Comments about ‘Mitt Romney changes the game during Wednesday's presidential debate’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Oct. 5 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

‘Mitt Romney changes the game during Wednesday's presidential debate’


...and why not?

He's changed just about everything else imaginable during the campaign?

Ali'ikai 'A'amakualenalena
Provo, UT

Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah

"I don't believe everything I read, especially when it comes to unemployment numbers. Anybody who thinks the 7.8% number is genuine isn't in touch with reality . . . "

So why do you believe the numbers when they were high but don't believe them now? Don't you wonder how these numbers are determined? And what is your source of inforation if you don't believe everything you read?

It always strikes me as odd that conservatives complain about the mainstream media but have nothing to say about the right-wing media. It only confirms in my mind that many people, particularly people "severely conservative", seek out sources to confirm their prejudices and never question what they read or hear. It's as if they neglected developing critical thinking skills because they learned to take it on faith that their sources were giving them the truth.

But then, there is the animosity with which they hold the opposition and therefore want to believe the worst because it satisfies an ignorance within themselves. Even people of the Left could not accept the work of George W. Bush dealing with AIDS in Africa.

Ying Fah
Provo, UT

WestGranger West Valley City, Utah

And the real Romney is who? No one could recognize the man on television Wednesday night. He was re-bottled, re-packaged, and re-introduced in a media campaign worthy of Madison Avenue.

I yearn for the old Romney who I've come to know. If he has changed, then let me at least have a few weeks trying to get to know the new Romney before the old Romney re-emerges again.

Kearns, UT

The real Obama was unveiled during the debate. He had no teleprompter, to canned speech written by someone else, and no idea or ideas. Obema was out of his element and was a mere shell of of what the media has made him. Without the media, he'd still be the Jr. Senator from Illinois.

To sum it all up. The Emperor has no clothing. And that became really apparent. I'd not like to be Obama running on his record.

Provo, UT

I was just wondering what kind of a man throws his kids under the bus by telling everyone they lie, and does it for the trite purpose of chalking up a zinger in the debate?

Sometimes it seems Mitt says things to benefit himself without regard or consideration for how it harms others, even those supposedly closest to him. That does not strike me as a desirable trait in a President, much less an avowed Christian.

Kearns, UT

KJB1 7.8% unemployment may be the lowest of Obama's term, but it is still very bad. This number does not count the 23 million that have quit looking for jobs. The real unemployment rate is over 15%.

From my days in school, full employment, that signals a healthy, growing economy was considered to be just under 3%. Obama's economy has a long way to go.


Thurston Howell III has said for the past 18 months that if elected he would cut all income tax rates by 20%. He has not said how he intends to make up the difference in revenue to balance the budget.To do so by closing deductions would require elimination all deductions for charities, church tithings, home loans, employee health insurance, and to make drastic cuts to education, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. On the other hand, he could be advocating cutting the military and defense budgets to make up the difference but I doubt it. Do the Math!

Durham, NC

Romeny this week took a big step in creating credibility when on FoxNews he admitted that his statement about the 47% was wrong. After days of defending the statement, Mitt has had a rebirth of sorts, and now believes and admitts his statment was out of place.

Why the change in heart... polls, political advisors, the left wing liberal media, a genuine reconsideration... who knows. Does he really in his heart believe this... I hope so. Or is this just another case of saying one thing for one audience, and another for a different audience... who knows.

Bottom line though is Mit will be able to do far less than he promised if alected, and Obama far less damage even if he is re-elected. It is sixes. The COTUS is a beutiful thing that has self correcting built into it. No one group should ever dominate the political tone of this country.

Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
"...and why not? He's changed just about everything else imaginable during the campaign?"

The first presidential debate reminded me of the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes. The voters compared Romney to Obama and saw the same thing Al Gore did. Obama looked like the rarefied air in Denver had deprived him of oxygen.

If Obama disagreed with Mitt Romney for heaven's sake he should have opened his eyes and his mouth and said something.

Mike in Sandy
Sandy, UT

Yes. He changed the game by cheating and sneaking some notes from his pocket onto the dais.

Cedar Hills, UT

"President Barack Obama's forces had hinted that all they needed was one good punch to knock out Romney"

Oh boy - this was one of those moments where you squash your rival into the turf on prime time ESPN! Yes sir - this was the presidential candidate vs the amateur... the White House amateur. Geez, what a thumping! If this were a football game the score would have been 42-0 at HALF TIME for Mitt!! What this really was was the exposing of Barack Obama in front of the entire nation. The imposter who slid into the White House finally had to play hard ball and the man looked and acted like a college freshman at the black board doing a calculus problem in front of 200 grad students. YIKES!! The king has no clothes ... but we all knew that didn't we.

Eureka, UT

Craig Clark - I agree, whenever you put your trust in a man, you'll be disappointed.

I'm disappointed in how Romney, who chose Ryan as his VP and who came with an economic plan that calls for tax cuts for the rich that over time would amount to a 5 trillion reduction in revenue, says it won't add to the deficit and how he can plausibly say he hasn't talked about it. He did talk about the 47% but that was only to rich donors and not meant for the 100% of all people he has since claimed he's going to represent. He wants to balance the budget with cuts to NPR/PBS and Big Bird and openly says that but why when it only represents .012% of the budget.

As for believing the "liberal" media, let's see, the media is owned by the largest most conservative organizations with many large conservative corporations paying the bills with advertising. Do you really think they would have a house divided approach? I don't.

Cedar Hills, UT


Mitt answered your tax question - weren't you paying attention? Let me RE-STATE what Mitt said - THERE WILL BE NO TAX CUT FOR WEALTHY AMERICANS! Is that clear? Small business does NOT count as rich either. Sorry. Also what Mitt said was he wasn't going to borrow from China to pay for PBS. I suppose borrowing more from China is just fine for liberals but better ask your kids and grand kids since they will be the ones footing that bill for generations..

So yes - Mitt isn't going to run our debt as high as mount Everest as your socialist president is content to do - thank heaven for sanity!! Finally I have no idea what your liberal media comment is about? Do you?

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Yes, he dove to the center to avoid the right wing.

Salt Lake City, UT

"Please enlighten us all about the times when Romney said he would create a $5 Trillion burden on the budget. He didn't."-lets debate

"The claim is based on a study done by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group that has analyzed the tax plans of the candidates. The center examined Romney’s proposals for a 20 percent reduction in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions.

The center estimated that altogether, the lost revenues would total $480 billion by 2015. The Obama campaign adds up the cost over a decade and winds up with $4.8 trillion, which it then rounds up to $5 trillion."-politifact

The tax cut Governor Romney has proposed equal almost 5 trillion. He is hoping to offset this by closing "loopholes". He has given hardly any indication of what deductions and "loopholes" he would eliminate. That is the issue.

Aurora, CO

I rather enjoyed the debate, seeing Pres Obama have to defend his policies against the real Mitt instead of the caricature the Democrats have imagined he was and were campaigning against. The President had to own his miserable record and was rather surprised to be called on his mistakes. He isn't used to that, and it showed.

Now, for the crowd who are not able to see how raising employment is the key, here is an analogy. You have a group of people drawing unemployment/welfare/food stamps because they aren't employed. You have another group who are employed, paying taxes and not receiving the unemployment/welfare/food stamps. Take five from the first group and get them jobs. They aren't receiving, but are now contributing. No outlays is a savings, and their contributions are adding to the tax base. More income to the Treasury, less out go. See? The revenues are greater, the expenditures are smaller. Understand the concept now?

Mitt wants to raise employment, President Obama wants to increase expenditures, all in the name of compassion. But who is more compassionate? Employment is better then welfare.

Salt Lake City, UT

"Let me RE-STATE what Mitt said - THERE WILL BE NO TAX CUT FOR WEALTHY AMERICANS! Is that clear?"

Well, no patriot, it isn't clear.

In a debate in February Governor Romney said that he was "going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20 percent, including the top 1 percent."

Now he says, "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans."

He will reduce them. He won't reduce them. What is it?

Romney's plan clearly calls for tax cuts across the board, just like the President claimed, and just like Romney has said.

Romney says he will offset the reductions using cuts in "loopholes". But what "loopholes"? He doesn't say.

Now Governor Romney also says he will deal with the debt (and this is after dealing with the huge reduction of revenues caused by his tax cuts), and how will he deal with the debt? How's he going to do it? He's going to cut the less then .01% of the budget that goes to PBS.

Mitt Romney is not serious about dealing with the debt.


@mark - thank you very much for proving my point. Romney says he'll cut taxes, then Obama and his minions make up details of how it would work, and call Romney a liar for not going along with their made-up math. I'm sorry that so many people aren't smart enough to understand how you can restructure loopholes and deductions, and therefore lower tax RATES without lowering the tax BURDEN on higher income Americans.

Someone who says "He will reduce them. He won't reduce them. What is it?" seems pretty easily confused about something that's not really that complex.

Then, if you do something that actually stimulates the economy rather than merely zombifies it as Obama has done, then the additional working people and higher incomes create additional tax revenue that starts to correct the deficit and debt.

Clearly people like Obama and mark think we have one giant pie in America, that needs to be proportioned correctly to make things work. With that philosophy, you can't financially meet one need without taking slivers from someone else.

Romney believes Americans can create more pies, and that solves the problem.

Cedar Hills, UT

Hey mark - if you cut 2500 unnecessary or wishful items that each account for less than .01% of the budget, you've cut the budget by 25%. Who said Romney only wanted to cut PBS?

Why not just cut nothing since any one thing is such a small piece of the puzzle? Your kind of thinking is why our nation may very well go bankrupt before the debt problem is fixed.


@mark - one thing that you and Obama conveniently leave out of the calculations, and I suspect it's intentional as you pretend to be confused, is that growing the economy creates more jobs, including more higher-paying jobs, and there is a tremendous increase in tax revenue when that happens.

In keeping with standard Democrat economic philosophy, you and Obama believe there is one giant pie that must be cut up and proportioned. You can't increase funding for one entity without slivering away a piece from someone else. The rich have disproportionate slices, so we must take from their slices to help others. If you decrease taxes, the cuts to loopholes and deductions cannot cover the difference. With this philosophy, Mitt's math indeed does not work.

I suppose it's incomprehensible to people like you, Obama, and everyone else who regurgitates the "bad math" argument, that it is actually possible to make more pies. That's why you leave out Mitt's oft-repeated claim that in addition to closing loopholes and deductions, his plan satisfies budget needs by growing the economy and creating more taxpayers who pay taxes on higher income.

to comment

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