Romney 2 Obama 0

[Skjellyfetti]

I think there was a winner in the sense that Barack Obama not only gained ground he lost but he cauterized some wounds that he inflicted on himself by seeming too diffident and disengaged. Both candidates tonight I think tip-toed right up to the point of rudeness, but stepped back. It was a very good fight. I have seen every presidential debate in American history since the floor of Nixon and Kennedy in 1960. This was immeasurably the best

[Grizalltheway]

I think there was a winner in the sense that Barack Obama not only gained ground he lost but he cauterized some wounds that he inflicted on himself by seeming too diffident and disengaged. Both candidates tonight I think tip-toed right up to the point of rudeness, but stepped back. It was a very good fight. I have seen every presidential debate in American history since the floor of Nixon and Kennedy in 1960. This was immeasurably the best

Conks throwing Will under the bus in 3...2...1...

[ASUMountaineer]

Conks throwing Will under the bus in 3...2...1...

Nah, Will is a great guy. I watch This Week simply because he is always on there, he always provides great insight.

[ASUMountaineer]

How did Gary Johnson do? Oh that's right both parties are scared shitless to let him join, no need to watch for me.

Nothing brings Donks and Conks together like keeping a third party down.

[kalm]

That was an hour and a half of my life I will never get back... what a bunch of dumbass questioners and the moderator was even worse.

Who gives a flying **** in space about "how Romney is different than Bush?" You stupid ****! Have you not been paying attention to the entire campaign???

Who gives a rat's hairy ass about gun control and assault rifles? The real unemployment rate is close to 12%, we have border control agents being killed by gangsters with weapons that came from our government, and we have embassies with Al Qaeda flags.... and that's the best question we can come up with??????

They wasted about 7 minutes talking about government sponsored birth control. If you are pro choice you have to be pro choice about contraception. It is a matter of personal responsibility to take care of your own birth control. If you can't afford it don't **** or simply suck dick. It isn't my job to pay for YOUR contraception. If you want the government out of your pussy as you say you do, then get them ALL the way out.

How can I be sure I get a job after college???? You stupid, pathetic ****... get an education in a trade that is in demand in the marketplace and make yourself so good and so valuable that the people hiring will want you. We who hire people hire because we think they will help our company and make us more money than they cost us. Freakin' common sense you little moron...

And finally.... Crowley **** the bed on Obama's statements in the Rose Garden and chided Romney into sitting down. It is one thing to be disrespectful, it is quite another to be factually incorrect while being disrespectful. SMFH.....

IF the GOP ever agrees to this format again they are dumber than I think they are and deserve whatever happens to them.

All in all, a very poor format with very poor questioners and a pathetic moderator. The only thing that was accomplished last night was Obama showed a pulse, even if he was extremely loose with the facts. Like the commercial says, "It ain't what you do it's the way that you do it..." Gawd....

Good post

And another thing. Obama lied about Romney paying a lower tax rate than someone making 50k

Romney's effective rate was about 14.1%. The avg effective income tax rate of someone making 50k is less than 8%. There was a whole thread on this last month about how its a lie being told by the left that Romney pays a lower income tax rate than someone making 50k. Romney should have pointed this out.

"Fact Check: Is Romney's tax rate really lower than yours?

.....IRS data, though, shows that Romney's effective income tax rate -- that's what he pays as a percentage of his income once deductions and other benefits are factored in -- is actually far higher than what most Americans pay.
And it's certainly higher than what someone making $50,000 pays.
IRS data from 2010 shows someone making between $50,000 and $75,000 on average pays an effective rate of 7.8 percent. Even someone making between $100,000 and $200,000 pays a 12.1 percent rate -- also lower than Romney's. ......"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09 ... han-yours/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So Obama has kept taxes low for everyone! Christ, even our effective corporate is low compared to most OECD nations.

[ASUMountaineer]

It maybe went against him in the debate, but it now opened up a can of worms in the post debate for Obama. All the media is now checking his claim and how multiple people from his administration kept saying it was due to a video. Obama will now have to answer to the media. Libya is not going away.

The problem for Romney is that Libya should have been a slam dunk, instead Obama gets an edge because Romney misspoke regarding Obama's Rode Garden comments.

I've been saying it for years...Romney is a poor candidate. Unfortunately for him, his campaign staff is even worse.

[Grizalltheway]

Conks throwing Will under the bus in 3...2...1...

Nah, Will is a great guy. I watch This Week simply because he is always on there, he always provides great insight.

I'm a big fan of him as well. Don't always agree with him, but no one can accuse him of not knowing his shit.

[Chizzang]

Nah, Will is a great guy. I watch This Week simply because he is always on there, he always provides great insight.

I'm a big fan of him as well. Don't always agree with him, but no one can accuse him of not knowing his shit.

George Will and Christopher Hitchens / Excellent observational characters - deep thinkers - broad view and microscopic...

I love (and hate) them both

[BlueHen86]

I kind of disagree about point #1. Sure, it's not on the scale of 9/11 and shouldn't be confused with that, but it is disturbing that there was a major terrorist attack, on the anniversary of 9/11, and we didn't see it coming, we didn't prepare for it coming, and after it happened we weren't even sure it happened. US ambassadors don't get killed very often - this is only something like the 4th active ambassador to be killed in the line of duty so it is something that needs to be a big story.

The thing is, both are bungling the issue. Obama hasn't done a good job of showing that he's on top of the situation or that they did the right things before or after it happened. And Romney has looked feeble in being able to question why they didn't do the right things before or after it happened. But I still think it's a pretty big story.

Agreed. And Romney missed a huge chance last night by wordsmithing Obama's answer instead of attacking his lack of an answer to the actual QUESTION.

Romney blew it by the way he phrased his statement. What Romney should have said was: 'We we're attacked in Benghazi and, despite warning signs, the White House was not prepared. Even after the attack, it took the White House 5 days before they realized that it was a planned terrorist attack and not a spontaneous act of terror'.

Instead, he just went with comment that it took the White House 5 days to acknowledge that it was a terrorist attack. Even though Romney was correct in what he was saying he gave Obama the opening to mention the Rose Garden statement an obfuscate the issue.

[BDKJMU]

Another thing, the fat bitch allowed Obama over 3 min more time than Romney:

Obama gets more time

Amid persistent complaints and interruptions from both candidates, President Obama ultimately got more than three extra minutes of speaking time than Mitt Romney during Tuesday's debate.

According to CNN's timekeeping, Obama got 44:04 minutes of speaking time, while Romney got 40:50.

Both candidates pressed the moderator Candy Crowley — sometimes aggressively — into allowing additional responses and back-and-forth exchanges.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012 ... 38699.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This should be taken out of the moderators hands. When their clock strikes zero there should either be a buzzer or their mikes should be cut. 2 minutes should mean 2 minutes, not a second more.

Yep, or otherwise the Republican candidate will get shafted every debate:

Bizarre Coincidence: Democrats Get More Time in All Three Debates

If you want more time to get your message out in debates, it’s good to be a Democrat.

According to the CNN debate clock, President Obama spoke at greater length than Mitt Romney during both debates, as did Vice President Biden during his debate with Paul Ryan. In the first debate, Obama spoke for 3 minutes, 14 seconds more than Romney — which means he got 8 percent more talking time than Romney. In last night’s debate, Obama spoke for 4 minutes and 18 seconds longer than Romney, giving him 11 percent more talking time. Obama talked for 52 percent of the time when either man had the floor, while Romney talked for 47 percent.

During the vice presidential debate, the gap wasn’t as wide: Biden spoke for 1 minute, 22 seconds more than Ryan. Still, that gave Biden 3 percent more speaking time than Ryan.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/33 ... ina-trinko" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BDKJMU]

"Michelle Obama Broke Agreed Upon Rules, Clapped At Debate

At the second presidential debate on Tuesday night, a camera caught first lady Michelle Obama clapping after moderator Candy Crowley told Republican presidential candidate Gov. Mitt Romney that President Obama called the Benghazi attack an "act of terror" soon after the attack on the U.S. consulate.

Nearly all of the audible applause came from those sitting away from the actual debate, but when FOX News' camera shot moved to a bird's-eye view it became apparent that the only applause from the participating debate audience came from first lady Michelle Obama. Mitt Romney's wife Ann was also sitting with the debate participants.

According to the rules both campaigns agreed to, or the memorandum of understanding (MOA), there is to be no clapping from members of the debate audience.

The rule: Article 9, Section A, Subsection 7: "All members of the debate audience will be instructed by the moderator before the debate goes on the air and by the moderator after the debate goes on the air not to applaud, speak, or otherwise participate in the debate by any means other than by silent observation, except as provided by the agreed upon rules of the October 16 town hall debate.""
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... ebate.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[free7694]

Baldy's scoring metric is too simplistic. Better to look at the series of debates like rounds in boxing. Mitt won the first one handily, 10-8, maybe even 10-7. Last night's debate was a much closer fight, but I give it to Obama, 10-9. So, after two rounds, Romney leads on the cards 19-18 or 19-17, depending on how you see it.

[SeattleGriz]

I'm a big fan of him as well. Don't always agree with him, but no one can accuse him of not knowing his shit.

George Will and Christopher Hitchens / Excellent observational characters - deep thinkers - broad view and microscopic...

I love (and hate) them both

I loved (and hated) him.

[BlueHen86]

Another thing, the fat bitch allowed Obama over 3 min more time than Romney:

Obama gets more time

Amid persistent complaints and interruptions from both candidates, President Obama ultimately got more than three extra minutes of speaking time than Mitt Romney during Tuesday's debate.

According to CNN's timekeeping, Obama got 44:04 minutes of speaking time, while Romney got 40:50.

Both candidates pressed the moderator Candy Crowley — sometimes aggressively — into allowing additional responses and back-and-forth exchanges.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012 ... 38699.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This should be taken out of the moderators hands. When their clock strikes zero there should either be a buzzer or their mikes should be cut. 2 minutes should mean 2 minutes, not a second more.

Yep, or otherwise the Republican candidate will get shafted every debate:

Bizarre Coincidence: Democrats Get More Time in All Three Debates

If you want more time to get your message out in debates, it’s good to be a Democrat.

According to the CNN debate clock, President Obama spoke at greater length than Mitt Romney during both debates, as did Vice President Biden during his debate with Paul Ryan. In the first debate, Obama spoke for 3 minutes, 14 seconds more than Romney — which means he got 8 percent more talking time than Romney. In last night’s debate, Obama spoke for 4 minutes and 18 seconds longer than Romney, giving him 11 percent more talking time. Obama talked for 52 percent of the time when either man had the floor, while Romney talked for 47 percent.

During the vice presidential debate, the gap wasn’t as wide: Biden spoke for 1 minute, 22 seconds more than Ryan. Still, that gave Biden 3 percent more speaking time than Ryan.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/33 ... ina-trinko" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And yet, Romney won the first debate handily. The extra time isn't a big deal.

Nice job quoting and agreeing with yourself by the way.

[BlueHen86]

"Michelle Obama Broke Agreed Upon Rules, Clapped At Debate

Ohhhhh, I'm telling!

[CID1990]

These debates are nothing but a beauty contest. No unsuccessful president has ever won reelection by having a strong debate performance. Conversely, no challenger has ever unseated a successful president because of a strong debate performance.

The numbers are shifting to Romney, and at this point all he has to do is not pick his nose at the next debate, or walk out with toilet paper on his shoes.

[Chizzang]

These debates are nothing but a beauty contest. No unsuccessful president has ever won reelection by having a strong debate performance. Conversely, no challenger has ever unseated a successful president because of a strong debate performance.

The numbers are shifting to Romney, and at this point all he has to do is not pick his nose at the next debate, or walk out with toilet paper on his shoes.

Heck just tell everybody "we're giving away free planets over here"
everybody gets one

I'll vote for that !!!

[CitadelGrad]

These debates are nothing but a beauty contest. No unsuccessful president has ever won reelection by having a strong debate performance. Conversely, no challenger has ever unseated a successful president because of a strong debate performance.

The numbers are shifting to Romney, and at this point all he has to do is not pick his nose at the next debate, or walk out with toilet paper on his shoes.

Dick Nixon was leading comfortably in the polls until Kennedy blew him away at a televised debate.

[AZGrizFan]

These debates are nothing but a beauty contest. No unsuccessful president has ever won reelection by having a strong debate performance. Conversely, no challenger has ever unseated a successful president because of a strong debate performance.

The numbers are shifting to Romney, and at this point all he has to do is not pick his nose at the next debate, or walk out with toilet paper on his shoes.

Dick Nixon was leading comfortably in the polls until Kennedy blew him away at a televised debate.

Yeah. This isn't 1960.

[CID1990]

These debates are nothing but a beauty contest. No unsuccessful president has ever won reelection by having a strong debate performance. Conversely, no challenger has ever unseated a successful president because of a strong debate performance.

The numbers are shifting to Romney, and at this point all he has to do is not pick his nose at the next debate, or walk out with toilet paper on his shoes.

Dick Nixon was leading comfortably in the polls until Kennedy blew him away at a televised debate.

Kennedy wasn't an unsuccessful President.

[CitadelGrad]

Getting your fvcking head blown off isn't the mark of success.

[CitadelGrad]

Dick Nixon was leading comfortably in the polls until Kennedy blew him away at a televised debate.

Yeah. This isn't 1960.

So?

[SDHornet]

Heck just tell everybody "we're giving away free planets over here"
everybody gets one

I'll vote for that !!!

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah. This isn't 1960.

So?

So....the whole "TV debate performance thingy" was much more novel in 1960 than it is today. It would take a wholesale shitting of one's pants (ala Rick Perry) to have a televised debate LOSE an election for you.

[CitadelGrad]

So?

So....the whole "TV debate performance thingy" was much more novel in 1960 than it is today. It would take a wholesale shitting of one's pants (ala Rick Perry) to have a televised debate LOSE an election for you.

ala Obama, you mean. The beginning of the end for Obama came with the first debate.

BTW, Today's Gallup poll of likely voters shows Romney 52% Obama 45%.

Obama has started running ads in Minnesota and Wisconsin. If he's defending those bastions of progressive politics this late in the game, his internal polling numbers must look like shit. Obama is toast.