Comments about ‘Experts: Mitt Romney wins debate ... again’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Sept. 23 2011 11:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
David King
Layton, UT

Amazing. All the media said this would be a fight between Romney and Perry and it happened just like they predicted! Coincidentally they were standing next to each other, asked questions about the other, and given more time to speak than the "sideshows". The wild predictions came true. They did go back and forth! After watching the debate I had erroneously thought that some of the "sideshow" candidates had given good, substantive answers on how to deal with the economy, education, and foreign policy, instead of just trying to be better than Rick Perry and reminding us how much we don't like Obama. I even brazenly thought some had better nights than Romney. Boy was I wrong! How do I know? The experts say so! I don't have to worry about anyone but Romney and Perry! That is a load off my mind.

Cedar Hills, UT

Forget Perry, Romney is the man with the most real world experience and the smartest. Which is to take away nothing from the others on the panel. They are all outstandingly more able than the person we have leading the country at the moment.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

This notice should head every last article or mention of the U.S. presidential debates:

'The Commission on Presidential Debates puts on a show, not a debate. Until the people have direct access to ask intelligent questions and have access to refute their answers, these debates can only properly be taken as 'a show' and not intelligible public discourse regarding those who will govern us.'

Lindon, ut

Whoa, from every poll I have seen, Ron Paul won the debate. Fox news had a poll out earlier where Ron Paul had 27,573 votes or 39% and Romney had 16,073 or 22%. Fox has removed this poll but if you search for it you can find a screenshot of the poll. Ron Paul won this debate hands down, he is the best choice for this country, Dr. Ron Paul 2012!

Pittsburgh, PA

Voice: I agree with you but I also think these debates have value. Yes, they are contrived political stagecraft but at the core they demonstrate to the public what these candidates can do under pressure.

Romney was cool and prepared and Perry was the direct opposite.

I don't care either way. I will probably vote for Obama but it is still fun to watch.

Murray, UT

So Romney admitted there are reasons not to elect him. I took that to mean he knew he wasn't the perfect candidate - and neither is anyone else. I think voters kind of like an admission of humility and imperfection from a candidate. And I don't think a comment like that will hurt. In fact, I kind of liked it, particularly in its context.

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

What?? I'm not so sure these "experts were even watching the debate. Romney or Perry didn't win anything. Just because they got the most time doesn't mean they won.

Pittsburgh, PA

Romney's only mistake was saying that there were many good reasons not to vote for him. I bet money that that sound bite is going to appear on a campaign ad for Perry or Obama (if he gets that far).

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

Romney and Perry are who the controlling establishment wants us to vote for. They are not nessecarily who the people want to vote for unless these guy are crammed down their throats.

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

Oh brother! People are looking at this debate like it's a football game. "He blew them away when he mentioned this." "This guy is a serious contender." This is PROPOGANDA. I don't think Goebbels could've done a better job at getting people riled up with this kind of rhetoric. Romney, Perry, and the like except Ron Paul are shills for the controlling Banking Establishment. You vote a person like this in, and you will be getting Obama on steroids. They will repackage every single one of his policies and label them as "conservative". Healthcare reform will not be repealled by anyone except for Paul. Obamacare just makes the ruling class richer just like any other policy that comes out of Washington.

Establishment Republicans = Obama. They are one in the same on the inside. But on the outside, they look different and say different things but have the same goal in mind. New World Order.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT


A 'pre-programmed show' isn't really the problem. It's 'who is programming' that is. Pre-programmed inherently means 1- that one may avoid the strawman fallacy, giving more accurate, honest, less 'pressured' answers. 2- that one may craft even more divisive and misleading answers. (a two-sided coin)

So in regards to 'pressure' there really is none. In regards to their value, pre-programmed comes with good and bad equally and nothing is really changed by that. We could have that in written, but 'open for public inquiry' debate all the same.

So why is the 'who programs debates?' the real concern?

I had a political professor who showed us a criticism of televised debates when they first aired. I was initially surprised that some people were against it. However, their criticism was so incredibly valid, if not prophetic of debates today. I was also shocked that they argued that one could create entirely fictitious candidates. But before televised- candidates debated in the newspapers, where citizens could slowly examine and reply- reaching candidates with intelligent inquiry and thenpublished rebuttals. Televised took debate away from the people; instead, programmed by others.

The voice of the governed grows ever silent.

Pittsburgh, PA

regis, I agree that votes like humility etc but the look on Romney's face showed that he wished he had framed it another way. The soundbite will be on an anti-Romney ad. just wait and see.

Lehi, UT

I think - and I hope - that this is the context in which Romney misspoke the incomplete thought:

"There are a lot of reasons not to elect me in some other time; but at this critical time in our nations history when so much is on the line with our economy and the need to make America strong, respectable and prosperous again, there are a lot more reasons to elect me as your next President and leader of this, the greatest of all nations.

In fact, when all else seem insignificant in 2012, and experience, character and qualifications are the remaining determinants for POTUS, Romney will be last candidate standing.

Cedar City, UT

The establishment's "man" is being groomed to "win" the nomination in order to ensure politics as usual in Washington. Alloted time was "tipped" greatly in Perry/Romney's favor and major issues like the Federal Reserve and Income tax were given only momentery mention. My impression was that the "stage" was being set by the media.

Pittsburgh, PA

A voice of Reason: I have no idea what you are talking about though I probably agree with you 99%. To say that there is no pressure is a little naive.

Cedar City, UT

libertarian: I agree. Did any of them talk about the war?

Farmington, UT

Perry seemed somewhat distracted and seemed to have a hard time finding his words. Think the press had a field day with Bush's blunders? Just wait. Cain had a good night and sparked this thought: A Romney/Cain ticket would rock!

Heber City, UT

I watched the debate from beginning to end. I'm not a registered Republican and will not likely vote for any of the candidates.

The "experts" are not analyzing as much as they are projecting their agendas Fox included.

I thought Paul was the most impressive. He is principled, consistent and steadfast in the face of media opposition.

Romney was well-prepared with canned responses and pre-tested jabs but he just doesn't come across to me as very credible. Great for a beauty pageant but not terribly convincing as a leader. I read his book...the first version. Those who claim he knows how to create jobs are simply refusing to look at his record as Governor where he ranked 48th.

Perry seems to me to be getting stronger but he brings some hard to shed baggage with his vaccine,immigration issues and his book. All are hurdles in the primaries but will be non-issues in the general.

Herman Cain made giant strides and got a mini-endorsement from Huntsman. I'd give him 2nd place in the debate. Besides some punchlines, Gingrich, Bachmann, Johnson, Santorum are non-factors. Huntsman can't differentiate himself and is getting zero traction.


It is good to see how the candidates do under pressure.
It is interesting to see how all of the "conservative" radio talk show hosts run to Perry's defense the day after the debate. I have just about had a belly full from hearing about how genuine Rick Perry is and how phony Mitt Romney is.
Mr. Perry has so much baggage that there is no way he will ever be able to do well in a debate. Do you really want someone that bumbles around like that in the White House?
Also, I would like to know where all of the Jobs in Texas are. 3 years ago, my company employed 18 people. Today it employs 1 and most everyone I know is in the same boat.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

Pac Man,

"A voice of Reason: I have no idea what you are talking about though I probably agree with you 99%. To say that there is no pressure is a little naive."

lol, well I wouldn't call it naive... but I would agree that there is probably pressure from being in the spotlight and not wanting to mess something up. I'll hand that to them... I only mean that if we are contrasting a unprepared statement, a prepared argument is hardly nerve racking in comparison.

In the end, I'm really only arguing for the people to have control over the debates and for more people to engage in those debates. I think most people would agree with that. At least the people who aren't cookoo for cocoa puffs... or people like me, who think they're not. :)


If you want an intelligent debater... I'd watch some of Alan Keyes debates. I don't agree with a good deal he believes. But I absolutely think he's a great debater in politics. He's one that, despite my not wanting more people agreeing with him, I wish a LOT more argued like him. To be fair though, I do agree with him sometimes.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments