Presidential Debate Thread - Obama vs. Romney (2 Viewers)

[Slapdash]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

 

[Sam Quentin]

Are people seriously interpreting this "act of terror" nonsense and anything other than an obvious but ultimately insignificant gaffe by Romney?

Amazing. Please continue.

I think it's a stupid issue, but he was right and Crowley was wrong. Crowley admits as much.

Several posters have asserted this but I can't find any link.

Here's one

She doesn't admit she was wrong there.

She admits that Romney's basic point was correct and that she was nitpicking his verbiage.

No, I didn't get that either. Certainly not the "nitpicking" part.Romney made a fool of himself by repeatedly asking if Obama used the words "act of terror." He was trying to catch Obama in a lie. That was his main point, not criticizing Obama for blaming the video. The latter would have been a valid criticism, but Romney never made it. His intent was much more direct: to show the TV audience that Obama made a statement that was clearly false. Instead, as Crowley correctly and properly pointed out, it was Romney who made the false statement. Highly embarrassing, and Romney deserves all the criticism he is getting for it.

I think Romney was rightly flabbergasted that Obama would parse the Rose Garden speech in such a manner and ignore all of his administrations efforts to deceive the world that this was some spontaneous act.

Up until now, Obama was somebody whose policies I disagreed with, but now I dislike him personally.

 

[Fennis]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

it was an internet poll on drudge

 

[Fennis]

Are people seriously interpreting this "act of terror" nonsense and anything other than an obvious but ultimately insignificant gaffe by Romney?

Amazing. Please continue.

I think it's a stupid issue, but he was right and Crowley was wrong. Crowley admits as much.

Several posters have asserted this but I can't find any link.

Here's one

She doesn't admit she was wrong there.

She admits that Romney's basic point was correct and that she was nitpicking his verbiage.

No, I didn't get that either. Certainly not the "nitpicking" part.Romney made a fool of himself by repeatedly asking if Obama used the words "act of terror." He was trying to catch Obama in a lie. That was his main point, not criticizing Obama for blaming the video. The latter would have been a valid criticism, but Romney never made it. His intent was much more direct: to show the TV audience that Obama made a statement that was clearly false. Instead, as Crowley correctly and properly pointed out, it was Romney who made the false statement. Highly embarrassing, and Romney deserves all the criticism he is getting for it.

I think Romney was rightly flabbergasted that Obama would parse the Rose Garden speech in such a manner and ignore all of his administrations efforts to deceive the world that this was some spontaneous act.

Up until now, Obama was somebody whose policies I disagreed with, but now I dislike him personally.

well that changes everything

 

[Andy Dufresne]

The whole Lybia exchange was strange.

I think Mitt saw his big opportunity but then stumbled like a baby that gets over excited when it realizes it can walk and falls flat on it's face.

 

[Sam Quentin]

I think this Libya thing is going to be a problem for BO.At the very least, how did Candy have the quote on her desk ready to protect BO?

I was wondering that, too...She didn't exactly have anything with a network connection either. So how did she know what he did or didn't say at that exact moment like that?

The questions were all pre-screened and Crowley picked which ones were going to be discussed. This was talked about before the debate.

but nobody could have anticipated that in all of the discussion on this over the ensuing weeks, that he would focus in on one phrase he uttered as a platitude in passing....

 

[Abraham]

The whole Lybia exchange was strange. I think Mitt saw his big opportunity but then stumbled like a baby that gets over excited when it realizes it can walk and falls flat on it's face.

That's a fair assessment. There is certainly some red meat in there for Mitt to chew on but he didn't get to it very well last night.

 

[Slapdash]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

it was an internet poll on drudge

 

[The Commish]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall. With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

I don't see the rational people seriously discussing win vs loss at all. I see a couple fishing with that bait and the partisans swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

 

[sporthenry]

Are people seriously interpreting this "act of terror" nonsense and anything other than an obvious but ultimately insignificant gaffe by Romney?

Amazing. Please continue.

What's more amazing is that a lot of conservatives want to double down on this and continue to attack Obama over Libya.

what's more amazing is that, knowing that the US was attacked by terrorists, the Administartion would go in front of the world and posit that this happened because we have too much free speech ("abuse"). Just like Giffords and Oklahoma City, it's that darned free speech again.

I never heard this. Do you have a link to an Obama administration person stating that "we have too much free speech"?

Gotta love the lies conservatives spew. Here are quotes from the UN speech, and I'll link the Fox News transcript for full disclosure at the end. "We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don't we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. As president of our country, and commander in chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so.

(APPLAUSE)

Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views -- even views that we profoundly disagree with. We do so not because we support hateful speech, but because our founders understood that without such protections, the capacity of each individual to express their own views and practice their own faith may be threatened.

We do so because in a diverse society, efforts to restrict speech can quickly become a tool to silence critics and oppress minorities. We do so because, given the power of faith in our lives, and the passion that religious differences can inflame, the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech -- the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy, and lift up the values of understanding and mutual respect.

I know that not all countries in this body share this particular understanding of the protection of free speech. We recognize that. But in 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with the click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete.

The question, then, is how we respond. And on this we must agree: There is no speech that justifies mindless violence."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/25/transcript-obama-address-to-un-general-assembly/#ixzz29Z4Y8jEl

I don't see one spot where Obama says we have too much free speech. But let me try to take a play out of the Conservative playbook. They'll dismiss Obama's defense of free speech since they were wrong about the "apology" and instead focus on Obama tying the video to an attack on an embassy (which isn't incorrect if he was speaking about Egypt). And forget the idea this was a speech at the UN where he is trying to promote peace in the Middle East, what does he gain by blaming terrorists at the UN?

 

[GroveDiesel]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

 

[The Commish]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

 

[Ghost Rider]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall. With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

Yep. The CNN poll had Obama winning the debate by around 7-8 points, but polls with registered voters showed that they have more faith in Romney when it comes to the economy and the deficit. IIRC, it was 59%-40% in favor of Romney as far as who will better handle the economy. That is not good news for the president. Also, while I think both guys did okay last night (both did well at times, and both struggled at times), I think it is easy to overrate Obama's performance simply because it was such an improvement from the first. It was so bad in Denver that he had nowhere to go but up. Romney was pretty much the same last night as he was in the first debate.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

 

[Slapdash]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

Sounds like he did a decent job in the debate moving the numbers towards him:

As for who would do a better job of handling the economy, the president made some headway on closing that gap. Before the debate, 71 percent said they believed Romney would, while only 27 percent said they thought Obama would; after the debate, 34 percent said the president would better handle the economy, with 65 percent saying Romney would.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

IMO, Romney's biggest mistake was asking Obama questions directly.

In a debate format like this, Obama is under no requirement to answer and the audience has an inherent appreciation for that, I think.

 

[GroveDiesel]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

Sounds like he did a decent job in the debate moving the numbers towards him:

As for who would do a better job of handling the economy, the president made some headway on closing that gap. Before the debate, 71 percent said they believed Romney would, while only 27 percent said they thought Obama would; after the debate, 34 percent said the president would better handle the economy, with 65 percent saying Romney would.

He's down 31% on the single biggest issue that dominates the country right now. With the next debate being a foreign policy debate, it's highly unlikely that those numbers improve in any way for him. In fact, when the next jobs report comes out next month and the survey returns to a non-outlier number, that gap will almost certainly shoot back up. That gap spells disaster for Obama, especially as it applies to the independent vote.

 

[GroveDiesel]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

None of those numbers have anything to do with the first debate. HTH

 

[chet]

IMO, Romney's biggest mistake was asking Obama questions directly. In a debate format like this, Obama is under no requirement to answer and the audience has an inherent appreciation for that, I think.

Yes, and he also missed a couple of opportunities.

 

[Sammy3469]

not sure Obama won, but judging by the whining about Crowley, it's pretty clear Romney lost.

 

[TPW]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Exactly. And unlike with Fast and Furious, Obama can't claim executive privilege on this one. It's not going to go away and his little holier than thou comments about coffins don't excuse the blunders which were made or the subsequent attempt at cover up.

 

[timschochet]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Romney wants to go to war with Iran, yet you clowns are all up in arms about a poor communications effort after the fact in Libya.Unreal.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

Commission on Presidential Debates

 

[Slapdash]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

Sounds like he did a decent job in the debate moving the numbers towards him:

As for who would do a better job of handling the economy, the president made some headway on closing that gap. Before the debate, 71 percent said they believed Romney would, while only 27 percent said they thought Obama would; after the debate, 34 percent said the president would better handle the economy, with 65 percent saying Romney would.

He's down 31% on the single biggest issue that dominates the country right now. With the next debate being a foreign policy debate, it's highly unlikely that those numbers improve in any way for him. In fact, when the next jobs report comes out next month and the survey returns to a non-outlier number, that gap will almost certainly shoot back up. That gap spells disaster for Obama, especially as it applies to the independent vote.

This metric is only uncommited voters that watched the debate. The gap on that issue isn't nearly as large to the electorate as a whole

 

[Slapdash]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

I thought it was interesting that the CNN panel largely made the same point.

 

[The Commish]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

It's still being investigated right? What's left to "dig into on substance"? Personally, I really hope they focus on topics like China and trade policies. I want to see that discussion unfold in a public forum. I personally don't think the Libya thing should matter as much as people are trying to make out. Obama said what he had to. The blood of those victims were on his watch and the responsibility lies with him. I'm not sure what else they can try and hash out of it. Harping on it give the feeling of a petty, one trick pony IMO.

 

[ArbyMelt]

I think the economy and jobs are the most important issue for this election, and Romney scored many points on these issues. Looks like the undecideds that were polled after the debate are leaning Romney (MSNBC, FOX News), so even though the debate was a draw, or slight lean to Obama (mostly because of the Libya "act of terror" issue), the Romney camp has to be happy, as this shouldn't slow down their momentum. BUT .. i see Obama up a few points on INTRADE, let's see if that holds. I expected a bump if he had a pulse at the debate.

 

[pantagrapher]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

Sean Hannity could be the moderator and the GOP would claim he leans left. It's simple, really: no matter who the moderator is, he leans left, according to conservatives.

 

[ArbyMelt]

Romney wants to go to war with Iran, yet you clowns are all up in arms about a poor communications effort after the fact in Libya.

link? and you can't use Biden quotes.

 

[DoubleG]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

Then why was it a question from the audience? And why was it prefaced with "a bunch of coworkers and I"? And why was it still on NBC's home page within the last week? And why was it one of the "high points" of last night's debate?You can keep saying "nobody cares" - but that doesn't make it so. Simply turning a blind eye to the facts does not make them cease to exsist.

 

[chet]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

Sean Hannity could be the moderator and the GOP would claim he leans left. It's simple, really: no matter who the moderator is, he leans left, according to conservatives.

You're not being intellectually honest.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

@DRUDGE_REPORT: CAUGHT ON TAPE: Michelle O Broke Rules, Clapped At Debate...

Do they have the siren up?

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

None of those numbers have anything to do with the first debate. HTH

OK. So what are you saying? I don't follow it at all. Obama won the debate by all measures. The links you offered said Obama won the debate. How is that anything other than winning the debate?If you're saying that he didn't win the debate because people still favor Romney on the economy, that also makes no sense. The Cardinals gained more yards than the Bills. Can the Bills therefore not celebrate the win?

Who cares what the breakdown is by issue? The polls showed the election tied or maybe a slight edge to Obama before the second debate. He won the second debate. If people prefer Romney on the economy, that's great for Romney. But that edge isn't new, it was already built into the previous polling. A win is a win is a win.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

How is it wrong? Is the next debate not on foreign policy? Has this issue not been in the general news for the last month now? This isn't just some conservative whacko ghost hunt, it's been a national news issue for a month. No, people don't care about it as much as they do the economy, but it IS still an issue.With the "Arab Spring" turning into more of an "Arab Winter", this plays right into how our foreign policy is being played out in the Middle East. If Romney is able to make that connection, then he significantly weakens one of the only advantages Obama has over him in the polls.But you are right in that ultimately this election will be decided on the economy, which bodes well for Romney and his huge lead on that issue in the polls.

 

[The Commish]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

Then why was it a question from the audience? And why was it prefaced with "a bunch of coworkers and I"? And why was it still on NBC's home page within the last week? And why was it one of the "high points" of last night's debate?You can keep saying "nobody cares" - but that doesn't make it so. Simply turning a blind eye to the facts does not make them cease to exsist.

I can't answer for why the individuals were talking about it. If I had to guess it was because they are reading NBC's homepage, CNN, whatever. As to why the networks are still covering it? Why do they cover anything? To make money. Hits = I suspect, if you were to ask folks to rank the importance of this issue among all the others this country faces, it wouldn't make the top 10...maybe top 15.

 

[timschochet]

Personally, I really hope they focus on topics like China and trade policies.

And Iran. And Afghanistan. Anything but Libya.

 

[pantagrapher]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

Sean Hannity could be the moderator and the GOP would claim he leans left. It's simple, really: no matter who the moderator is, he leans left, according to conservatives.

You're not being intellectually honest.

Claiming liberal media bias is so ingrained in the conservative mind that it's a reflex at this point.

 

[GroveDiesel]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

None of those numbers have anything to do with the first debate. HTH

OK. So what are you saying? I don't follow it at all. Obama won the debate by all measures. The links you offered said Obama won the debate. How is that anything other than winning the debate?If you're saying that he didn't win the debate because people still favor Romney on the economy, that also makes no sense. The Cardinals gained more yards than the Bills. Can the Bills therefore not celebrate the win?

Who cares what the breakdown is by issue? The polls showed the election tied or maybe a slight edge to Obama before the second debate. He won the second debate. If people prefer Romney on the economy, that's great for Romney. But that edge isn't new, it was already built into the previous polling. A win is a win is a win.

I never said Obama didn't win the overall debate. Your problem seems to be that you keep putting words in my mouth. Perhaps if you actually take the time to read what people write instead of creating the bogeyman you want to create, you'd be able to come up with a more coherent discussion.And almost every poll I've seen over the last week shows either a tie or Romney with a slight lead.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

On a tangent - who picks the moderators for these debates? The reason I ask is that in virtually every debate you have the GOP complaining that the moderators are favoring the incumbent...that they lean to the left and it influences their moderation of the debate. So do the parties agree on a list of moderators from a preselected pool (like jury duty), does each debate get the moderator chosen by a different party? How does all that work?

Sean Hannity could be the moderator and the GOP would claim he leans left. It's simple, really: no matter who the moderator is, he leans left, according to conservatives.

You're not being intellectually honest.

I like pantagrapher, but he blows hot and cold in this category.

 

[DoubleG]

not sure Obama won, but judging by the whining about Crowley, it's pretty clear Romney lost.

Hopefully you are smart enough to realize that the two are not logically dependant on one another. A ref can have a bad game - and the team he was biased against can still win. Argue until you're blue in the face about who "won" or "lost" the debate - but the fact that Crowley made mistakes and people are pointing them out does not automatically mean that their candidate lost.

 

[The Commish]

So, are people really allowing the "media coverage" of something to define it's importance as it pertains to this election?

 

[Tuco]

I was really turned off by both men talking over each other and interrupting. It was one thing in the VP debate, but both men i thought came off looking petty. I thought Romney looked bad trying to get in last words and respond to previous questions during other answers.

As for Lybia, I bet many people who only casually follow politics don't know much about it. I think there is more harm than good for the President in this story. We'll see how the spin plays out.

 

[Sam Quentin]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

None of those numbers have anything to do with the first debate. HTH

OK. So what are you saying? I don't follow it at all. Obama won the debate by all measures. The links you offered said Obama won the debate. How is that anything other than winning the debate?If you're saying that he didn't win the debate because people still favor Romney on the economy, that also makes no sense. The Cardinals gained more yards than the Bills. Can the Bills therefore not celebrate the win?

Who cares what the breakdown is by issue? The polls showed the election tied or maybe a slight edge to Obama before the second debate. He won the second debate. If people prefer Romney on the economy, that's great for Romney. But that edge isn't new, it was already built into the previous polling. A win is a win is a win.

Daffy Duck owned Bugs Bunny in talent contests too, but in the long run, people just didn't like him.

 

[bigbottom]

Biggest whiff of the night was Obama not slaying Mitt for his comments about removing capital gains taxes to help the middle class. I though Obama could have crushed him there by explaining that capital gains are about the wealthy -- about money making money -- and far less about the working class. I thought he could have scored some huge points there.

As someone who is clearly in the middle class (household income right around $100,000) who has investments and pays capital gains taxes - I disagree. In fact this was one of the points that my wife and I sit up and listen more closely to what Romney was saying on that point.

Of course you did. Romney was promising you stuff. Got to give him kudos for promising to make the tax code even more progressive.

 

[humpback]

Is the last debate really on foreign policy? After reading the debate segments from last night on Lybia, I'm not sure that's the best way for Romney to leave a positive last impression. The reality is, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors in the White House. I assume Romney's left with the same sort of sources as we are. I expect him to struggle like Ryan did with Biden on these topics. You could tell he couldn't wait to get off of foreign policy.

I'm not so sure about this. The problem for Romney on the Libya issue wasn't that he was wrong on the substance, it was that he was wrong on the semantics. He has a week now to dig deeper on the substantive side and come out swinging. Everyone in here has basically agreed that Romney was made foolish not because he's wrong at the core of the issue, but because he got owned on a semantics issue. Semantics are easy to clear up, the facts behind the narrative the White House laid out will not be so easy for Obama to clear up.

Sorry, but this is still wrong.Yes, Romney got caught on semantics last night, but the audience reaction was largely because outside of the conservative talk show bubble nobody believes this is a worthy topic to begin with (well, except for BigBottom, I guess.) It would be a huge mistake for Romney to bring this issue up again. He should simply walk away from it, just as he should have from the very beginning.

Then why was it a question from the audience? And why was it prefaced with "a bunch of coworkers and I"? And why was it still on NBC's home page within the last week? And why was it one of the "high points" of last night's debate?You can keep saying "nobody cares" - but that doesn't make it so. Simply turning a blind eye to the facts does not make them cease to exsist.

I can't answer for why the individuals were talking about it. If I had to guess it was because they are reading NBC's homepage, CNN, whatever. As to why the networks are still covering it? Why do they cover anything? To make money. Hits = I suspect, if you were to ask folks to rank the importance of this issue among all the others this country faces, it wouldn't make the top 10...maybe top 15.

I agree that it isn't a top issue for most people, but the rest of this is , and so is Tim's stance here. It's pretty clear that some people care about this, even if you want to argue that they shouldn't. They do.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the takeaway is that the polls say Obama won by about an 8% margin. Unfortunately for him, they also say that he lost the economics debate by about a 40% margin. Also, the MSNBC panel's undecideds actually had Romney winning the debate overall.

With the economy being the biggest issue for this election, I don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama when he is still getting clobbered on the #1 issue.

link?

My bad, it's closer to 30% after the debate, down from over 40%. CNN's poll had it closer than that at 18%. None of those numbers are good in any way for Obama though.

I don't understand what you're saying. If I'm reading this correctly, you "don't see how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama" because he lost the previous debate?So you're not allowed to celebrate a win if you get clobbered in the previous contest? If so, I'm curious to get your thoughts on the Bills-Cardinals game last Sunday, bearing in mind that the Bills lost 45-3 in the previous contest. I hope you're not claiming a big win for the Bills.

None of those numbers have anything to do with the first debate. HTH

OK. So what are you saying? I don't follow it at all. Obama won the debate by all measures. The links you offered said Obama won the debate. How is that anything other than winning the debate?If you're saying that he didn't win the debate because people still favor Romney on the economy, that also makes no sense. The Cardinals gained more yards than the Bills. Can the Bills therefore not celebrate the win?

Who cares what the breakdown is by issue? The polls showed the election tied or maybe a slight edge to Obama before the second debate. He won the second debate. If people prefer Romney on the economy, that's great for Romney. But that edge isn't new, it was already built into the previous polling. A win is a win is a win.

I never said Obama didn't win the overall debate. Your problem seems to be that you keep putting words in my mouth. Perhaps if you actually take the time to read what people write instead of creating the bogeyman you want to create, you'd be able to come up with a more coherent discussion.And almost every poll I've seen over the last week shows either a tie or Romney with a slight lead.

Ok, fair enough, I won't put any words in your mouth. You said "you don't understand how any rational person can claim last night as a big win for Obama." But as far as I can tell Obama did win by virtually any measure, and it seems completely rational to me to suggest that winning a debate three weeks before a presidential election in the midst of a trend in the polls towards your competitor is pretty "big." So I guess I still don't understand your point. I've read every word of what you wrote repeatedly. I even used a direct quote lifted from your post. And I still can't understand it. Sorry. I asked you twice to clarify, and twice you chose not to. If that makes me the one who lacks coherence, so be it, but I kind of think it's the opposite.

 

[DoubleG]

Then why was it a question from the audience? And why was it prefaced with "a bunch of coworkers and I"? And why was it still on NBC's home page within the last week? And why was it one of the "high points" of last night's debate?

You can keep saying "nobody cares" - but that doesn't make it so. Simply turning a blind eye to the facts does not make them cease to exsist.

I can't answer for why the individuals were talking about it. If I had to guess it was because they are reading NBC's homepage, CNN, whatever. As to why the networks are still covering it? Why do they cover anything? To make money. Hits = I suspect, if you were to ask folks to rank the importance of this issue among all the others this country faces, it wouldn't make the top 10...maybe top 15.

How do they get hits by posting things and running stories about things people don't care about? Please enlighten us on the marketing of stories "people don't care about" - and how that makes money.If you would like to put the paint brush down now and walk away, as you are getting close to a corner, feel free.