What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Presidential Debate Thread - Obama vs. Romney (5 Viewers)

I would like to distance myself from Jackhole11.

Govt does good things. But you do realize that it's big business, and the incomes paid by big business, that contributes greatly to those programs?
Yes I am aware businesses pay taxes. I'm also aware that given the option they would choose not to pay taxes.
Ok?All I'm saying is that govt is not supplying you. The people are the govt. We supply the govt. One of the main reasons the left promotes bigger govt is that it causes more reliance on the federal govt and obligates those to continue to vote for them.
That may be a broad summation of what you think the left promotes. I can't speak for everyone that is left leaning to whatever degree, but in my opinion, there are things that people have a right to, I'm not gonna argue my interpretation of the constitution, declaration and preamble. But I believe affordable health care and education are on that list. That has to be paid for, and I understand that people don't believe the government to be responsible enough to handle it, but some things have to be done, I've been disappointed with parts of Obama's first term, but I've never been happier about a piece of legislation being passed than when Healthcare reform was passed.Call it what you will.
You seem to be conflating Obamacare and affordable health care.
 
OB spoke for 44 minutes and Mitt spoke for 40.

Mod jumped in and lied to protect OB.
Romney won the debate, despite it being 2 against 1. Well done, Mitt.
WAIT. Wait wait wait. Honest question: do you really believe Mitt won this debate?Those of us who think Mitt is a schmuck could still fairly admit that he won the first debate. I can't imagine anyone in their right mind could claim that Obama didn't win this.
The bolded is key.
kind of like Romney is fading
The good part about that is that we'll actually have an answer for it soon. And I actually said his post-debate bump was fading if we're going to be truthful here.
and just about every single poll has proven you wrong, regardless of how many times you repeat it to convince yourself.
We'll see in about a week.
 
I would like to distance myself from Jackhole11.

Govt does good things. But you do realize that it's big business, and the incomes paid by big business, that contributes greatly to those programs?
Yes I am aware businesses pay taxes. I'm also aware that given the option they would choose not to pay taxes.
Ok?All I'm saying is that govt is not supplying you. The people are the govt. We supply the govt. One of the main reasons the left promotes bigger govt is that it causes more reliance on the federal govt and obligates those to continue to vote for them.
That may be a broad summation of what you think the left promotes. I can't speak for everyone that is left leaning to whatever degree, but in my opinion, there are things that people have a right to, I'm not gonna argue my interpretation of the constitution, declaration and preamble. But I believe affordable health care and education are on that list. That has to be paid for, and I understand that people don't believe the government to be responsible enough to handle it, but some things have to be done, I've been disappointed with parts of Obama's first term, but I've never been happier about a piece of legislation being passed than when Healthcare reform was passed.Call it what you will.
Fair enough. I would disagree that health care is at that level of government responsibility, but I agree we need public goods and services. I just think the 'business is heartless, govt loves you' attitude is a gross misunderstanding of the role and purpose of both.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bleeding heart libertarian here. Obama miserable, Mitt steady debate one. Obama obliterated Mitt in debate two. If you think differently, you were watching something else.
Yes, because you are obviously omnipotent and your judgement should not be questioned.
 
I think a key deficiency for Romney going down the stretch will be the lack of specifics on the deduction and loophole issue. Romney is running with an n dollar deduction cap, but uses different numbers each time. Giving everyone a pony is going to cost real dollars. It's trickle down logic, and deserves to be discussed as such. There is no guarantee of magic growth in this structure.
hang on here, you guys were perfectly fine with "hope and change" and no specifics in 2008, but now you're going to expect the other guy to provide you details? Forget it, you clearly shouted out that you didn't care about details when you cast that vote.You'll have to take it on faith, just like you did in 2008 and over the last four years.
Strawman.
 
Bottom Line. When you wake up tomorrow...Gas Prices are ?Unemployment ?How much does the USA owe?
Gas Prices are determined on the open global market. If you think the President has that much if any sway on the gas prices, you'll be sorely mistaken. If you want prices to go down, you'll have to stop India, China, and Brazil from industrializing. As far as how much US owes? Well they owe most of it to America so it isn't as bad as people claim. China owes 8% of our debt, most of our debt is owed to us Americans. We certainly have to address it but it isn't as pressing as most people think.
Sorry, you are not going to convince me.
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Watch for yourself:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Nu6VZ9DeVcSeriously though, if Obama really believed it was an act of terrorism why was he sending out his cronies to say it was the video for the next couple of weeks? He makes a general reference to terrorism in the video. He never calls this attack an act of terrorism.
If Obama believes that a random response to a YouTube video that escalated into an attack is an act of terror, then great! I won't argue that definition. But that's not what happened. It was pre-planned... Coordinated... And intended to occur on the anniversary of 9/11.... And not only did we not see it coming, it took weeks before we even acknowledged that people planned it.
 
Bottom Line. When you wake up tomorrow...

Gas Prices are ?

Unemployment ?

How much does the USA owe?
Gas Prices are determined on the open global market. If you think the President has that much if any sway on the gas prices, you'll be sorely mistaken. If you want prices to go down, you'll have to stop India, China, and Brazil from industrializing. As far as how much US owes? Well they owe most of it to America so it isn't as bad as people claim. China owes 8% of our debt, most of our debt is owed to us Americans. We certainly have to address it but it isn't as pressing as most people think.
Thats not really true. We buy much of our oil from a cartel that controls supply and pricing.
Well there is a lot that goes into this, but most of the pricing is determined on Wall Street with a lot of it based on what OPEC wants to supply. By inundating the market, it won't really drive the price down, we can speculate what OPEC will do, probably slow down production and we won't get a hometown discount on this oil. Either way, it really isn't a way to energy independence but it will probably help stabilize prices a bit more.
 
I would like to distance myself from Jackhole11.

Govt does good things. But you do realize that it's big business, and the incomes paid by big business, that contributes greatly to those programs?
Yes I am aware businesses pay taxes. I'm also aware that given the option they would choose not to pay taxes.
Ok?All I'm saying is that govt is not supplying you. The people are the govt. We supply the govt. One of the main reasons the left promotes bigger govt is that it causes more reliance on the federal govt and obligates those to continue to vote for them.
That may be a broad summation of what you think the left promotes. I can't speak for everyone that is left leaning to whatever degree, but in my opinion, there are things that people have a right to, I'm not gonna argue my interpretation of the constitution, declaration and preamble. But I believe affordable health care and education are on that list. That has to be paid for, and I understand that people don't believe the government to be responsible enough to handle it, but some things have to be done, I've been disappointed with parts of Obama's first term, but I've never been happier about a piece of legislation being passed than when Healthcare reform was passed.Call it what you will.
You seem to be conflating Obamacare and affordable health care.
It seems like that, because for years it hasn't been possible. Its really hard to get insurance when there is zero incentive for insurance companies to compete with one another, its a commodity, and they have been fixing prices forever. I wish Obamacare had been more reaching, but im willing to accept the cut down version to get it passed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The worst part of this cluster #### political cycle is that one guy says 'What has he done in the last 4 years? His record is bad!' and the other guy says 'What is he going to do over the next 4 years? He has no plan!'

Well ####, they both suck!

 
Bleeding heart libertarian here. Obama miserable, Mitt steady debate one. Obama obliterated Mitt in debate two. If you think differently, you were watching something else.
I have a buddy that is a professor of politics and has worked for various Republican campaigns. He had the popcorn ready at the start of the debate but has been off Facebook for the last half hour or so. That tells me there is no way Romney won this thing.
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
 
Bottom Line. When you wake up tomorrow...

Gas Prices are ?

Unemployment ?

How much does the USA owe?
Gas Prices are determined on the open global market. If you think the President has that much if any sway on the gas prices, you'll be sorely mistaken. If you want prices to go down, you'll have to stop India, China, and Brazil from industrializing. As far as how much US owes? Well they owe most of it to America so it isn't as bad as people claim. China owes 8% of our debt, most of our debt is owed to us Americans. We certainly have to address it but it isn't as pressing as most people think.
:confused: How long do you think these countries have been industrializing?
Look at the facts, in 2010, China's demand went up 12%, Latin America 5.7%, etc. The US was actually a net exporter of refined oil, so we had more refined oil then we needed.
 
Bottom Line. When you wake up tomorrow...

Gas Prices are ?

Unemployment ?

How much does the USA owe?
Clearly all circumstances that resulted only from the past 3 years. What happened before that is totally irrelevant.

I BLAME GEORGE BUSH! WAAAAAH!
Fixed, for accuracy.
Wow, thats an incredibly childish response.
C'mon, that's EXACTLY what he was saying.
Not it wasnt. But nuance only works on people that think critically, which some Republicans oppose being taught in schools btw.
 
I think a key deficiency for Romney going down the stretch will be the lack of specifics on the deduction and loophole issue. Romney is running with an n dollar deduction cap, but uses different numbers each time. Giving everyone a pony is going to cost real dollars. It's trickle down logic, and deserves to be discussed as such. There is no guarantee of magic growth in this structure.
hang on here, you guys were perfectly fine with "hope and change" and no specifics in 2008, but now you're going to expect the other guy to provide you details? Forget it, you clearly shouted out that you didn't care about details when you cast that vote.
The discussion on taxes in 2008 was about Bush tax cuts and whether to keep them or let them expire. Obama has extended them largely due to the political-fueled perception that we can't raise a marginal rate a scant few percent. He wants to end them now.Mitt is asking Americans to buy into a 20% across the board cut in tax rates for everyone. This will cost approximately $4.8 trillion over ten years. A plan this audacious requires a discussion of math. Sorry.
You just don't understand it, Picks. Trust him, it'll work.
Really? We are concerned about 5 trillion over 10 years??
Of course we are. Mitt is too. He just thinks the math automatically works by campaign assertion, and some blog posts.
Oh please. Its half a billion a year. We spend that in one hour.
Its 500 billion a year btw
Sorry was going on what we spend a day and screwed it up. Fact is we are talking about 500 billion a year that will go back to the "folks" while we spend around 10 billion per day.
 
Bottom Line. When you wake up tomorrow...

Gas Prices are ?

Unemployment ?

How much does the USA owe?
Clearly all circumstances that resulted only from the past 3 years. What happened before that is totally irrelevant.

I BLAME GEORGE BUSH! WAAAAAH!
Fixed, for accuracy.
Someday, you'll be better than this.
unlikely
He does believe in Hope and Change, so at least he's consistent.
 
Government does not create jobs.A+You Obama supporters need to understand the above because it's true and Obama doesn't understand it.
Hey bro, I know its hard to understand, but big business doesn't have your, or anyone but their own interest in mind - ever.
So the fact that government spending has a higher fiscal multiplier than tax breaks? Or the fact that FDR pulled us out of the Great Depression with government spending. Don't let facts get in the way of big fonts though.
Govt spending does not have a higher multiplier than tax breaks. Exact opposite.
It isn't the opposite. It is arguable at best as economists still struggle to answer this question. But tax cuts (i.e. just cutting income taxes) alone usually have a terrible fiscal multiplier. Now tax rebates, which are considered tax cuts, have high multipliers since the consumer is buying something. But just cutting taxes won't see growth b/c people are paying debt down and saving.
 
I think a key deficiency for Romney going down the stretch will be the lack of specifics on the deduction and loophole issue. Romney is running with an n dollar deduction cap, but uses different numbers each time. Giving everyone a pony is going to cost real dollars. It's trickle down logic, and deserves to be discussed as such. There is no guarantee of magic growth in this structure.
hang on here, you guys were perfectly fine with "hope and change" and no specifics in 2008, but now you're going to expect the other guy to provide you details? Forget it, you clearly shouted out that you didn't care about details when you cast that vote.
The discussion on taxes in 2008 was about Bush tax cuts and whether to keep them or let them expire. Obama has extended them largely due to the political-fueled perception that we can't raise a marginal rate a scant few percent. He wants to end them now.Mitt is asking Americans to buy into a 20% across the board cut in tax rates for everyone. This will cost approximately $4.8 trillion over ten years. A plan this audacious requires a discussion of math. Sorry.
You just don't understand it, Picks. Trust him, it'll work.
Really? We are concerned about 5 trillion over 10 years??
Of course we are. Mitt is too. He just thinks the math automatically works by campaign assertion, and some blog posts.
Oh please. Its half a billion a year. We spend that in one hour.
Its 500 billion a year btw
Sorry was going on what we spend a day and screwed it up. Fact is we are talking about 500 billion a year that will go back to the "folks" while we spend around 10 billion per day.
Wait, 500 billion per year doesn't matter, but PBS spending does? :confused:
 
I think a key deficiency for Romney going down the stretch will be the lack of specifics on the deduction and loophole issue. Romney is running with an n dollar deduction cap, but uses different numbers each time. Giving everyone a pony is going to cost real dollars. It's trickle down logic, and deserves to be discussed as such. There is no guarantee of magic growth in this structure.
hang on here, you guys were perfectly fine with "hope and change" and no specifics in 2008, but now you're going to expect the other guy to provide you details? Forget it, you clearly shouted out that you didn't care about details when you cast that vote.You'll have to take it on faith, just like you did in 2008 and over the last four years.
Yeah, no reason to learn from our earlier failures, right?
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Why did Obama continue to say the attack was due to the video for many days after the attack including a speech to the UN?
 
Government does not create jobs.A+You Obama supporters need to understand the above because it's true and Obama doesn't understand it.
Hey bro, I know its hard to understand, but big business doesn't have your, or anyone but their own interest in mind - ever.
So the fact that government spending has a higher fiscal multiplier than tax breaks? Or the fact that FDR pulled us out of the Great Depression with government spending. Don't let facts get in the way of big fonts though.
Govt spending does not have a higher multiplier than tax breaks. Exact opposite.
It isn't the opposite. It is arguable at best as economists still struggle to answer this question. But tax cuts (i.e. just cutting income taxes) alone usually have a terrible fiscal multiplier. Now tax rebates, which are considered tax cuts, have high multipliers since the consumer is buying something. But just cutting taxes won't see growth b/c people are paying debt down and saving.
Dude no. It's pretty much consensus you get a higher multiple w tax cuts than govt spending . At least that's what economists in macro at Various institutions which even Fabian socialists founded teach. Price mechanisms and all that silly stuff.
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Why did Obama continue to say the attack was due to the video for many days after the attack including a speech to the UN?
Seems like Romneys general point was correct, but factually about what was said, Obama and the moderator were correct.
 
Obama resorting to outright lies tonight. He said gas and oil leases & production are up on federal lands when even his DoE released a report recently showing both leases and production are down considerably.
I don't think he said leases are up. I believe that the assertion was that since he took office production is up on federal lands.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Why did Obama continue to say the attack was due to the video for many days after the attack including a speech to the UN?
Seems like Romneys general point was correct, but factually about what was said, Obama and the moderator were correct.
BACKPEDALLING
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Why did Obama continue to say the attack was due to the video for many days after the attack including a speech to the UN?
Seems like Romneys general point was correct, but factually about what was said, Obama and the moderator were correct.
Exactly. Romney's basic point was Obama was not calling it a "terrorist attack". Semantics confused him.
 
Obama resorting to outright lies tonight. He said gas and oil leases & production are up on federal lands when even his DoE released a report recently showing both leases and production are down considerably.
I don't think he said leases are up. I believe that the assertion was that since he tool office production is up on federal lands.
That's definitely not true. Down 14% per the dems on ABC.
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Why did Obama continue to say the attack was due to the video for many days after the attack including a speech to the UN?
Seems like Romneys general point was correct, but factually about what was said, Obama and the moderator were correct.
That has nothing to do with the lies that went on for several days after the attack.
 
Very interested to see BO's Rose Garden quote.With any luck, it could turn into a "it depends on what the definition of is is." moment.
Just shown on CNN. Fact checker decided it was TRUE. Fact checked during the debate by Obama and the moderator.Didn't you earlier say she lied for Obama? Seems you're out of touch with the facts, but if you support Romney, you're probably OK with that.
Directly after that "fact checker" Anderson Cooper clearly said the video they played in the rose garden was taken out of context, and the paragraph before the "acts of terror" comment BO was referncing 9/11. I just played it back on my DVR to verify.
 
Obama resorting to outright lies tonight. He said gas and oil leases & production are up on federal lands when even his DoE released a report recently showing both leases and production are down considerably.
I don't think he said leases are up. I believe that the assertion was that since he tool office production is up on federal lands.
And more specifically that people sitting on leases of federal lands but waiting to use them until it was profitable were told to use it or lose it. I don't understand why conservatives would be against that.
 
Obama resorting to outright lies tonight. He said gas and oil leases & production are up on federal lands when even his DoE released a report recently showing both leases and production are down considerably.
I don't think he said leases are up. I believe that the assertion was that since he tool office production is up on federal lands.
Correct. Romney was hammering on him good but then he pressed him on if leases were up and Obama really turned that issue by saying they pulled the leases from the companies that were just sitting on them. Up until that point, I wasn't thrilled with Obama's position on oil and gas.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top