Presidential debate thread

[stevemcqueen1]

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.

I don't think he's weak and I don't think his performance in the debate is reflective of his ability as president. He's gotten a lot of crap done despite facing a horrible economy, two unfinished vastly expensive wars, and the most oppositional and obstructionist congress since... probably ever. You can't do that without a backbone of steel.

And ultimately, I think the media will do the job of excoriating Romney for lying for Obama. That's the funny thing about telling lots of lies, you'll piss people off and they'll start calling you out on it. Has anyone focused on the false claims Obama made? There had to be some.

I doubt any of it matters though. I think the news cycles so fast these things play almost no factor in the way people actually vote when they are at the poll. Romney is an untrustworthy liar and shill for big business and the far right, or Obama is an untrustworthy socialist and redistributionist who wants government to own and control everything. That's what a lot of people will take with them to the polls.

[redskindan07]

The Ryan and Biden debate next week should be interesting...

[The Evil Genius]

I doubt, seeing how he's now being eviscerated by the media & etc., that O will play it safe in future debates.

As for the 47% lack on focus last night - why give Romney another chance to explain or apologize for it? The maximum damage has already been done.

[Mad Mike]

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.

He just looked like he was really tired and a little brain dead. I've had days like that after only a few hours sleep where I could barely form a coherent thought on subjects I knew well.

Romney looked tired as well. (did anyone else notice his eyes looked bloodshot?) but because he was the one with the initiative with his new "reasonable & moderate" persona, Obama seemed to be the one forced to think on his feet more. Romney seemed to be repeating a well practiced script and didn't have to think as much.

[NLC1054]

Obama doing a campaign rally right now that looks and sounds a lot like what he should've done last night, I'll admit...

[Mad Mike]

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.

I fully expect a better performance by Obama next time now that he has seen Romney's new "reasonable" persona.

And Romney... the dude would be one slick used car salesman. I could see him slipping from "youse guys" to "y'all" at the hint of a rebel flag on a customers car.

[DjTj]

I doubt, seeing how he's now being eviscerated by the media & etc., that O will play it safe in future debates.

As for the 47% lack on focus last night - why give Romney another chance to explain or apologize for it? The maximum damage has already been done.

That's not true at all. Millions of people tuned into the debates last night who have not been following the day-to-day election news cycle. And as SHF pointed out, I think that 90% of people in the U.S. don't really understand where the 47% number comes from and what it means.

If the best strategy is to not bring things up that have already been beaten to death on the campaign trail, why didn't Romney just ignore Obamacare last night?

[Gibbsisgod2006]

I don't think he's weak and I don't think his performance in the debate is reflective of his ability as president. He's gotten a lot of crap done despite facing a horrible economy, two unfinished vastly expensive wars, and the most oppositional and obstructionist congress since... probably ever. You can't do that without a backbone of steel.

And ultimately, I think the media will do the job of excoriating Romney for lying for Obama. That's the funny thing about telling lots of lies, you'll piss people off and they'll start calling you out on it. Has anyone focused on the false claims Obama made? There had to be some.

I doubt any of it matters though. I think the news cycles so fast these things play almost no factor in the way people actually vote when they are at the poll. Romney is an untrustworthy liar and shill for big business and the far right, or Obama is an untrustworthy socialist and redistributionist who wants government to own and control everything. That's what a lot of people will take with them to the polls.

He has done nothing but let Al Qaeda back in to Afghanistan and as regard to the Iraq war he was just following through with President Bush withdrawl plan that was already in place. President Obama also let US Ambasodor get killed on his watch by an act of terrorism as well.

[The Evil Genius]

Edited cause it said ****.

Humorous though.

[NLC1054]

He has done nothing but let Al Qaeda back in to Afghanistan and as regard to the Iraq war he was just following through with President Bush withdrawl plan that was already in place. President Obama also let US Ambasodor get killed on his watch by an act of terrorism as well.

Al Qaeda left Afghanistan? I don't think they ever left Afghanistan. And they likely won't leave Afghanistan unless we leave Afghanistan a giant smoking crater.

Our job in Afghanistan was to kill Osama bin Laden. That happened. Under the Obama administration there have also been several key members and figures of of Al Qaeda who have been eliminated. The notion that he "let someone get killed under his watch" is ridiculous, especially in the face of all the evidence that Dubya had about 9/11.

[Hersh]

He has done nothing but let Al Qaeda back in to Afghanistan and as regard to the Iraq war he was just following through with President Bush withdrawl plan that was already in place. President Obama also let US Ambasodor get killed on his watch by an act of terrorism as well.

So much is wrong with this statement but it's pretty clear that you hate Obama for whatever reason you've made up in your mind. I bet you voted for Bush in 2004 even though you might not admit it now.

[LadySkinsFan]

Where were the women and our issues? Are we not part of the domestic debate? I guess not. Obama had a huge opportunity to score major points with the largest electorate demographic (women) and nothing.

---------- Post added October-4th-2012 at 01:21 PM ----------

People, Bush didn't have a timetable to get out of Iraq; they kicked us out, set a deadline for us to be out, and when Obama tried to extend it, it was shot down.

Again, Iraq booted us out.

[Gibbsisgod2006]

Al Qaeda left Afghanistan? I don't think they ever left Afghanistan. And they likely won't leave Afghanistan unless we leave Afghanistan a giant smoking crater.

Our job in Afghanistan was to kill Osama bin Laden. That happened. Under the Obama administration there have also been several key members and figures of of Al Qaeda who have been eliminated. The notion that he "let someone get killed under his watch" is ridiculous, especially in the face of all the evidence that Dubya had about 9/11.

Seriously it is ridiculous he allowed a US ambasador get killed were not talking about Bush were talking about President Obama who has blamed a stupid film for this act instead of taking repsonibility for it. OK they may have killed some top Al Queda officals but still the violence in Afganistan has gotten worse.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_16...in;cbsCarousel

[Hersh]

And ultimately, I think the media will do the job of excoriating Romney for lying for Obama. That's the funny thing about telling lots of lies, you'll piss people off and they'll start calling you out on it. Has anyone focused on the false claims Obama made? There had to be some.

I actually disagree with you on what the media will do. Investigative journalism is almost completely dead and at the point that the media cares more about ratings than about substance. They want this to be close, it serves there best interest. Holding Romney and Obama accountable isn't good tv compared to a tight race. As I think you or someone else pointed out in this thread, all people talked about last night was the style Romney had with very few people talking about the lack of facts or his previous positions. If fact, when it was pointed out that Romney was factually off-base, it was dismissed as spin for Obama not showing more fight. Facts continue to be the biggest loser in this country.

[visionary]

I bet you voted for Bush in 2004 even though you might not admit it now.

LOL, this is kind of a weird accusation to make.