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 (2 Viewers)

Jim11> I can assure you that it's really, really hard, and requires a really, really smart guy, to become editor of the Harvard Law Review. Like, crazy smart.

 
Clear battle of substance (Romney) VS style (Barry)

Romney.....classy, elegant, respectful, a man with a plan and a vision.

Barry......looking to the moderator for help, kind of smug, arrogant, no plan......

Easy choice here folks.....

 
I don't think there's enough difference in either man's ability to handle foreign policy to make a big difference. For most people this is way down the list of concerns. It's the economy, and I think when people go to the polls they'll realize that Mitt is more qualified and Obama's policies aren't working.
Only in America can a man get rich by gutting companies for profit, provide exactly zero details on how he would do anything, and "be more qualified" to deal with the economy than the President of the United States. That statement is ludicrous.
So someone who cut overhead and waste in companies he took over is not qualified, but 4 years ago a 1st term US Senator, previously new IL State Senator, and community organizer was an expert in macroeconomics? Got it. I realize many want to focus on the shutdowns or failures from Bain investments but you never bat 1.000 in business. It's just that simple.
Really? So Obama's failed investments in energy companies aren't as bad as Romney makes them out to be?
I said you'll never bat 1.000, that's not a defense for batting .000 or .025 or whatever the case may be. You really want to compare the "success rate" of those green energy investments to Bain acquisitions? I don't pretend to know every success/failure of Bain, but given their success I feel pretty safe in wagering they had a greater success rate than those energy companies. I'm game if you are.
Well, considering Bain was only really concerned about taking more money out of the company than it put in, they had a very large success rate - much higher than the rate of companies they bought that actually turned around.
A buisness that was interested in earning more money then they spend? You don't say..? Must have been full of evil republicans.. We should not stand for this..
Pointing out there is a severe difference between investing in a company where it matters whether it succeeds or fails and being an LBO firm that generally wins regardless.
 
I don't think there's enough difference in either man's ability to handle foreign policy to make a big difference. For most people this is way down the list of concerns. It's the economy, and I think when people go to the polls they'll realize that Mitt is more qualified and Obama's policies aren't working.
Only in America can a man get rich by gutting companies for profit, provide exactly zero details on how he would do anything, and "be more qualified" to deal with the economy than the President of the United States. That statement is ludicrous.
So someone who cut overhead and waste in companies he took over is not qualified, but 4 years ago a 1st term US Senator, previously new IL State Senator, and community organizer was an expert in macroeconomics? Got it. I realize many want to focus on the shutdowns or failures from Bain investments but you never bat 1.000 in business. It's just that simple.
Really? So Obama's failed investments in energy companies aren't as bad as Romney makes them out to be?
I said you'll never bat 1.000, that's not a defense for batting .000 or .025 or whatever the case may be. You really want to compare the "success rate" of those green energy investments to Bain acquisitions? I don't pretend to know every success/failure of Bain, but given their success I feel pretty safe in wagering they had a greater success rate than those energy companies. I'm game if you are.
Well, considering Bain was only really concerned about taking more money out of the company than it put in, they had a very large success rate - much higher than the rate of companies they bought that actually turned around.
A buisness that was interested in earning more money then they spend? You don't say..? Must have been full of evil republicans.. We should not stand for this..
That's the part I sincerely don't understand. People are so critical of Bain yet unless you work for a not for profit or governmental agency, your employer is in business to make money. This "gutting" people mention is done all the time in every business when overhead is cut. It may be just one job in some cases or eliminating a position to run more efficiently, but that is the nature of business. It's like Bain has become this indictable entity by engaging in for profit endeavors.
 
Kind of funny how Romney was this centrist, agreeable dove while in the GOP debates he wanted to stomp across the world in a blaze of glory.

 
I'd be shocked if Romney doesn't win this election. I think Romney takes Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio. Pennsylvania still a toss up

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jim11> I can assure you that it's really, really hard, and requires a really, really smart guy, to become editor of the Harvard Law Review. Like, crazy smart.
Yeah it was just explained to me how significant that position really is in academia. In his defense I think even Romney knows that Obama was probably the better student, but Romney's connections as his time as a high school cheerleader have also paid off nicely.
 
Jim11> I can assure you that it's really, really hard, and requires a really, really smart guy, to become editor of the Harvard Law Review. Like, crazy smart.
Yeah it was just explained to me how significant that position really is in academia. In his defense I think even Romney knows that Obama was probably the better student, but Romney's connections as his time as a high school cheerleader have also paid off nicely.
I'd love to see the transcripts on both
 
Clear battle of substance (Romney) VS style (Barry)

Romney.....classy, elegant, respectful, a man with a plan and a vision.

Barry......looking to the moderator for help, kind of smug, arrogant, no plan......

Easy choice here folks.....
^ Wow people are partisan.I suppose I am too...but to me, Romney looked like he had a bad burrito before the debate and desperately needed to get to a bathroom to dump a pretty nasty load. Meanwhile, I thought Obama just let Romney walk into 2-3 traps all on his own, then pounced once the traps sprung. I didn't see smug, arrogant, no plan...I saw confident, and a guy who knows about 30-times more than any of us (via access to sensitive/classified information), and a guy who was a bit incredulous having to debate a guy who memorized a few talking points on Pakistan, but doesn't know 0.1% as much about the region as he does.

 
I don't think there's enough difference in either man's ability to handle foreign policy to make a big difference. For most people this is way down the list of concerns. It's the economy, and I think when people go to the polls they'll realize that Mitt is more qualified and Obama's policies aren't working.
Only in America can a man get rich by gutting companies for profit, provide exactly zero details on how he would do anything, and "be more qualified" to deal with the economy than the President of the United States. That statement is ludicrous.
So someone who cut overhead and waste in companies he took over is not qualified, but 4 years ago a 1st term US Senator, previously new IL State Senator, and community organizer was an expert in macroeconomics? Got it. I realize many want to focus on the shutdowns or failures from Bain investments but you never bat 1.000 in business. It's just that simple.
Really? So Obama's failed investments in energy companies aren't as bad as Romney makes them out to be?
I said you'll never bat 1.000, that's not a defense for batting .000 or .025 or whatever the case may be. You really want to compare the "success rate" of those green energy investments to Bain acquisitions? I don't pretend to know every success/failure of Bain, but given their success I feel pretty safe in wagering they had a greater success rate than those energy companies. I'm game if you are.
Well, considering Bain was only really concerned about taking more money out of the company than it put in, they had a very large success rate - much higher than the rate of companies they bought that actually turned around.
A buisness that was interested in earning more money then they spend? You don't say..? Must have been full of evil republicans.. We should not stand for this..
That's the part I sincerely don't understand. People are so critical of Bain yet unless you work for a not for profit or governmental agency, your employer is in business to make money. This "gutting" people mention is done all the time in every business when overhead is cut. It may be just one job in some cases or eliminating a position to run more efficiently, but that is the nature of business. It's like Bain has become this indictable entity by engaging in for profit endeavors.
Well, there are plenty of reasons to be critical of Bain, especially since their business model doesn't work without some perverse tax incentives, but really the larger point is that running Bain as a LBO firm is hardly evidence of an ability to create jobs or improve the largest economy on the planet.
 
What are they saying on Fox?CNN everybody across the board saying Obama won easily.
Steve Schmidt doing his best to pretend like something else was on TV.
CNN Conservatives trying to say debate doesn't matter because it is already over or that Mitt just sitting there, agreeing and taking it was presidential and proved to people he isn't the insane Republican that we are going to attack everyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This was supposed to be Obama's easiest debate given the topic.

Even if he won (which is debatable), it was a close match. It would be like Michigan coming out just ahead of Appalachian State.

But if Obama lost this debate, it's like Appalachia state pulling off the upset.

i think Romney walks away with more than what was expected, win or no win.

 
Fact checking in full swing.

Romney: Syria is Iran's pathway to the sea.

Except they don't share a border....

 
Mitt's foreign policy sounds like it's pretty much what Obama did, he just do it faster or earlier.
And cheaper. Even though he'll spend $2 trillion more on the military. And don't forget that China, Iran, et al will come to D.C. with their tails between their legs and kiss Romney's ring after the inauguration too...since, you know, they'll take him seriously.
 
What are they saying on Fox?CNN everybody across the board saying Obama won easily.
Steve Schmidt doing his best to pretend like something else was on TV.
CNN Conservatives trying to say debate doesn't matter because it is already over or that Mitt just sitting there, agreeing and taking it was presidential and proved to people he isn't the insane Republican that we are going to attack everyone.
If that's true it's the wrong strategy. The race is close and Obama still has an easier path via electoral college. Romney can't sit back and run out the clock.
 
Clear battle of substance (Romney) VS style (Barry)

Romney.....classy, elegant, respectful, a man with a plan and a vision.

Barry......looking to the moderator for help, kind of smug, arrogant, no plan......

Easy choice here folks.....
Barry? You can't say Obama or Mr. President? That would be the classy thing to do
 
What are they saying on Fox?CNN everybody across the board saying Obama won easily.
Steve Schmidt doing his best to pretend like something else was on TV.
CNN Conservatives trying to say debate doesn't matter because it is already over or that Mitt just sitting there, agreeing and taking it was presidential and proved to people he isn't the insane Republican that we are going to attack everyone.
If that's true it's the wrong strategy. The race is close and Obama still has an easier path via electoral college. Romney can't sit back and run out the clock.
I agree just saying that I doubt there were that many independents watching and cared that much about Syria or Iran. This election will probably be decided on the ground anyways.
 
Clear battle of substance (Romney) VS style (Barry)

Romney.....classy, elegant, respectful, a man with a plan and a vision.

Barry......looking to the moderator for help, kind of smug, arrogant, no plan......

Easy choice here folks.....
Barry? You can't say Obama or Mr. President? That would be the classy thing to do
Or Mittens.. O' wait, that's what the libs call the other guy :potkettle:

 
Clear battle of substance (Romney) VS style (Barry)

Romney.....classy, elegant, respectful, a man with a plan and a vision.

Barry......looking to the moderator for help, kind of smug, arrogant, no plan......

Easy choice here folks.....
Barry? You can't say Obama or Mr. President? That would be the classy thing to do
The office may deserve respect, but Barry does not. BIG difference.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top