Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: Debate I

  1. #1
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,080
    Like
    97
    Liked 342 Times in 195 Posts

    Debate I

    Romney held his own pretty well tonight no? Better than I would've thought at least, maybe it was more an off-night for Obama, but a tad surprising.

  2. #2
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,650
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I thought Romney waxed Obama tonight. Obama looked tired, bored and/or distracted.

    I generally think Romney is full of it, but he is extremely confident in his presentation. It also seemed like Romney left a ton of openings for Obama to jab him and Obama never took it. I wonder if that was the gameplan - if so it was a poor one.
    Papers...business papers.

  3. #3
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,080
    Like
    97
    Liked 342 Times in 195 Posts
    I liked Romney's crack about how Obama kept saying his plan had no details and then attacked details. He seemed quick witted and pretty decisive in the way he attacked Obama's differences from him. It was a surprisingly effective debate for Romney.

  4. #4
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,650
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    I liked Romney's crack about how Obama kept saying his plan had no details and then attacked details. He seemed quick witted and pretty decisive in the way he attacked Obama's differences from him. It was a surprisingly effective debate for Romney.
    I'm curious, why are you that surprised with the debate performance of Romney? He has always been considered a strong debater and Obama is generally considered a weaker one (especially compared to his speech ability). I wonder if the 20 or so debates Romney had in the past year helped him while the fact Obama hasn't had a debate in 4 years cost him. I will be interested to see how the next two go.

    Overall I just felt like Obama looked tired and beat down and Romney seized the initiative and never let it go.
    Papers...business papers.

  5. #5
    It looked like both players were bored with the game and on the defensive. Neither won, mitt played even which is winning, but its a weak opponinent. Ill still take the guy who isnt a bigot.

  6. #6
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,080
    Like
    97
    Liked 342 Times in 195 Posts
    No one is requiring you to change your mind about candidates but even hard leftwingers were calling that a blowout for Romney.

    What surprised me jim was that we saw Gov Romney last night who seemed to care less about appealing to the Hannity-type base of the party. I think that was a huge part of why he destroyed most of the meager Obama attacks. He seemed magnimous, rational, and more prepared than Obama on every front. I think it was just how much better he was than Obama, I didn't expecft it to be that lopsided.

  7. #7
    Senior Member All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,764
    Like
    139
    Liked 112 Times in 68 Posts
    Romney was more poised, brief, and exacting, while Obama appeared frustrated, wonkish and rambly. I think Obama came in not wanting to make mistakes nor change the dynamics of the race--in that point, the President perhaps succeeded, but was it worth it looking more meek among the two? I do think Obama got the best zinger; "Romeny's new tax plan: Nevermind."

    Romeny still strikes me, even in winning the debate, as an empty suit. He didn't clarify any of his ideas for me, he muddled them and even retracted positions that he taken before. Maybe he wins the debate by offering adamant abstractions, but I'm not sure that moves the electorate.

  8. #8
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,171
    Like
    98
    Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts
    I'm not going to vote for either guy but Romney won. I think one problem Obama had was he wasn't able to point out the false/myths/lies that Romney was able to constantly put out there. One reason, I think, might be that Obama is so insulated (just like Bush) that he wasn't ready for an actual confrontation with Romney over ideas. He just didn't seem well prepared.

  9. #9
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,080
    Like
    97
    Liked 342 Times in 195 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PseudoSABR View Post
    Romeny still strikes me, even in winning the debate, as an empty suit. He didn't clarify any of his ideas for me, he muddled them and even retracted positions that he taken before. Maybe he wins the debate by offering adamant abstractions, but I'm not sure that moves the electorate.
    Was it really more abstract than any other debate? I guess I'm not familiar with detailed debates, the time frame usually makes them about principles not details. In fact, I thought this debate was refreshingly more nuanced than most. Both candidates tried to get specific when talking about particular legislation. In my eyes, this was one of the better debates I can remember for talking specifically rather than broadly.

    The devil is in the details so it's probably not best to evaluate policy changes by debates anyway. But it's hard, as someone who believes being practical is important, not to strongly favor Romney's abstract take on Dodd-Frank for instance. Now I know that he has backdoor intentions and part of this isn't genuine, but his argument was "regulation is ok, but not all regulation is ok. Sometimes, some part of legislation are bad" to which Obama basically replied "well better to do something bad than nothing." Which A) doesn't answer the question and b) is pretty much in line with every liberal driven policy change on social welfare, college funding, etc. It's admitting your own legislation's awful unintended consequences, throwing up your hands, shrugging, and blaming someone else.

    Good god. That, for me, totally encapsulates the problem with the left. I'm still probably going to throw my vote away on some third party or write-in, but Romney at least got me interested in seeing how long this Rational Romney is going to stay around.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer biggentleben's Avatar
    Posts
    889
    Like
    38
    Liked 61 Times in 43 Posts
    Frankly, neither one of them will be able to get done any of "their" plans without the help of Congress, so why do we care what anyone's "plan" is? Romney could have a plan to have every person in America be making six figures before the end of his presidency. It's not logical or probable, but neither is either candidate's economic plans in totality or their foreign policy plans or their health care plans or a single bit of what they're selling. Rather than talking about plans that neither of them has the overarching power to make happen on their own, I'd love to see a return to a Nixon/Kennedy type of debate where we were truly exploring the candidate's feelings and position on an issue, not so focused on what the plan was.
    Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

  11. #11
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,650
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnarthor View Post
    One reason, I think, might be that Obama is so insulated (just like Bush) that he wasn't ready for an actual confrontation with Romney over ideas. He just didn't seem well prepared.
    I think this is a good observation. There are many striking parallels between this election and 2004 up to the strong performance that Kerry had in the first debate. Good for Romney, but some of the polling following the debate was interesting. It was a knockout victory for Romney and people seemed to indicate they'll take another look at him, but there didn't seem to be any negative movement against Obama. In a sense he held his position while allowing Romney to move forward to claim some of the undecideds. I'm not sure it is enough, Obama has a huge chunk of states to play with, Romney really needs to move the needle to have a chance. I'm not convinced one debate can do that.
    Papers...business papers.

  12. #12
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,171
    Like
    98
    Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drjim View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnarthor View Post
    One reason, I think, might be that Obama is so insulated (just like Bush) that he wasn't ready for an actual confrontation with Romney over ideas. He just didn't seem well prepared.
    I think this is a good observation. There are many striking parallels between this election and 2004 up to the strong performance that Kerry had in the first debate. Good for Romney, but some of the polling following the debate was interesting. It was a knockout victory for Romney and people seemed to indicate they'll take another look at him, but there didn't seem to be any negative movement against Obama. In a sense he held his position while allowing Romney to move forward to claim some of the undecideds. I'm not sure it is enough, Obama has a huge chunk of states to play with, Romney really needs to move the needle to have a chance. I'm not convinced one debate can do that.
    Agreed. Today's job report was a big boon for Obama. Romney really needs a run on those swing states. Romney could win FL, OH and VI and still realistically lose. Unless all that super-PAC money sways a lot of voters, Romney is going to need some sort of October surprise.

  13. #13
    Head Moderator All-Star glunn's Avatar
    Posts
    4,510
    Like
    2,348
    Liked 294 Times in 165 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Ninety minutes does not seem like enough time to cover what needs to be covered. I would like to see the debates be at least three hours, with strict cutoffs when the candidates go ever the allotted time for each answer.

  14. #14


    I found this interesting. It be fun to see what stops this tide or if it just dies out on it's own. And how close this brings Mitt to Obama.

    Edit I tried to post a pic of the Chance of
    Winning graph at 538.


    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

  15. #15
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,786
    Like
    4
    Liked 67 Times in 50 Posts
    Blog Entries
    63
    It is disturbing that apparently millions of Americans can be swayed by a sham of a debate that covered nothing, had one of its contestants playing prevent defense and allowing touchdown after touchdown, and had the other one lying left and right.

  16. #16
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,080
    Like
    97
    Liked 342 Times in 195 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Wahl View Post
    It is disturbing that apparently millions of Americans can be swayed by a sham of a debate that covered nothing, had one of its contestants playing prevent defense and allowing touchdown after touchdown, and had the other one lying left and right.
    You're aware that both sides utilize these things called advertisements that are less substantive, often far more hyperbolic and riddled with lies, and strategically designed to mislead far more often and far more effectively right? Just want to be sure, because - if you are aware of this - it makes your point seem a lot less reasonable.

  17. #17
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,650
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Wahl View Post
    It is disturbing that apparently millions of Americans can be swayed by a sham of a debate that covered nothing, had one of its contestants playing prevent defense and allowing touchdown after touchdown, and had the other one lying left and right.
    You're aware that both sides utilize these things called advertisements that are less substantive, often far more hyperbolic and riddled with lies, and strategically designed to mislead far more often and far more effectively right? Just want to be sure, because - if you are aware of this - it makes your point seem a lot less reasonable.
    This. Plus the fundamental fact that Obama had trouble providing a defense of his record and providing a positive reason for a second term (even if it stretched the truth a little). Doesn't mean he can't recover and win some of those voters back.
    Papers...business papers.

  18. #18
    Senior Member All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,764
    Like
    139
    Liked 112 Times in 68 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Wahl View Post
    It is disturbing that apparently millions of Americans can be swayed by a sham of a debate that covered nothing, had one of its contestants playing prevent defense and allowing touchdown after touchdown, and had the other one lying left and right.
    You're aware that both sides utilize these things called advertisements that are less substantive, often far more hyperbolic and riddled with lies, and strategically designed to mislead far more often and far more effectively right? Just want to be sure, because - if you are aware of this - it makes your point seem a lot less reasonable.
    He's not talking about advertising though. Sure Obama's ads distort the truth, but it's far different for a candidate to be the mouth piece for such distortions.

    That said, this is the first time Romney's been a palatable candidate for the center; so a lot of people I believe are unaware of his prior positions, and just how much he's swiveled from the summer. I don't believe that many Americans are swayed by Romney's debate to actually vote for him...though I do think, many more are churning the idea over.

  19. #19
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,696
    Like
    32
    Liked 776 Times in 426 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    That in itself is probably my biggest beef with Romney. Who is this guy? Is he the guy that was a very moderate governor of Massachusetts, is he the vocal mouthpiece we saw for the right during the primaries (and the run up to the primaries), or is he again the moderate he claimed to be during the debate?

    I don't see how anyone can be comfortable voting for a man that so completely reverses his positions on issues to fit what he believes the voters want to hear on that particular day. Going into the primaries, I was pretty high on Romney (still liked Huntsman better and that is about 1000% more true today, at least that guy has common sense and conviction, plus he's whip-smart) but after seeing Mitt waffle constantly and directly contradict his own opinions from his time as Governor, I no longer have the slightest bit of respect for the man. I've gone from slightly positive to ambivalent to believing he is a deceitful menace in the course of a year. Pretty amazing, actually.

  20. #20
    Senior Member All-Star SpiritofVodkaDave's Avatar
    Posts
    3,615
    Like
    37
    Liked 183 Times in 103 Posts
    Pig hit it on the head, even the folks I know who usually vote republican are refusing to vote for Romney, he will never pick up the independent vote (along with the women's vote, latino vote, black vote, under 35 vote etc)

    The republicans need to figure out eventually that they can't just keep appealing to the middle american white male.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.