're working.

A Quinnipiac poll of Ohio likely voters released last week, for instance, showed Romney losing women to Obama by a staggering 25-point margin.

Internal Romney polling, meanwhile, has him badly trailing Obama among Hispanics -- and it's been that way all year.

With more than 50 million people expected to tune in Wednesday evening, don't expect the president to pass up a golden opportunity to keep female and Hispanic-oriented issues in the national spotlight.

5. Taking the zing out of zingers

It was just one line in a New York Times story last weekend about each candidate's debate cram sessions, but it grabbed a lot of attention.

"Mr. Romney's team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August," reporters Ashley Parker and Peter Baker wrote in the paper.

Romney advisers are correct that voters are likely to walk away from the debate talking about distinctive moments -- audible sighs, body language, repeated use of phrases such as "lock box" -- rather than factoids about Medicare Advantage or sequestration.

But zingers?

The Obama team predictably pounced on that one.

"We also saw in reports that Mitt Romney and his team have been working on zingers and special lines for months," Obama spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki told reporters over the weekend. "That's not what the president's focus is on. So if you're expecting that, that's probably not what he's going to deliver on."

Romney delivered his lines with precision during the Republican primary debates and probably will again on Wednesday.

But if it comes to pass that Romney jabs at Obama with a sharp attack or humorous quip, you can be sure the president's allies will be ready to mock Romney's reliance on prepared "zingers" to diminish his stature and performance.
Link
The economy is #3? oof.

 

jamny

Footballguy
I only hope they convinced Romney not to do that creepy stare when he's listening to Obama speak.

 

bigbottom

I put on my robe and wizard hat
'Fennis said:
Geroge Will had a really good list of questions that should be asked of both candidates, but wont be asked.

The spectacles we persist in dignifying as presidential “debates” — two-minute regurgitations of rehearsed responses — often subtract from the nation’s understanding. But beginning Wednesday, these less-than-Lincoln-Douglas episodes might be edifying if the candidates could be inveigled into plowing fresh ground.Concerning the judiciary Although the average age of the Supreme Court justices (66) is less than that of the Rolling Stones (68), three justices will be in their 80s before the next presidential term ends, so the next president probably can solidify today’s conservative majority or create a liberal majority.For Mitt Romney: Many conservatives advocate “judicial restraint.” They denounce “judicial activism” and define it as not properly deferring to decisions by government’s majoritarian branches. Other conservatives praise “judicial engagement” and define it as actively defending liberty against overbearing majorities. Do you favor “restraint” or “engagement”? Do you reject the Kelo decision, in which the Supreme Court deferred to governments’ desire to seize private property and give it to wealthier private interests who would pay higher taxes?For Barack Obama: You deplore the court’s Citizens United decision. What is your constitutional basis for rejecting the decision’s principle that Americans do not forfeit their First Amendment rights when they come together in corporate entities (mostly nonprofit advocacy corporations such as the Sierra Club) to speak collectively? You say you would “seriously consider” amending the First Amendment to empower Congress to regulate political speech. Explain why you would choose to make the Bill of Rights less protective.For Romney: The Republican platform endorses using “whatever legislative method is most feasible” to ban flag desecration. Can you distinguish this from the ­anti-blasphemy laws in some Islamic countries? Should we criminalize expressive acts that offend?Concerning foreign policy For both: On Oct. 7, we begin the 12th year of the war in Afghanistan, and 51 recent NATO fatalities have been at the hands of our supposed Afghan allies, causing U.S. commanders to indefinitely suspend many joint operations. Why are we staying there 27 more months?For Romney: You envision “countervailing duties” to punish China for manipulating the value of its currency. Do the “quantitative easings” by Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve, which vastly expanded the money supply, constitute currency manipulation? Would duties increasing the prices Americans pay for Chinese imports violate your vow to not raise taxes? For Obama: Your campaign boasts about increasing the number of unfair-trade charges against China. How would Americans’ welfare be enhanced by raising the prices they pay for consumer goods and production materials from China?For both: You are correct that China subsidizes politically connected businesses. Does not our Export-Import Bank do this?For Obama: Are GM and Chrysler subsidized? Are they politically connected businesses?Concerning domestic policy For Obama: Your opponent proposes cutting income tax rates 20 percent and implies that he would pay for this partly by means-testing some deductions (e.g., mortgage interest payments and charitable giving). Do you oppose his plan for making the income tax more progressive? For Romney: You say “redistribution” has “never been a characteristic of America.” You’re kidding, right? Is redistribution not one purpose of progressive taxation? Is not most of what government does — from agriculture subsidies to subsidized student loans to entitlements — the redistribution of wealth from one cohort or region to another?For Obama: You recently said that changing Washington “from the outside” is “how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done — mobilizing the American people.” You’re kidding, right? A majority of the American people never supported passage of Obamacare. Did you not secure passage by deals with Big Pharma and other ­inside-Washington players?For both: Do you agree that a financial institution that is too big to fail is too big to exist? If not, why not? The biggest banks emerged from the Great Recession bigger. At the end of 2011, the five biggest (JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs) held more than $8.5 trillion in assets, which is 56 percent of the 2011 gross domestic product. Why should they not be broken up? For Obama: Your deep-blue Illinois — like another essentially one-party Democratic state, California — is buckling under the weight of its portion of the estimated $2.5 trillion in unfunded state pension obligations. Will you promise to oppose attempts to force the taxpayers to bail out badly governed states?For both: Do you assume that the Almighty is not paying attention whenever you say “I approve this message”?
Those are good questions. If Romney rejects the Kelo decision, I'd follow that up with a question about the Keystone Pipeline.
 
'Fennis said:
Geroge Will had a really good list of questions that should be asked of both candidates, but wont be asked.

The spectacles we persist in dignifying as presidential “debates” — two-minute regurgitations of rehearsed responses — often subtract from the nation’s understanding. But beginning Wednesday, these less-than-Lincoln-Douglas episodes might be edifying if the candidates could be inveigled into plowing fresh ground.Concerning the judiciary Although the average age of the Supreme Court justices (66) is less than that of the Rolling Stones (68), three justices will be in their 80s before the next presidential term ends, so the next president probably can solidify today’s conservative majority or create a liberal majority.For Mitt Romney: Many conservatives advocate “judicial restraint.” They denounce “judicial activism” and define it as not properly deferring to decisions by government’s majoritarian branches. Other conservatives praise “judicial engagement” and define it as actively defending liberty against overbearing majorities. Do you favor “restraint” or “engagement”? Do you reject the Kelo decision, in which the Supreme Court deferred to governments’ desire to seize private property and give it to wealthier private interests who would pay higher taxes?For Barack Obama: You deplore the court’s Citizens United decision. What is your constitutional basis for rejecting the decision’s principle that Americans do not forfeit their First Amendment rights when they come together in corporate entities (mostly nonprofit advocacy corporations such as the Sierra Club) to speak collectively? You say you would “seriously consider” amending the First Amendment to empower Congress to regulate political speech. Explain why you would choose to make the Bill of Rights less protective.For Romney: The Republican platform endorses using “whatever legislative method is most feasible” to ban flag desecration. Can you distinguish this from the ­anti-blasphemy laws in some Islamic countries? Should we criminalize expressive acts that offend?Concerning foreign policy For both: On Oct. 7, we begin the 12th year of the war in Afghanistan, and 51 recent NATO fatalities have been at the hands of our supposed Afghan allies, causing U.S. commanders to indefinitely suspend many joint operations. Why are we staying there 27 more months?For Romney: You envision “countervailing duties” to punish China for manipulating the value of its currency. Do the “quantitative easings” by Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve, which vastly expanded the money supply, constitute currency manipulation? Would duties increasing the prices Americans pay for Chinese imports violate your vow to not raise taxes? For Obama: Your campaign boasts about increasing the number of unfair-trade charges against China. How would Americans’ welfare be enhanced by raising the prices they pay for consumer goods and production materials from China?For both: You are correct that China subsidizes politically connected businesses. Does not our Export-Import Bank do this?For Obama: Are GM and Chrysler subsidized? Are they politically connected businesses?Concerning domestic policy For Obama: Your opponent proposes cutting income tax rates 20 percent and implies that he would pay for this partly by means-testing some deductions (e.g., mortgage interest payments and charitable giving). Do you oppose his plan for making the income tax more progressive? For Romney: You say “redistribution” has “never been a characteristic of America.” You’re kidding, right? Is redistribution not one purpose of progressive taxation? Is not most of what government does — from agriculture subsidies to subsidized student loans to entitlements — the redistribution of wealth from one cohort or region to another?For Obama: You recently said that changing Washington “from the outside” is “how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done — mobilizing the American people.” You’re kidding, right? A majority of the American people never supported passage of Obamacare. Did you not secure passage by deals with Big Pharma and other ­inside-Washington players?For both: Do you agree that a financial institution that is too big to fail is too big to exist? If not, why not? The biggest banks emerged from the Great Recession bigger. At the end of 2011, the five biggest (JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs) held more than $8.5 trillion in assets, which is 56 percent of the 2011 gross domestic product. Why should they not be broken up? For Obama: Your deep-blue Illinois — like another essentially one-party Democratic state, California — is buckling under the weight of its portion of the estimated $2.5 trillion in unfunded state pension obligations. Will you promise to oppose attempts to force the taxpayers to bail out badly governed states?For both: Do you assume that the Almighty is not paying attention whenever you say “I approve this message”?
Excellent questions. Too bad none of them will ever see the light of day.
 

HellToupee

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!

 

squistion

Footballguy
'HellToupee said:
:thumbup: for starting the thread

there is a tingle going down my right leg about tonight
Good thing you didn't start it, as you would change the title to Micro Four Thirds Camera Talk if the discusssion went in a direction you didn't like, such as reflecting poorly for those on the right.
 

Don Quixote

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!
I was thinking
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NCCommish

Footballguy
Not sure if I'll watch. We already know Mitt has some prepared "zingers" IMO these will make the base happy but turn off everyone else. Especially now that it's known he has been practicing them for two months. In fact if he does use one I am leaning toward it biting him in the butt over the long haul. We also know Romney's handlers have been trying to teach him empathy. So again being revealed before the debate deflates it's effectiveness.

Obama is truly not that good in debate settings. I expect him to have a very safe debate. He is leading, he is the incumbent, no reason to take chances or get off script. We won't see Obama get into it until the Town Hall where he does really well and Mitt not so much. Still even that will be sanitized of as many possible unscripted moments as they can squeeze out.

So I am tepid on the whole thing. I am looking forward to Biden and Ryan though. There might actually be some fun to be had there. Between Joe's gaffes and Ryan's thin skin there could certainly be some moments.

 

jamny

Footballguy
'HellToupee said:
:thumbup: for starting the thread

there is a tingle going down my right leg about tonight
Good thing you didn't start it, as you would change the title to Micro Four Thirds Camera Talk if the discusssion went in a direction you didn't like, such as reflecting poorly for those on the right.
:lmao: I was wondering what I could have possibly said in that thread. Didn't care enough to open it though.

 

Slapdash

Footballguy
'HellToupee said:
:thumbup: for starting the thread

there is a tingle going down my right leg about tonight
Good thing you didn't start it, as you would change the title to Micro Four Thirds Camera Talk if the discusssion went in a direction you didn't like, such as reflecting poorly for those on the right.
Typical rump swab.
 

HellToupee

Footballguy
'HellToupee said:
:thumbup: for starting the thread

there is a tingle going down my right leg about tonight
Good thing you didn't start it, as you would change the title to Micro Four Thirds Camera Talk if the discusssion went in a direction you didn't like, such as reflecting poorly for those on the right.
oh screw you. Your political postings come across like a bad case of halitosis.
 

timschochet

Footballguy
Since tonight's debate deals with the economy, I am hoping that the 16 trillion dollar debt is addressed, since it is, IMO, the one issue which overwhelms all the others. If I were asking the questions, I would ask:

Obama: How does repealing the Bush tax cuts only on the top 5-10% make any dent whatsoever in the debt? You stated last summer that you would agree to spending cuts to entitlements in exchange for tax increases- what specific spending cuts to entitlements would you approve of? Why did you reject Bowles-Simpson, and what is your proposed alternative?

Romney: How will cutting taxes and increasing defense spending reduce the debt? You and Ryan have stated that the tax cuts will be offset by removing loopholes. What specific loopholes do you intend to remove?

I would also ask both candidates if they believe in man-made global warming, and what they propose to do about it.

I would also ask both candidates what specific plans they have to wean this nation off of petroleum, and how long that will take.

I hope all these questions get asked tonight.

 

roadkill1292

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!
Please shoot me if I ever get like this.
 
Not sure if I'll watch. We already know Mitt has some prepared "zingers" IMO these will make the base happy but turn off everyone else. Especially now that it's known he has been practicing them for two months. In fact if he does use one I am leaning toward it biting him in the butt over the long haul. We also know Romney's handlers have been trying to teach him empathy. So again being revealed before the debate deflates it's effectiveness. Obama is truly not that good in debate settings. I expect him to have a very safe debate. He is leading, he is the incumbent, no reason to take chances or get off script. We won't see Obama get into it until the Town Hall where he does really well and Mitt not so much. Still even that will be sanitized of as many possible unscripted moments as they can squeeze out.So I am tepid on the whole thing. I am looking forward to Biden and Ryan though. There might actually be some fun to be had there. Between Joe's gaffes and Ryan's thin skin there could certainly be some moments.
Romney is going to try to hit homeruns and all Obama wants to do is play out the side.Romney could get desperate which might cause him to make inflammatory statements.
 

Slapdash

Footballguy
This is really Mitt's last chance to turn the ship around here. IF he can stay on topic about the weakness of the economy and give substance about how he will change it, then he has a shot. If he continues to get distacted by throwing zingers about the war on religious freedom, apologizing for America, and etc then he is toast.

 

roadkill1292

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!
Please shoot me if I ever get like this.
you've been hassling , bordering on istalking me for about a year now. Enough is enough.
I've been hassling all the ridiculous partisans. You're nobody special.
 

honky kong

Footballguy
This is really Mitt's last chance to turn the ship around here. IF he can stay on topic about the weakness of the economy and give substance about how he will change it, then he has a shot. If he continues to get distacted by throwing zingers about the war on religious freedom, apologizing for America, and etc then he is toast.
So you're saying he has no shot? ;)
 
This is really Mitt's last chance to turn the ship around here. IF he can stay on topic about the weakness of the economy and give substance about how he will change it, then he has a shot. If he continues to get distacted by throwing zingers about the war on religious freedom, apologizing for America, and etc then he is toast.
How do you suppose Mitt can talk about the economy and how his budget is going to fix it when he has never spoke about what specific programs (buzzword "entitlements") he wants to cut? He can say "I am going to cut 100 trillion dollars my first minute in office", but it does not mean squat until he outline exactly how he wants to do that.
 

Rich Conway

Footballguy
'Fennis said:
Geroge Will had a really good list of questions that should be asked of both candidates, but wont be asked.

The spectacles we persist in dignifying as presidential “debates” — two-minute regurgitations of rehearsed responses — often subtract from the nation’s understanding. But beginning Wednesday, these less-than-Lincoln-Douglas episodes might be edifying if the candidates could be inveigled into plowing fresh ground.Concerning the judiciary Although the average age of the Supreme Court justices (66) is less than that of the Rolling Stones (68), three justices will be in their 80s before the next presidential term ends, so the next president probably can solidify today’s conservative majority or create a liberal majority.For Mitt Romney: Many conservatives advocate “judicial restraint.” They denounce “judicial activism” and define it as not properly deferring to decisions by government’s majoritarian branches. Other conservatives praise “judicial engagement” and define it as actively defending liberty against overbearing majorities. Do you favor “restraint” or “engagement”? Do you reject the Kelo decision, in which the Supreme Court deferred to governments’ desire to seize private property and give it to wealthier private interests who would pay higher taxes?For Barack Obama: You deplore the court’s Citizens United decision. What is your constitutional basis for rejecting the decision’s principle that Americans do not forfeit their First Amendment rights when they come together in corporate entities (mostly nonprofit advocacy corporations such as the Sierra Club) to speak collectively? You say you would “seriously consider” amending the First Amendment to empower Congress to regulate political speech. Explain why you would choose to make the Bill of Rights less protective.For Romney: The Republican platform endorses using “whatever legislative method is most feasible” to ban flag desecration. Can you distinguish this from the ­anti-blasphemy laws in some Islamic countries? Should we criminalize expressive acts that offend?Concerning foreign policy For both: On Oct. 7, we begin the 12th year of the war in Afghanistan, and 51 recent NATO fatalities have been at the hands of our supposed Afghan allies, causing U.S. commanders to indefinitely suspend many joint operations. Why are we staying there 27 more months?For Romney: You envision “countervailing duties” to punish China for manipulating the value of its currency. Do the “quantitative easings” by Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve, which vastly expanded the money supply, constitute currency manipulation? Would duties increasing the prices Americans pay for Chinese imports violate your vow to not raise taxes? For Obama: Your campaign boasts about increasing the number of unfair-trade charges against China. How would Americans’ welfare be enhanced by raising the prices they pay for consumer goods and production materials from China?For both: You are correct that China subsidizes politically connected businesses. Does not our Export-Import Bank do this?For Obama: Are GM and Chrysler subsidized? Are they politically connected businesses?Concerning domestic policy For Obama: Your opponent proposes cutting income tax rates 20 percent and implies that he would pay for this partly by means-testing some deductions (e.g., mortgage interest payments and charitable giving). Do you oppose his plan for making the income tax more progressive? For Romney: You say “redistribution” has “never been a characteristic of America.” You’re kidding, right? Is redistribution not one purpose of progressive taxation? Is not most of what government does — from agriculture subsidies to subsidized student loans to entitlements — the redistribution of wealth from one cohort or region to another?For Obama: You recently said that changing Washington “from the outside” is “how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done — mobilizing the American people.” You’re kidding, right? A majority of the American people never supported passage of Obamacare. Did you not secure passage by deals with Big Pharma and other ­inside-Washington players?For both: Do you agree that a financial institution that is too big to fail is too big to exist? If not, why not? The biggest banks emerged from the Great Recession bigger. At the end of 2011, the five biggest (JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs) held more than $8.5 trillion in assets, which is 56 percent of the 2011 gross domestic product. Why should they not be broken up? For Obama: Your deep-blue Illinois — like another essentially one-party Democratic state, California — is buckling under the weight of its portion of the estimated $2.5 trillion in unfunded state pension obligations. Will you promise to oppose attempts to force the taxpayers to bail out badly governed states?For both: Do you assume that the Almighty is not paying attention whenever you say “I approve this message”?
Excellent questions. Too bad none of them will ever see the light of day.
Doesn't really matter if those questions get asked, since neither candidate would make any attempt to answer them anyway."Well, George, I'm glad you asked me that question about THING X. THING X is one of the biggest questions facing our country today. Much like THING Y, THING X plays a special role in making America great. Just like the plans I've outlined for THING Y, I think we need to buckle down and focus on eliminating the things the don't work, and strengthening the things that do. We need to review everything about THING X and really determine where we can make it better."
 

HellToupee

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!
Please shoot me if I ever get like this.
you've been hassling , bordering on istalking me for about a year now. Enough is enough.
I've been hassling all the ridiculous partisans. You're nobody special.
listen up , I'll talk with the "powers that be" about your perverse fixation with me if your behavior doesn't change
 

LHUCKS

Footballguy
As useless as these debates are, I still look forward to watching them. :shrug:

Top 4 Things I'm looking forward to hearing

1. Obama - "We were dealt a bad hand, but things are getting better" - essentially blaming Bush for the economy 4 years later

2. Romney - "We did build this"

3. Obama - "Obamacare will save money", Romney "No it will not, you are a liar"

4. Obama - "I'm sticking to my original tax plan", Romney, "No you are not, you are a liar"

 

HellToupee

Footballguy
a word to all the Mitt men here. If Obama gets Mitt back pedaling it could be trouble for our guy. Mitt has to stay up on his haunches and set the tempo tonight.

 

Rich Conway

Footballguy
Since tonight's debate deals with the economy, I am hoping that the 16 trillion dollar debt is addressed, since it is, IMO, the one issue which overwhelms all the others. If I were asking the questions, I would ask:

Obama: How does repealing the Bush tax cuts only on the top 5-10% make any dent whatsoever in the debt? You stated last summer that you would agree to spending cuts to entitlements in exchange for tax increases- what specific spending cuts to entitlements would you approve of? Why did you reject Bowles-Simpson, and what is your proposed alternative?
"Well, timschochet, I'm glad you asked me that question about THING X the debt. THING X The debt is one of the biggest questions facing our country today. In the plans I've outlined for THING X the debt, I think we need to buckle down and focus on eliminating the spending in our budget that doesn't work, and strengthening the things that do. We need to review everything about THING X the debt and really determine where we can make it better."
Romney: How will cutting taxes and increasing defense spending reduce the debt? You and Ryan have stated that the tax cuts will be offset by removing loopholes. What specific loopholes do you intend to remove?
"Well, timschochet, I'm glad you asked me that question about THING X the debt. THING X The debt is one of the biggest problems created by the Obama administration. In the plans I've outlined for THING X the debt, my administration would buckle down and focus on eliminating the spending in our budget that doesn't work, and strengthening the things that do. We need to review everything about THING X the debt and really determine where we can make it better."
I would also ask both candidates if they believe in man-made global warming, and what they propose to do about it.

I would also ask both candidates what specific plans they have to wean this nation off of petroleum, and how long that will take.

I hope all these questions get asked tonight.
"Well, timschochet, I'm glad you asked me that question about THING X energy independence. THING X Energy independence is one of the biggest questions facing our country today. In the plans I've outlined for THING X energy independence, I think we need to buckle down and focus on making THING X energy independence a priority for our great nation."
 

roadkill1292

Footballguy
this is going to be big boy politics tonight fellas. Does Obama have the stones to stand & fight because Mitt's going to be bringing it. If so this could be Hagler/Hearns. Not for the faint of heart or sissies. Should be a lot of fun!
Please shoot me if I ever get like this.
you've been hassling , bordering on istalking me for about a year now. Enough is enough.
I've been hassling all the ridiculous partisans. You're nobody special.
listen up , I'll talk with the "powers that be" about your perverse fixation with me if your behavior doesn't change
Good, consistent shtick. :thumbup:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top