Presidential debate thread

[DjTj]

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.

But that is kind of the reality, isn't it? Neither of the candidates are really proposing anything large enough to make a difference in the deficit. Romney says he's going to cut taxes without cutting taxes. Obama is going to cut spending without cutting spending. Neither of them are willing to touch Social Security or Medicare for current seniors. The differences between the candidates on tax and budget issues are really a tiny fraction of the budget when you really get down to it.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Did President Obama last night appear as uncomfortable as GHWB in 1992 against Clinton?

There wasn't a "stare at the watch" moment, but after 15 minutes he looked like he would rather be anywhere else.

[SkinsHokieFan]

As far has him not calling out the 47% thing, does anyone think Romney didn't have a scripted, prepared response to that? I mean, just think for a minute. They've had like two-three weeks to counter the 47% bomb.

What would be a counter to the 47 percent?

And wouldn't the President's preparation include a counter to that counter?

You hammer a clear weakness, you don't pull a Denny Green and let them off the hook.

Really, this was an exchange that NEEDED to happen. Too many people on the right actually feel that half this country pays nothing in taxes, which is false and don't realize that the reason taxes are so low for the 47 percent is because of the GWB tax cuts

[NLC1054]

As far has him not calling out the 47% thing, does anyone think Romney didn't have a scripted, prepared response to that? I mean, just think for a minute. They've had like two-three weeks to counter the 47% bomb.

[Jumbo]

After being very impressed with Mitt's slick and polished Madmen portrayal of a presidential candidate compared to Professor I.M. Boring, I have been motivated to find Mitt's new "rebooted vital signs" <!CLEAR!> campaign theme song.

Johnny Horton would approve 100%.

When our country was a baby and the Redcoats had their way
It was he who had a party tossin’ tea in Boston Bay
It was he who braved the winter in the days of Valley Forge
Fightin’side by side together with a fella name of George

Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
You can meet him on each page of history
He’s the spirit of America
Our country’s pride and joy
Hats off to Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
That’s our boy

When our country started growin’ and the wagons headed West
When our country called for pioneers, his name led all the rest
What a figure in his rawhide coat and hat made of raccoon
Wonder what there was about him made you think of Dan’l Boone

Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
You can meet him on each page of history
He’s the spirit of America
Our country’s pride and joy
Hats off to Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
That’s our boy

If we need a mess of thinkin’ he’s the Lincoln of the day
If we’re fixin’ for a tussle it’s his muscle all the way
If we need a handsome fella so the ladies hearts can throb
There’s a Yankee Doodle Dandy always handy for the job

Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
You can meet him on each page of history
He’s the spirit of America
Our country’s pride and joy
Hats off to Johnny Freedom, Johnny Freedom
That’s our, that’s our, that’s our boy

[Corcaigh]

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.

The Clinton "arithmetic" talking point in his conference speech got a lot of traction. Unless Romney gives specifics on his "arithmetic" that work, Obama should hammer this point.

[NLC1054]

What would be a counter to the 47 percent?

And wouldn't the President's preparation include a counter to that counter?

You hammer a clear weakness, you don't pull a Denny Green and let them off the hook.

Really, this was an exchange that NEEDED to happen. Too many people on the right actually feel that half this country pays nothing in taxes, which is false and don't realize that the reason taxes are so low for the 47 percent is because of the GWB tax cuts

A lie. A big giant bold face lie, just like nearly everything else Romney said. But it'd be a lie to diffuse the point and somehow spin it back around on Obama.

I mean I wanted Obama to say something about it too, but given the evidence, I think it was clearly Romney was prepared for it somehow, even though it would've been with a lie.

[SkinsHokieFan]

A lie. A big giant bold face lie, just like nearly everything else Romney said. But it'd be a lie to diffuse the point and somehow spin it back around on Obama.

I mean I wanted Obama to say something about it too, but given the evidence, I think it was clearly Romney was prepared for it somehow, even though it would've been with a lie.

So the President and his people were so afraid of the counter, they were willing to forgo the biggest hammer they have had on Mitt the last 2 weeks?

That is absolutely terrible. No wonder Bibi is able to stand up at the UN and draw red lines.

If that is the reason the 47 percent was not brought up, this President is incredibly weak. Which I really hope he isn't, because this is a discussion that needs to happen.

[Rocky21]

I just read this in the left leaning, pinko rag The Washington Post.

Consider the task facing Romney going into Wednesday’s debate: Nationally, RealClearPolitics’s poll average had him down three points; Nate Silver’s model had him down four. He had held a lead in a major poll exactly once since the end of August. The electoral college looked even worse for him: RealClear’s map gave Obama 269 electoral votes safe or leaning to Romney’s 181 (with 88 in toss-up states); HuffPost Pollster gave Obama a 290-191 lead; and Nate Silver’s model had Obama winning an average of 319 electoral votes to Romney’s 218, a comfortable margin. Even Karl Rove had 277 votes safe or leaning to Obama, with another 70 as toss-ups.

“Ah,” you say, “that may be true, but surely the gap is small enough to close? And wouldn’t the first debate be enough to bring this race back to a dead heat?” In a word, no.

Incumbent presidents almost always have a poor first debate: George W. Bush lost to John Kerry in 2004, for example, and Walter Mondale beat Ronald Reagan so badly in 1984 that there was a spate of articles asking if the incumbent was too old for the presidency. Yet never has a challenger’s strong first debate performance closed as large a national polling gap as Romney faced going into last night’s debate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...g.html?hpid=z3

[stevemcqueen1]

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

He's got a Nixonian squint to his eyes.

I think looks were a huge problem for Romney prior to the debate. His personal likability disadvantage was enough to lose the election. Nobody trusted him, especially not conservatives. But he was funny and human seeming last night, which has been his primary goal during the primary and during that debate IMO. Don't know how much of a difference last night will make for him, but it's not going to hurt him in the likability department overall.

Except for people like me, who already didn't trust him, and were infuriated by the lies perceived in his message.

[Rocky21]

sorry. double post.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Whats funny Rocky is that those debates highlighted weaknesses in both Bush and Reagan going into their 2nd terms.

Bush was stupid. Reagan was clearly too old by that point.

Did this debate last night highlight that President Obama is too much of a nice guy to call someone out on their BS?

[DjTj]

What would be a counter to the 47 percent?

And wouldn't the President's preparation include a counter to that counter?

You hammer a clear weakness, you don't pull a Denny Green and let them off the hook.

Really, this was an exchange that NEEDED to happen. Too many people on the right actually feel that half this country pays nothing in taxes, which is false and don't realize that the reason taxes are so low for the 47 percent is because of the GWB tax cuts

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it makes no sense. It had to be part of Obama's preparation to bring up the 47 percent. He has already talked about it on the campaign trail, and even referenced it on Letterman. His line of attack on this is already pretty well developed.

We don't have any way of knowing whether Obama decided not to bring it up for some reason, or if he was waiting for a moment that never came. I'm sure Romney had some prepared response to it, but forcing Romney to at least acknowledge the facts would have been important. There are more debates though, and with the uproar I am sure Obama will bring it up at the next one.

...Of course, since all the pundits were waiting for it, Jim Lehrer could have just brought it up explicitly rather than just repeatedly asking, "So guys, are there differences between the two of you on _____ ?" I think that's what moderators are supposed to do.

[NLC1054]

So the President and his people were so afraid of the counter, they were willing to forgo the biggest hammer they have had on Mitt the last 2 weeks?

'

I don't think they were afraid of it. But I think it'd be much harder for Mitt Romney to defend that accusation, say, in front of a Town Hall group, then in the format of the first debate is all I'm saying.

[Jumbo]

Did President Obama last night appear as uncomfortable as GHWB in 1992 against Clinton?

There wasn't a "stare at the watch" moment, but after 15 minutes he looked like he would rather be anywhere else.

Close. There's no good excuse for Obama's fumbling the ball last night. It was strategically dumb no matter what "excusing" spin supporters try to put on it. He handled himself poorly. He was improperly prepared. But it's done. It's far from lethal. They just let Romney back in the game more than they should on their own end.

If he had been any major GOP figure offering that level of effort, we non-GOPers would be all over him for such a poor showing. It really is a game and he fumbled on an important drive. It's hardly over, however and there's a lot to this game. It's not all shallow.

I expect his team to work on the obvious. Use fact-checks to eviscerate Romney's clear win on surface presentation (which still will yield only limited damage repair) and more importantly, prepare to kick his ass thoroughly next time where it counts---in those superficial but vital appearances.

He can keep to some substance on issues, but he needs to show some of his top-drawer campaign trail pizzazz. Oh, and have Biden (and I like/respect Smokin' Joe) kidnapped and hidden away until after the election.