When Obama says we didn't see the "real" Mitt Romney at the debate,
it reminds me of the professional anti-Mormons who talk about how most Mormons
don't know what the church "really teaches, which turns out to be a lot
of speculative doctrine for the Journal of Discourses.
re:UtahBlueDevilI recall listening once to a new CEO of our company
(Novell). He was taking over a mess from the previous guy and it was very clear
this new guy was the real deal - no smoke and mirrors. Anyone and everyone
listening could tell that this guy knew his stuff and had a real handle on the
market which the previous guy did not. Listening to Mitt explain - in detail -
his plans for the next 4 years as well as erase all the Obama campaign attack
adds against him I got the exact same feeling - this guy REALLY knows his stuff.
It was refreshing to hear an articulate and thoughtful answer for once. I think
that ALL of the 60 million watching Monday night had to agree that Mitt was
heads and shoulders above the current White House resident and that alone gave
millions hope - especially undecided voters. America is in a really tough spot
and Mitt gave every impression that at the very least he understands the problem
and the solution. Getting congress to agree and pass bills is another matter.
Barack Obama is a king with no clothes thanks to this debate. Finally!
@UtahBlueDevilI have looked at the new polls coming out Friday
afternoon and you are incorrect. President Obama is in fact getting hurt in the
new polls. There is always a time lag between an event and the consequences
measured in the polls.
Romney used notes. Obama did NOT.Candidates are asked not to bring notes
In the name of fair, two party politics, I ask for the moderator to allow this,
and I ask for intelligent discussion.Romney cheated. He brought
notes when candidates are asked NOT to.Easily found googling Romney cheat
sheets.Someone please explain why he was so sneaky and slick
bringing them out of his pocket.Just so we all know.Thank you.
Re: UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC"Rifleman - if you look at the polls since
the debate, the one thing you will see is that the debate didn't change
those numbers one bit. Not even a little."Then the liberals have
nothing to worry about. Would you be making the same argument if it had been
Romney who bombed?It wasn't just Mitt Romney's strong
performance. It was President Obama's amazingly weak one, and to suggest it
won't sway undecided voters is laughable.
Rifleman - if you look at the polls since the debate, the one thing you will see
is that the debate didn't change those numbers one bit. Not even a
little.What it really came down to is not who delivered with the
most style points, it is clear Romney won that one. What isn't moving
voters is this whole trickle down economics idea, the notion that business will
hire more people based on tax rate rather than demand. Not many people are
going to be swayed either way from their positions on this. There are some who
actually believe that post expense tax rates impact how many people a company
will hire. That if a company has extra profits, rather than returning that at
equity to share holders, they will go out and hire more people, regardless of
what the demand curve says. That is the Reagan\Bush\Romney idea. There are others that believe companies would rather sit on cash (Apple,
Microsoft, Oracle) if they have a windfall, rather than bringing on headcount
which usually doesn't see a return for 12 to 18 months.Its
whose story do you believe.
Peggy Noonan said "When Mr. Romney gave him the sweet-faced "You're
a cute little shrimp" look, and he gave it to him all night, Mr. Obama
couldn't even look at him."Geez. And I thought Mr. Romney
was suffering from a severe case of gas. Just goes to show you how
two people can see the same thing differently. Being a Republican stalwart, it
is easy to see why Ms. Noonan said what she said. Now let's compare what
was said and what was true.Yes, Romney appeared to run the debate
like a CEO running a Board meeting. And, yes, everyone nods their heads and
laugh when he attempts to tell a joke. But he knows that if they don't,
and they know that if they don't, he might just fire them because he's
the guy in charge. It doesn't really matter what he says or how truthful
he is, he's in charge. This appears to be the advice his
strategists gave him coming in. The Romney we saw on television last night was
not the Romney running around telling us how "severely conservative" he
I find it ironic that people who willingly voted for such abstract and
nonspecific things like "Hope and Change" and "Yes We Can" are
now demanding specifics from Mitt Romney. Barack Obama didn't tell us one
thing he would do in his second term. I can imagine that with what he has
planned for a second term, he can't be too specific.
Re: atl134 Salt Lake City, UTThe cold, hard, brutal truth, as quoted
by Democratic strategist James Carville is that Obama "didn't bring his
A-game. If you think he won the hearts and minds of the undecided voters I have
a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you cheap.
Re: one old man Ogden, UT"I was deeply disappointed in Obama last
night. He had several opportunities to call Mitt on some of his lies, but failed
to do so."If Obama doesn't have what it takes to stand up
to Romney why should we believe he has what it takes to stand up to
American's enemies around the world?Obviously they know
something we refuse to admit: Obama is weak.
Wow! Our liberal biased news media is on fire with news about how great Romney
did, and how poorly Obama did. Even Bill Maher admitted that perhaps others are
right about Obama's inability to speak coherently without a
teleprompter.One cannot help but wonder if Obama has given up. He
did all but say it a few weeks ago when he proclaimed that it is impossible to
change Washington.It is funny to hear some above suggest that Obama
will be more prepared next debate. Perhaps, but it is naive to think that
Romney will not also attempt to anticipate Obama's speech points and be
I find it really funny for all the requests from liberals that Mitt needs to be
specific on his economic plans. How much specifics do any of you know of the
next 4 years of Obama - economics wise? The man is a blank sheet of paper.
Nothing - other than he plans of raising more taxes. As far as how he intends of
fixing his dead economy? Nothing. Just more of the same.
Comments about Romney's "lack" of a plan or vision...Romney was the only one who got specific last night. He had 3, 4, sometimes 5
specific items for every accusation and question.The moderator
emphasized specificity... perhaps next time they should define what that means
because apparently the President doesn't know.
atl, So you're bashing Romney for not indentifying his deficit reduction
plan.I listened to the entire debate and heard as many specifics as you
can squeeze into a debate.Maybe you just watched a different debate than
the rest of the country watched.Even your left leaning buddies were
shaking their heads.By the by, what was Obama's plan to solve the
deficit?All Obama does is respond with criticisms rather than spelling out
what he'll do for the next 4 years.And telling us that he's just
gonna keep doing what he's been doing doesn't make it for this taxs
Romney should have pointed out that if he is elected, he will inherit a worse
economy than Obama did.
Sounds like sour grapes to me. Why doesn't Obama use the excuse that he
felt bad about letting his wife down on their wedding anniversary. After all he
apologized to her on national TV and promised it won't be that way next
year. The questions is; where will they be at?
CNNs polling found that debate watchers largely thought Romney won by over 2:1.
The thing is... their net favorability of Obama pre to post debate improved by 1
point while Romney's improved by 2 points. Romney's still got a long
way to go, and the Obama team will change tactics. Not to mention that
Romney's lies are being slammed by Obama on the campaign trail and by
factcheckers. @Lilljemalm"When I pay close attention, he
only repeats short sound bites and never has any substance"As
opposed to Romney who has done absolutely nothing to identify his deficit
reduction plan (repealing Obamacare doesn't reduce the deficit according to
the CBO, and PBS is well... much smaller than Romney's proposed tax
increase), nor identify a single one of the tax loopholes he'd cut to pay
for his otherwise 5 trillion dollar tax cut?
Obama is a victim of his own narcississism. He's had 4 yrs. of a
lamestream media fawning over his every word.The few times he has press
conferences; the questions he will answer from the press corps are screened in
advance.People who have left the White House (for other employment)have
said he has a total dictatorial management style. (my way or the highway)When things aren't scripted or somehow controlled he has a
"Al Gore even suggested that it may have been Denver's high altitude
that made it appear as if he had taken valium."Al Gore will say
and do anything to line his money with taxpayer money and increase the networth
of his green stock. just another left wing scum bag.
Famous last words.With all the hoopla surrounding Romney's
"victory" in last night's debate, people forget how much things can
change overnight. Did Romney really have present his views clearly and
forcibly? Did Obama fail in his message? Maybe. Maybe not.There
are two more of these debates scheduled and a lot of campaigning yet to come.
What looks good today may turn sour tomorrow for either candidate. Romney
scored points by moving away from his more controversial "strictly
conservative" ideas and came across as reasoned and moderate - except he
hedged his comments with words which could be interpreted in different ways.
For example, his defense of Social Security and Medicare did neither address
specifics on keeping these two programs solvent nor provide a firm commitment to
their continued existence 5-10 year hence. He only said that he wanted to make
certain changes which would only affect people NOT YET approaching retirement
age. For these people he would create a second government entity to create and
manage a quasi-social security program with vouchers. It doesn't mean that
he is opposed to some day adopting the Paul Ryan plan.So we have to
wait and see.
Listening to the debate and to Obama's other speaches over the past few
months, I wasn't surprised at his performance. His speaches are hard to
follow because of his style of speach, being broken and halted. Sometimes he
sounds drunk. When I pay close attention, he only repeats short sound bites and
never has any substance. He essentially Twitters when he speaks. He
doesn't impress me as competent.
John Kerry and Al Gore also won their first debates.
I was deeply disappointed in Obama last night. He had several opportunities to
call Mitt on some of his lies, but failed to do so.
One candidate was prepared when he came to the debate. Obama,on the other hand,
failed miserably. Al Gore even suggested that it may have been Denver's
high altitude that made it appear as if he had taken valium.
I think Mitt actually carried the day. It was one of his best performances to
date. And if his campaign had been speaking like this the whole campaign, they
would be looking at the numbers they have been seeing - I might have supported
him.Here is my problem, I liked last night's MItt. It
wasn't the same Mitt of two weeks ago, nor of two months ago, not two years
ago. Since he began running for office 7 years ago, his platforms has always
been the elimination of long term capital gains. Last night he walked away from
that, or at least didn't discuss it. The rub is capital gains tax
represents a large part of the top 10 percents tax burden, and next to nothing
of the middle class's tax burden. It is a targeted tax break that helps
mostly the rich. He walked completely away from that last night.So
if last nights Mitt is the real one, cool. But, who the heck knows. Was he
placating the one audience with his 47% comment, or was it last nights
performance more of just tell them what they want to hear..Time will
I watched most of the debate on-line at work, so I'm sure I missed some of
it, but was pleased about the level of preparedness on Mitt's part. I think
he caught the President a little by surprise with that, and I hope Mitt realizes
the President will be much more prepared and more aggressive at their next
debate, and plan for that. I thought Mitt was a little disrespectful of the
moderator...actually, both of them were. Future debates will address that, too,
I'm sure.I think it will be helpful if Mitt will take time to
"fill in the blanks" about some of the details of his financial plans
for the country. The undecided people really need to hear those details, and
even those of us who have picked a candidate need to hear it, too. I also
realize that it is difficult to give details at this point, until Mitt is
actually able to take a look at specific government programs and analyze them
from a business point of view.