Who Won the Debate?

[lotus503]

Romney pummeled Obama.

This is the man leading our country folks. Barrack Obama who can't even articulate well. Who doesn't have the facts. Who lost a debate to a lousy car salesman. Romney made such glaring falsities? Then why didn't Obama call him out.

Face it guys. You can't fix the economy. And Obama can't and couldn't fix the economy. It isn't a simple issue. Chances are that the solution is something that AVERAGE and above average people won't understand. Heck, it might take a PHD to understand it. Romney understands it. Does it matter if you don't understand how Romney is going to fix the economy?

The fact is, he knows his shit. He knows the economy far better than any of us. If any of us knew the economy as well as he did, then we would be worth 200million as well. And Obama doesn't understand the economy either. If Romney were to articulate in full detail every loophole he would close, spending he would cut, etc., and how it would fix the economy, it would take a 200-slide powerpoint presentation.

The answer isn't a simple one line: raise taxes on rich. It just isn't.

Making money within an economy is not indicitive of ones ability to fix it.

Our economic problems are the result of systemtic issues brought on by decades of bad policy. if you try and fix it within the existing model you will do nothing but create boom bust cycles and bubbles.

The only way out is a new model not bandaids on the existing model.

 

[OrByte]

Romney pummeled Obama.

This is the man leading our country folks. Barrack Obama who can't even articulate well. Who doesn't have the facts. Who lost a debate to a lousy car salesman. Romney made such glaring falsities? Then why didn't Obama call him out.

Face it guys. You can't fix the economy. And Obama can't and couldn't fix the economy. It isn't a simple issue. Chances are that the solution is something that AVERAGE and above average people won't understand. Heck, it might take a PHD to understand it. Romney understands it. Does it matter if you don't understand how Romney is going to fix the economy?

The fact is, he knows his shit. He knows the economy far better than any of us. If any of us knew the economy as well as he did, then we would be worth 200million as well. And Obama doesn't understand the economy either. If Romney were to articulate in full detail every loophole he would close, spending he would cut, etc., and how it would fix the economy, it would take a 200-slide powerpoint presentation.

The answer isn't a simple one line: raise taxes on rich. It just isn't.

I completely disagree and here is why...it was a 2 minute exchange early on in the debate:

Romney was talking about the 3 things he thinks will cut the deficit

1. raise revenue
2. cut programs
3. grow the economy

lets cut out #3 because that doesn't mean anything..

So Romney's approach to cutting the deficit is either 1 or 2...his words...his position last night

Obama's response was right on. I'm paraphrasing but Obama basically said you have to have a measured approach of tax increases and program cuts

Obama's plan is to raise 1 dollar for every 2.50 in cuts.

simple, measured, moderate.

I see nothing wrong with that approach, in fact, I think it makes more sense to tackle huge deficits with a combination of cuts and increases...it isn't an all or nothing approach that Romney described.

It's funny that I came away from the debate thinking one thing and you obviously thinking something entirely different....not bad...just funny

Does it matter if you don't understand how Romney is going to fix the economy?

yes it does, absolutely, especially since Mr. Romney isn't being clear on his plans.

 

[Blackjack200]

The fact is, he knows his shit. He knows the economy far better than any of us. If any of us knew the economy as well as he did, then we would be worth 200million as well.

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have made fortunes that make Mitt's money look like table scraps, wonder who they're supporting?

Counterintuitively, business success does not mean you have broad understanding of the economy.

 

[woolfe9999]

How long would it take for Romney to detail one loophole he would close?

Better question: if he doesn't have time do so comprehensively in a debate, why has he failed to do so on his own website?

Why has he failed to provide a detailed health care plan which will "replace" Obamacare after he repeals it?

Why has he failed to provide a detailed financial regulatory plan to replace Dodd-Frank?

Even assuming he pays for the lowered tax rates by eliminating enough deductions, how does he plan to balance the budget after increasing defense spending and will not cut SS or Medicare? Do we see anywhere the $10 trillion in cuts over 10 years he needs to accomplish this? We're not talking chicken feed like cutting NPR. This isn't about giving tiny examples. Where are these massive cuts?

 

[Matt1970]

I completely disagree and here is why...it was a 2 minute exchange early on in the debate:

Romney was talking about the 3 things he thinks will cut the deficit

1. raise revenue
2. cut programs
3. build a strong economy

lets cut out #3 because that doesn't mean anything..

So Romney's approach to cutting the deficit is either 1 or 2...his words...his position last night

Obama's response was right on. I'm paraphrasing but Obama basically said you have to have a measured approach of tax increases and program cuts

Obama's plan is to raise 1 dollar for every 2.50 in cuts.

simple, measured, moderate.

I see nothing wrong with that approach, in fact, I think it makes more sense to tackle huge deficits with a combination of cuts and increases...it isn't an all or nothing approach that Romney described.

It's funny that I came away from the debate thinking one thing and you obviously thinking something entirely different....not bad...just funny

Building a strong economy doesn't mean anything? A strong economy means more tax payers paying in. This is probably why you see Obama wining the debate. Romney also mentioned that raising taxes in a bad economy costs jobs so you never reach your end goal of raising revenue.

 

[OrByte]

Building a strong economy doesn't mean anything? A strong economy means more tax payers paying in. This is probably why you see Obama wining the debate. Romney also mentioned that raising taxes in a bad economy costs jobs so you never reach your end goal of raising revenue.

when I say it doesn't mean anything I'm saying it is a nebulous point.

Both candidates say they want to have a "strong economy"

but the phrase itself makes no indication of any PLAN to do so.

make sense?

 

[zinfamous]

Mitt won by default because Obama wouldn't call him out on his bullshit. Obama was lost in some cloud in his mind, thinking he'll win on logic alone, but Americans want to see a fight. First thing he should've done was tear Mitt a new one over the 47% remark.

heh. All Obama had to do was say that this is a decision between a man who promises to represent and work for every American, and the other who only wants to represent 53% of America.



A bit of political dumbassery, but very effective with the voting public.

 

[jackstar7]

Building a strong economy doesn't mean anything? A strong economy means more tax payers paying in. This is probably why you see Obama wining the debate. Romney also mentioned that raising taxes in a bad economy costs jobs so you never reach your end goal of raising revenue.

Romney also said the people at the top are doing fine in this economy...

 

[OrByte]

Romney also said the people at the top are doing fine in this economy...

he said something similar last night...I should look if there are transcripts

it caught my attention

 

[thelastjuju]

Obama's problem last night was that he just doesn't seem UP for a second term. Period. He missed so many opportunities it was just shocking to me. I kept waiting for it, but he failed to deliver.

Although Romney left a far better impression after the debate was over, I was still left having literally no clue exactly what he going to DO to grow the economy. Nobody knows. Even the most conservative people I know don't know, they just trust Romney will figure something out because he is a millionaire businessman.

Problem with that is, we elected a millionaire businessman, Herbert Hoover, to revive the economy after the Great Depression, and he failed miserably.. 25% unemployment under Hoover, which would only drop towards the end of WW2.

Here's to hoping it doesn't take a World War 3 with Russia, China, and the Middle East to get us out of this mess! :\

 

[buckshot24]

It makes a better media narrative for all players on all sides.

A close race is good for "business".

Obama got smoked so badly that even MSNBC had to admit so. If it wasn't the case they would have gladly said so. You can't spin this.

 

[lotus503]

Obama's problem last night was that he just doesn't seem UP for a second term. Period. He missed so many opportunities it was just shocking to me. I kept waiting for it, but he failed to deliver.

Although Romney left a far better impression after the debate was over, I was still left having literally no clue exactly what he going to DO to grow the economy. Nobody knows. Even the most conservative people I know don't know, they just trust Romney will figure something out because he is a millionaire businessman.

Problem with that is, we elected a millionaire businessman, Herbert Hoover, to revive the economy after the Great Depression, and he failed miserably.. 25% unemployment under Hoover, which would only drop towards the end of WW2.

Here's to hoping it doesn't take a World War 3 with Russia, China, and the Middle East to get us out of this mess! :\

the fact is we have a consumption based economy, requiring spending to keep it going. we need to reestablish a serious manufactuing base again.

Get off china's nuts

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Romneys main problem is lack of consistency and coherency in his msg. Voters just don't trust this guy, and he refuses to give specifics. The public is not going to dump Obama for an unknown that willfully trashed 47% of Americans.

 

[buckshot24]

Romney was talking about the 3 things he thinks will cut the deficit

1. raise revenue
2. cut programs
3. grow the economy

lets cut out #3 because that doesn't mean anything..

#3 means EVERYTHING. If you've got a flatlining economy it doesn't matter if you have tax rates at 60%.

So Romney's approach to cutting the deficit is either 1 or 2...his words...his position last night

And a growing economy.
Obama's response was right on. I'm paraphrasing but Obama basically said you have to have a measured approach of tax increases and program cuts

Obama's plan is to raise 1 dollar for every 2.50 in cuts.

simple, measured, moderate.

The problem here is that the tax increases always come first then the cuts never occur.

One thing is certain I think, raising taxes doesn't grow the economy.

I see nothing wrong with that approach, in fact, I think it makes more sense to tackle huge deficits with a combination of cuts and increases...it isn't an all or nothing approach that Romney described.

The economy is not a zero sum game. If you grow the pie each piece is larger and you don't have to make huge cuts.

yes it does, absolutely, especially since Mr. Romney isn't being clear on his plans.

He sort of answered this last night. A president can't get everything that he wants. He needs to negotiate with congress to get closer to his ideal.

 

[jackstar7]

Obama got smoked so badly that even MSNBC had to admit so. If it wasn't the case they would have gladly said so. You can't spin this.

You're spinning it right there.

 

[spidey07]

Romneys main problem is lack of consistency and coherency in his msg. Voters just don't trust this guy, and he refuses to give specifics. The public is not going to dump Obama for an unknown that willfully trashed 47% of Americans.

Oh yes they are going to dump Obama. Last night made up a lot of people's minds, and it wasn't in favor of obama. He looked absolutely terrible up there and got bitch slapped by a real leader. Last night Romney captured a large majority of undecided and independents.

Do you not remember the carter/Reagan debates and what happened? History is repeating itself. Carter should thank Obama, he's no longer the worst president ever. Obama has clearly taken on that role in history, it is a historic presidency after all.

 

[buckshot24]

You're spinning it right there.

MSNBC is filled with partisans, most of if not all of the hosts want Obama to win.

 

[Perknose]

Oh yes they are going to dump Obama.

I've got $500 says Obama beats Romney this fall. Do you have the courage of your convictions? Is it a bet, spidey?

 

[jackstar7]

MSNBC is filled with partisans, most of if not all of the hosts want Obama to win.

And maybe some of them put the truth above their feelings... like what we ask of people who give us the news.

I'm hardly going to defend a network like msnbc, but you're kinda attacking it from a meaningless position.

The reality is that they apparently defied your expectations, so rather than reconsider your prejudice against them, you fit their actions into your prejudice.

 

[Dulanic]

I've got $500 says Obama beats Romney this fall. Do you have the courage of your convictions? Is it a bet, spidey?

Many have made that bet, myself included. Him and Matt have no backbone to stand behind their candidate.

We still have 2 debates to go, this is far from over and debates rarely if ever cause 5% bumps.

 

[Matt1970]

heh. All Obama had to do was say that this is a decision between a man who promises to represent and work for every American, and the other who only wants to represent 53% of America.



A bit of political dumbassery, but very effective with the voting public.

The words Obama and Promise should not go together.

 

[spidey07]

I've got $500 says Obama beats Romney this fall. Do you have the courage of your convictions? Is it a bet, spidey?

Terms are 2012 US Presidential Election. 500 dollars to me from you if Romney wins, 500 dollars from me to you if Obama wins.

It is a bet if you accept these straight forward terms.

 

[Paul98]

Romney won the debate, Obama is winning the post debate.

 

[thelastjuju]

MSNBC is filled with partisans, most of if not all of the hosts want Obama to win.

Nothing wrong with this really.. FOX has the same relentless bias as MSNBC does, just the other way. Its got more to do with business than anything else.. Fox established a "news" network where conservatives can feel coddled, and so MSNBC decided to respond by creating a similar network for liberals.

The only PROBLEM with these networks is if you don't KNOW this, and are getting duped into thinking you are getting an objective or balanced view from either of these two networks.

I've always wished cable providers would include something like that in the channel's description. FOX (Conservative oriented news network) , MSNBC (Liberal oriented news network)

I personally make a point to tune into Maddow AND O'Reilly evey now and then, just so I can get the widest range of views humanly possible.

 

[palehorse]

Can anyone argue with the fact that we're (collectively and economically) worse off than we were four years ago?

So yes, while we certainly know more details about Obama's "plan" -- the status quo -- than we know about Romney's, we also know from first-hand experience that Obama's plan just plain f'n sucks.

What we know:
-- healthcare premiums still rising AND increased taxes/fines/fees to pay for Obamacare
-- a near 50% increase in food stamp recipients
-- fewer jobs available than the day he took office
-- a national debt that has increased by an amount higher than all previous Presidents... COMBINED!
-- Border is still grossly unsecure
-- quickly rising energy costs
Etc...

Since Obama's track record is a known quantity, I think I'm absolutely willing to take a chance on Romney in a desperate time that calls for business acumen and a documented history of bipartisan success.