Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Lone Cat wrote:
- on Healthcare and Social Security debate. I'd say that Romney is more convincing that Obama does. Obama did arrogantly defense his 'Obamacare' and simply bluffed that 'Romney can't do that!' . Romney has been a man of action YEARS before Obama enters politics.

Actually this is true. Romney can't claim to have accomplished anything similar because his health care accomplishment was too close to "Obamacare". Instead he has to hide in shame from his record so his far-right base don't stay home on election day.

- on Federal business regulations thing. Obama simply attacked Romney as 'a greedy baron trying to alter business regulations in its own favor'.

I'd say that's a pretty convincing attack. You know, since it's true.

"If I get elected, we will not have Obamacare. We will do what I did in my state..."

I'd love to hear what they say to each other when they shook hands at the biginning and end of the debate

 Kanluwen wrote:
And Romney held his sons up as examples of liars.

I chuckled.

That was a good line. I also liked Obama saying 'I don't mind the term' when Romney feigned apology for saying Obamacare.

Other than that the limited amount of the debate I heard was pretty decent. Seemed a decent amount of substance, and both candidates seemed to be doing a reasonable job, considering neither of them are top tier debaters.

But note I only heard about 15 minutes of the debate on the way to work.

Dang it... missed the debate and probably won't be able to sit down long enough to watch till tomorrow...

But I'm watching CNN in bits and peices CNN commentators are all talking about how Mitt Romney killed it, and how Obama looked mad, looked away, etc.

For those who've seen it? What's your take?

EDIT: Is twitter still down too?

 Lone Cat wrote:
I'm watchin' now.

- on Healthcare and Social Security debate. I'd say that Romney is more convincing that Obama does. Obama did arrogantly defense his 'Obamacare' and simply bluffed that 'Romney can't do that!' . Romney has been a man of action YEARS before Obama enters politics.

What's arrogant in defending your own policy?

And what's a man of action? Is that like a GI Joe figure or something?

I'd have to go Obama, simply for the fact that someone shook the etch a sketch and he's now once again flopped on all his positions. basically lying through his teeth to appeal to those 47% he doesn't care about.

Okay... from my twitter feed... "When you've lost Bill Maher... “@billmaher: i can't believe i'm saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter” "



K... going back to work...

I thought Obama did better, but I was jumping in and out alot. Romney seemed very defensive and interrupted a lot and seemed flustered.

Good debate, I suppose. Still voting for Obama, even though Romney held up alright.

I think Romney has the wrong ideas in just about every issue. He claims a lot about not raising taxes and increasing deductions, but somehow wants to pull money out of thin air to pay for things. The money isn't there, and without raising taxes, you aren't going to put a lid on the defecit, even if you end up paying for these magical programs.

This was his chance to set things straight and cement his plans and ideas in the hearts of the american people, and he did, but in a way that totally discredits him.

Romney will 'win' the debate according to pundits because of expectations. Provided Romney didn't walk out on stage drunk--this was at the least going to be a close debate--if not Romney leaning.

Personally, I would say Romney won the debate on style--but he sold a lot of views to win this. President Obama didn't just let him deflect/pivot and nailed him on some strange policy calls. Overall, both of them were weak and missed opportunities.


However, I have no doubt the real loser was Jim Lehrer. He just got ran over and did a horrible job moderating---I think he's done.

^ But Jim did pic up Obamacare as a centre of debate. what do you think that he could do it better ??

meow.

Yeah, Jim Lehrer wasn't forceful enough. He let Romney walk all over him, and Obama as well (although Obama was a little more polite about it, and wrapped up his points quicker and neater)...

Felt bad for the fella, but it's his own fault. Apparently he was a Marine. Maybe it's silly, but I figured he would try a little bit harder to get Romney to shut up.

I seriously doubt a Marine, regardless of training, could ever shut up a politician. Even if someone broke Romney/Obama's jaw, he'd still keep talking. He'd just be incomprehensible.

Yeah, main thing was getting talked over.

As a viewer I want moderators to do three things;

Keep the candidates on point and be forceful about time
Don't let candidates deflect and spout an unrelated talking point
Ask pertinent questions

He failed at least the first two---and really I'm not too sure on the third---as he let the candidates (Mostly Romney) setup the next question. IIRC, even Lehrer said something to the affect "I'm not sure how the debate was moderated..".

They need to go back to cutting the mics off when thier time is up.

 AustonT wrote:
They need to go back to cutting the mics off when thier time is up.

I would fully support that.

Aren't there two more debates this month? Hopefully they stay on point, and address some other issues.

The situations occurring abroad in the middle east were ignored, probably deliberately. Romney will show his true colors on these issues. I can't wait.

All these domestic things are nice and whatever, but I must admit I'm more interested to see how they debate about foreign issues.

*shrug*, I don't know the statistical model--but I wouldn't be shocked if incumbents typically lose (or perform poorly) on their first debate. Of course, as a rather affable pundit might say;



"That don' matter! You win debates if you're rusty or not, you're the President!"

Romney won it, was able to get specific points across better and Obama was on the defensive most of the time. I think Obama was unprepared because of the last several weeks of Romney gaffs, whereas Romney was trying to make this the decisive moment.

That was down right embarrassing for Obama.

Even though I'm an Obama supporter, Both of them seemed overly weak to me.

The Pres just didn't seem like he wanted to be there, kinda distant and mopy, and the Gov just seemed too defensive and angry or me to like either one of them.


While the Political analyzers say Romney won, They both lost IMO.

 d-usa wrote:
I thought Obama did better, but I was jumping in and out alot. Romney seemed very defensive and interrupted a lot and seemed flustered.

You know Obama is the black one right? You must have seen a different debate.

 Harriticus wrote:
Romney won it, was able to get specific points across better and Obama was on the defensive most of the time. I think Obama was unprepared because of the last several weeks of Romney gaffs, whereas Romney was trying to make this the decisive moment.

If by "specific points", you mean "specific generalities".

 gregor_xenos wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I thought Obama did better, but I was jumping in and out alot. Romney seemed very defensive and interrupted a lot and seemed flustered.

You know Obama is the black one right? You must have seen a different debate.

You know I said that I only saw bits and pieces right?

 Samus_aran115 wrote:
Yeah, Jim Lehrer wasn't forceful enough. He let Romney walk all over him, and Obama as well (although Obama was a little more polite about it, and wrapped up his points quicker and neater)...

Felt bad for the fella, but it's his own fault. Apparently he was a Marine. Maybe it's silly, but I figured he would try a little bit harder to get Romney to shut up.

bolded for emphasis. Obama actually got 4:30 minutes more speaking time than Romney so quicker and neater isn't actually true.

It's always interesting to me how people call winners and losers out of these debates based on who seemed more confident, or didn't stumble on their words or whatever. I've never been able to figure out how that stuff matters.

Surely all that matters is who sounds like they've got policies that appeal?

 Samus_aran115 wrote:
Aren't there two more debates this month? Hopefully they stay on point, and address some other issues.

The situations occurring abroad in the middle east were ignored, probably deliberately. Romney will show his true colors on these issues. I can't wait.

All these domestic things are nice and whatever, but I must admit I'm more interested to see how they debate about foreign issues.

This debate was scheduled to be entirely on domestic policy. The next two debates will be on both domestic and foreign policy, and the last debate will be on foreign policy exclusively.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
Romney won it, was able to get specific points across better and Obama was on the defensive most of the time. I think Obama was unprepared because of the last several weeks of Romney gaffs, whereas Romney was trying to make this the decisive moment.

If by "specific points", you mean "specific generalities".

Indeed. I have no idea where people are getting 'Romney was more specific' from when he was quite vague on a lot of things. He has "what I want to do" down, to some extent, but I never really hear the important 'this is how I'm going to do it". It is just "I will get rid of Obamacare", which he can't just do, and doesn't say how he plans to do it.

CNN's instant polling results indicate the majority believe Romney pretty well crushed Obama in this one.

I'd expect the race to tighten considerably (if it's not already absurdly tight; using 2008 voting models is a little ridiculous).

Its the economy stupid...and Obamacare.

Obama said his own policies were Clinton era and Romney's would be a return to Bush era.

Romney replied that his policies would be new and different then anything done before.

They both did a good job (Jim included) about keeping Obamacare tied to the countries economic situation. Romney didn't deny that Obama's policies have been a return to a Clinton style economy. So either Romney would be a return to a Bush style economy or something completely new and unknown depending on which canidate you choose to believe. During the Clinton administration the economy was booming with his policies in full force during his second term, no doubt about it, and that was after Bush Sr. raised taxes after his "read my lips" statement. Then GW came in and tanked the economy after 8 years of deregulation, and lets face it, the wars. So we still have the war situation, but we have the Obama/Clinton economic policies in place. The economy isn't tanking. Obama said he would fight for the middle class and he demonstrated everytime how his policies worked to do that. A lot of the time his policies look like entitlements for the lower income at the expense of upper income brackets and I think that demonstrates his putting the middle class first. If you own a private jet you should pay the frieght, to paraphrase. Romney wants to go back to what Bush was doing if you believe Obama. Doesn't really sound appealing and even Romney said he didn't want to go there. So Romney said he thinks the Obama/Clinton style economic governance is taking the country in the wrong direction and he wanted to do something new and different. No thanks. Sounds risky. Call me conservative. I don't want to take a chance on his policies especially when they are as unclear and simple as, "something new and different." I'm voting to stay the course for the middle class. It worked with Clinton and it will and is working with Obama. Good debate.