Presidential debate thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pointyfootball

I don't think politics is about money...more about power.

---

If money didn't = power, I would agree. They're pretty much one and the same now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by endzone_dave

Because everyone knew Romney was full of BS and the Obama couldn't call him on it. Plus an incumbent should be able to say look at all the great stuff I accomplished in the last four years and Obama couldn't - basically because he had nothing to brag about. And not evening bringing up the 47% issues was spineless.

---

i TOTALLY disagree on that one.

the 47% is out there. everyone knows it. it is there. to raise it HERE just would've given Romney a chance to deliver his prepared response. don't send out the obvious ones... that is just a soft underhanded lob of a pitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkinsHokieFan

This is silly. Why would you not hammer someone on a very weak point they have? Chris Matthews didn't get it last night why it would be left out.

It would be the equivalent of if the Falcons decided to throw 0 passes on Sunday, despite that being an overwhelming matchup advantage for them.

Its dumb. Its either shows a) a terrible lack of judgement and competence (which has been a hallmark trait of this administration or b) laziness, and it is really unacceptable that a President would do this in a debate.

I am not that impressed by Romney, and in speaking with my friend on his campaign today, they don't think its the overwhelming 2 TD victory most people are trotting it out to be.

---

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the only thing that Chris Matthews gets is tingles up his legs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bang

Nothing against you Steve, but this is exactly what I'm on about.

He stared well, this is not a qualification to be president.
But this is what they're looking at.


Both had a windsor knot in their tie, although Romney's looked more presidential.

this is crap.

PLASTIC ARTIFICIAL CRAP!!!!

~Bull ****!!!

---

You have to understand why looks are important. You're right that they have no inherent connection to value for being president whatsoever. But looks are how human beings do the vast majority of their communication. It's just how our psychology/biology. And communicating your ideas/message effectively is extremely important for these candidates to achieve their goal.

Romney was the more successful communicator last night because of all of that powerful visual stuff that seems arbitrary upon reflection.

I think Obama's miscalculation was that he wanted to appear thoughtful and Presidential, when really everyone wanted him to be an *******. He wanted to remind people of what he's done and try to dispell some of the stuff Romney's been saying and lay some of the groundwork for future policies, and everyone else wanted Obama to go for the throat and chokeslam Romney through the floor.

I mean that's kind of what I'm getting with all this "he appeared weak and unprepared" crud. Like people were so busy being annoyed that Obama wasn't essentially playing Romney's game that they completely forgot that most of what Romney said was bull****. They're impressed because Romney looked like an actual human being for once and ignoring the fact that what he said had little basis in fact and reality.

I don't care how Obama looked. I care what he said. Like, the words and stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcsluggo

i TOTALLY disagree on that one.

the 47% is out there. everyone knows it. it is there. to raise it HERE just would've given Romney a chance to deliver his prepared response. don't send out the obvious ones... that is just a soft underhanded lob of a pitch.

---

Thats just ridiculous

Why would you keep your best ammo in the war chest.

It is fresh on everyone's mind. You pound him on it, hammer him on it and put him on the defensive.

I was stunned how defensive the President was last night. There was one particular sequence when they were debating the "health care board"

The President, rather then detailing out that this board is made up of health care experts and the top of their field, was defending the word "board" and allowing Mitt to define it as a group of unelected people akin to death panels.

I, as a never would vote for Obama guy, was stunned he wasn't responding stronger here to a blatant mischaracterization of a fairly interesting aspect of the health care bill which I wasn't aware of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honorary_hog

So the more left-leaning among us continue to think that anyone who disagrees with them is a spoonfed moron? That's helpful. Really. It is.

---

This is the reason I hate politics. Republicans claim Democrats are evil and Democrats claim Republicans are stupid, and they both attack anyone not in the two mainstream parties as irrelevant. That's why I remain Independent. Neither of them encourage the two sides to work together on anything because they're too busy trying to make statements that incite hate on the other group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bang

Nothing against you Steve, but this is exactly what I'm on about.

He stared well, this is not a qualification to be president.
But this is what they're looking at.


Both had a windsor knot in their tie, although Romney's looked more presidential.

this is crap.

PLASTIC ARTIFICIAL CRAP!!!!

~Bull ****!!!

---

But that's what debates are about, and have been since JFK beat Nixon.
And there is a good portion of being president that relies on going around and presenting yourself in a certain manner depending on the situation, whether it's meeting with rival world leaders, or reassuring the American public, or comforting people in mourning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevemcqueen1

You have to understand why looks are important. You're right that they have no inherent connection to value for being president whatsoever. But looks are how human beings do the vast majority of their communication. It's just how our psychology/biology. And communicating your ideas/message effectively is extremely important for these candidates to achieve their goal.

Romney was the more successful communicator last night because of all of that powerful visual stuff that seems arbitrary upon reflection.

---

If looks are part of it then Romney is in huge trouble. The guy looks like a T-1000 with a suit on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Evil Genius

Forgive me if this has been posted..thought it was interesting though.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwood...-not-solyndra/

---

Interesting,but fails to tell the real story on Telsa
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ly_114146.html

http://investorplace.com/2012/09/tes...tion-too-soon/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkinsHokieFan

This is silly. Why would you not hammer someone on a very weak point they have? Chris Matthews didn't get it last night why it would be left out.

It would be the equivalent of if the Falcons decided to throw 0 passes on Sunday, despite that being an overwhelming matchup advantage for them.

Its dumb. Its either shows a) a terrible lack of judgement and competence (which has been a hallmark trait of this administration or b) laziness, and it is really unacceptable that a President would do this in a debate.

I am not that impressed by Romney, and in speaking with my friend on his campaign today, they don't think its the overwhelming 2 TD victory most people are trotting it out to be.

---

I don't think I would equate it to zero passes, but it's more like Obama only took the underneath passes even though he had a wide receiver running free in the middle of the field.

And actually I think we complain about the Redskins doing this all the time. Although it might be in the playbook, the quarterback ends up trying to wait for the right moment, the coach tells him to be careful with the ball, and he never throws it. Maybe Obama felt like he has a lead, so he's just going to try to run out the clock. He doesn't want to take a shot down the field right now.

edit: I would have preferred that Obama brought up the 47% soundbite, just like I like to see the Redskins take a deep shot. It's more entertaining, and I am still wondering what Romney had prepared in response. But we're just spectators, and there are still a few debates to go.

People will see what they want to see in these debates.

There were no knockout punches landed. No great soundbites. Both came across OK.

But Obama did a poor job of calling Romney on the 47% comment, and on the disconnect between not raising taxes, spending $2T more on defense and paying down the deficit. Big Bird and PBS represents something like one ten thousandth of the budget. That a politician would pick it as one of two examples shows how disconnected these talking points are from anything useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bang

We're a nation of mouthbreathing morons.

~Bang

---

So, Bang, you have since altered your statement a little, or at least softened it. Would you now say that 47% of us are "mouthbreathing morons". :ols:

I would have to say, IMO, anyone that chooses a party and believes they agree with EVERYTHING that EVERY candidate from that party thinks then they are morons. The whole idea of choosing a party puts you on the defense whenever anyone says something that might slightly disagree with your candidate. I honestly believe most people find it impossible to be unbiased when talking about members of their political parties. Just like most Redskins fans find it impossible to be unbiased when talking about the Skins' players vs the Cowboys' players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spjunkies

If looks are part of it then Romney is in huge trouble. The guy looks like a T-1000 with a suit on.

---

Agree. In the styles and looks category, President Obama should win hands down every time. Mitt is horribly awkward and fails in every way to connect with people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corcaigh

People will see what they want to see in these debates.

There were no knockout punches landed. No great soundbites. Both came across OK.

But Obama did a poor job of calling Romney on the 47% comment, and on the disconnect between not raising taxes, spending $2T more on defense and paying down the deficit. Big Bird and PBS represents something like one ten thousandth of the budget. That a politician would pick it as one of two examples shows how disconnected these talking points are from anything useful.

---

And I'll be shocked if that doesn't come up again at some point, either on the campaign trail or in the Town Hall. it's a bit easier to gameplan for your opponent when you know the strategy.