/dev/null Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 I'd Honey Boo Boo on? I didn't watch the debate and I refuse to watch Honey Boo Boo. But I did watch the new episode of South Park which ripped into Honey Boo Boo And I have a new "respect" for Michelle Obama's fight against childhood obesity Michelle Obama beats the crap outta Cartman Anyways, from what I've seen about the debates Romney won and Obama didn't look good at all. The spin will be that Obama is too busy ruling the world to prepare for a debate. I smell a Rope-A-Dope strategery. Don't come out fighting and lull the other guy into a sense of winning (like Charlie Sheen) and hold your best performance for later
OCinBuffalo Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 I didn't watch the debate and I refuse to watch Honey Boo Boo. But I did watch the new episode of South Park which ripped into Honey Boo Boo And I have a new "respect" for Michelle Obama's fight against childhood obesity Michelle Obama beats the crap outta Cartman Anyways, from what I've seen about the debates Romney won and Obama didn't look good at all. The spin will be that Obama is too busy ruling the world to prepare for a debate. I smell a Rope-A-Dope strategery. Don't come out fighting and lull the other guy into a sense of winning (like Charlie Sheen) and hold your best performance for later http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/03/chris_matthews_freaks_out_at_obama_after_debate_romney_was_winning.html When Chris Tingle is apopleptic...and left with promoting MSNBC shows as the only recourse for Obama to improve...you know how the debate went. They want to turn the bubble...into a doughnut...in which Obama floats in circular affectation.
DaveinElma Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Romney showed the world last night the amateur that Obama really is. He went line by line and destroyed all of BHO's BS attack talking points. No way Obama can withstand 2 more debates like this. People are going to look at this debate as the turning point in this elections.
/dev/null Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 http://www.realclear...as_winning.html When Chris Tingle is apopleptic...and left with promoting MSNBC shows as the only recourse for Obama to improve...you know how the debate went. They want to turn the bubble...into a doughnut...in which Obama floats in circular affectation. Chris Matthews needs a doctor. He's lost all feeling in his leg But I understand why he wants Obama to watch MSNBC. All about ratings. If Obama alone starts watching MSNBC that boosts their viewership by like 5-10%
Juror#8 Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 For the first debate, Romney was Jordan and Obama was Byron Russell. BO looked frustrated and agitated and completely unable to keep up with the direction of the debate. That said, he shouldn't have had to; he should have controlled the debate. Instead, Romney did. Romney set the tone and BO was playing catch up. It very much reminded me of what Kerry did to Bush during the first debate in 04. Romney won and it wasn't even close. I've heard some spin around the idea that the WH wanted to bait Romney into specificity to make attack ads. Apparently the talk has been that Romney was going to surprise the WH with specifics and zingers so the WH felt that they could make Romney confident enough to speak more freely than he should. According to my brother, debate performances last through a news cycle; ads last through voting day. Maybe, maybe not. But to me Romney seemed disciplined and on message. It didn't sway me into voting for Romney because I feel that he is garbage. But it crystallized why I refuse to vote for the incumbent as well. He is unprepared for primetime and not ready to take on the tough challenges with the level of competency required to make a meaningful difference. Nice guy though. You know what else is nice....the Harrison twins picking the TERPS tonight so we can get that college basketball national championship in 2013 MOTHERFU(((KERS!!!! (ESPN U at 5 pm - fear the turtle)
UConn James Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Still waiting for anything about the supposed $5T tax cut that materialized from Obama's *. Also, nice touch how when Romney said there will be an option in Medicare to EITHER stay with it as it is OR to take a voucher, Obama kept trying to kick the football that a voucher was Romney's ONLY option, when the Ryan plan has been very specific since it was released last year(?) that Medicare users would be allowed to choose. The problem was not an off night for Obama. He tried to define Romney, pigeonhole him and try to make people believe policy proposals that Romney has never championed. He's done this throughout the campaign, and it's worked to a degree. Up on that stage, tho, it was like watching a lame schoolyard bully snarking that Romney wet the bed last night. Debate the actual proposals, Mr. Obama. Don't just make stevestojan up. It makes you look like a moron. Edited October 4, 2012 by UConn James
Doc Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 For the first debate, Romney was Jordan and Obama was Byron Russell. BO looked frustrated and agitated and completely unable to keep up with the direction of the debate. That said, he shouldn't have had to; he should have controlled the debate. Instead, Romney did. Romney set the tone and BO was playing catch up. It very much reminded me of what Kerry did to Bush during the first debate in 04. Romney won and it wasn't even close. I've heard some spin around the idea that the WH wanted to bait Romney into specificity to make attack ads. Apparently the talk has been that Romney was going to surprise the WH with specifics and zingers so the WH felt that they could make Romney confident enough to speak more freely than he should. According to my brother, debate performances last through a news cycle; ads last through voting day. Maybe, maybe not. But to me Romney seemed disciplined and on message. It didn't sway me into voting for Romney because I feel that he is garbage. But it crystallized why I refuse to vote for the incumbent as well. He is unprepared for primetime and not ready to take on the tough challenges with the level of competency required to make a meaningful difference. Nice guy though. You know what else is nice....the Harrison twins picking the TERPS tonight so we can get that college basketball national championship in 2013 MOTHERFU(((KERS!!!! (ESPN U at 5 pm - fear the turtle) If Barry and his minions allowed themselves to get posterized so that they can get some attack ads out of it, not realizing Romney got enough material to do the same, if not worse, last night was more of a debacle for them than I previously thought it was.
Nanker Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 That was Clock Cleaning 101. I can only hope for this to continue. THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!
B-Man Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Thoughts, well lets see Its clear that whenever you see a "Romney was too aggressive, or testy , or desperate" post that he was actually confident and straight forward. Its also laughingly obvious from the number of "they both were terrible" and the debate format was bad and the moderator lost control, posts that the Republican candidate won. .
NoSaint Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Still waiting for anything about the supposed $5T tax cut that materialized from Obama's *. Also, nice touch how when Romney said there will be an option in Medicare to EITHER stay with it as it is OR to take a voucher, Obama kept trying to kick the football that a voucher was Romney's ONLY option, when the Ryan plan has been very specific since it was released last year(?) that Medicare users would be allowed to choose. The problem was not an off night for Obama. He tried to define Romney, pigeonhole him and try to make people believe policy proposals that Romney has never championed. He's done this throughout the campaign, and it's worked to a degree. Up on that stage, tho, it was like watching a lame schoolyard bully snarking that Romney wet the bed last night. Debate the actual proposals, Mr. Obama. Don't just make stevestojan up. It makes you look like a moron. I don't think the 5T was a new number. The problem is that the gap is supposed to be closed by tightening loopholes and such which Mitt hasn't clearly defined (not that average joe would be familiar with each loophole the top earners use).
Juror#8 Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 If Barry and his minions allowed themselves to get posterized so that they can get some attack ads out of it, not realizing Romney got enough material to do the same, if not worse, last night was more of a debacle for them than I previously thought it was. I think you're wrong Doc. In order for him to be "posterized" he would have had to show up to play. Since the incumbent didn't end up attending last night, I just watched the mock debate with Romney and the two moderators that he practiced with. That was twice as bad as what Cheney did to Edwards in 04.
UConn James Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 I don't think the 5T was a new number. The problem is that the gap is supposed to be closed by tightening loopholes and such which Mitt hasn't clearly defined (not that average joe would be familiar with each loophole the top earners use). It was to me. It was to Romney. How Obama can call something a "tax cut" when tax revenue is going to stay the same is beyond stupid. Romney said he's going to lower the tax rates for middle income Americans (higher income people will get a reduction, but not as much) and then cut loopholes that people can use. Romney did EXACTLY this in Massachusetts. Loopholes, you know those things that everyone often decries that corporations and "the rich" use to get out of paying taxes, were slashed and the tax code was simplified. (Of course, in the face of this, the Left has called the rate reductions combined with the elimination of loopholes "tax increases" even tho it's revenue neutral... in addition to the hypocrisy that the Left has called for loophole/deductibles reduction for "the rich" time out of mind and never saw a tax increase they didn't like, if they could get away with it.) Obama's charge that Romney isn't giving specifics is crap. What did Obama himself specify four years ago? We have a choice between a guy who's in over his head and can't deliver... and a man who actually accomplished on smaller scales -- with business / macroeconomic experience in the private sector and state government level -- what he promises to do on the national scale. I'll take past performance as an indicator of future success over "hope and change" any day. The details are for the negotiating table, but the rule will be for reducing rates combined with closing loopholes. Again, Obama is taking half of what Romney is proposing and trying to get people to believe it's the whole. This finally became obvious to a lot of people last night. Obama can't define himself and what he's going to do (add in a pinch that what he wants to do is unpopular) so he's trying to deceitfully define Romney.
BillsFanM.D. Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Romney crushed him. It was fairly obvious. Facts, body-language, fluidity of speech,....etc. He was superior throughout the debate. Romney now has some 'momentum' for the first time in a while..... with even MSM acknowledging his performance. I think Joe Biden woke up with a huge knot in his stomach this morning. If Ryan can put on a Romney like performance (or if Biden simply is Biden) then the pendulum will have seriously swung in the direction of the challengers.
IDBillzFan Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Yikes, I'm kinda sorry I didn't watch the debate. May try to watch it online. Something horrible had to happen if everyone on the left is blaming the moderator for whatever went wrong. Dennis Miller wrote last night: " Obama better hope a Kicked Ass is covered under Obamacare."
dayman Posted October 4, 2012 Author Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Still waiting for anything about the supposed $5T tax cut that materialized from Obama's *. Also, nice touch how when Romney said there will be an option in Medicare to EITHER stay with it as it is OR to take a voucher, Obama kept trying to kick the football that a voucher was Romney's ONLY option, when the Ryan plan has been very specific since it was released last year(?) that Medicare users would be allowed to choose. The problem was not an off night for Obama. He tried to define Romney, pigeonhole him and try to make people believe policy proposals that Romney has never championed. He's done this throughout the campaign, and it's worked to a degree. Up on that stage, tho, it was like watching a lame schoolyard bully snarking that Romney wet the bed last night. Debate the actual proposals, Mr. Obama. Don't just make stevestojan up. It makes you look like a moron. The $5T is the tax cuts over 10 years Romney says he'll make specifically through his 20% reduction. That's what happens if you take that specific cut and the few other taxes he's specifically called for, you lose about $5T over 10 years. As Romney made clear despite this "his plan is deficit neutral" b/c...well just b/c he says it is. He says he close enough loop holes (impossible on it's own and it would disproportionately affect lower income people) and otherwise people will be doing so well under his rule that they'll all be rich and paying more taxes to make up the difference (classic trickle rhetoric). Thing is, it won't happen. Romney's big tax cut actually is impossible as he describes it. Not a serious proposal. I mean yes, he can keep saying he won't have a $5T tax cut on stage, but that's the policy he goes around talking about...that's what it is. And when he says he'll make up for it...that's a huge hole (really impossible without doing very drastic things)...yet he doesn't talk about it at all. Revenue is not only off the table, but even more so. If just doesn't work. The bottom line is you can't just go w/ that level of reduction and not talk about the other end...if it were less drastic you could...but it's too much to say nothing and be serious. As for Medicare you choose between the voucher and future Medicare, what it will be. Not the voucher and what current Medidcare is. Edited October 4, 2012 by TheNewBills
Gary M Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 I think you're wrong Doc. In order for him to be "posterized" he would have had to show up to play. Since the incumbent didn't end up attending last night, I just watched the mock debate with Romney and the two moderators that he practiced with. That was twice as bad as what Cheney did to Edwards in 04. So Clint wasn't the only one talking to an empty chair?
GG Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 The $5T is the tax cuts over 10 years Romney says he'll make specifically through his 20% reduction. That's what happens if you take that specific cut and the few other taxes he's specifically called for, you lose about $5T over 10 years. As Romney made clear despite this "his plan is deficit neutral" b/c...well just b/c he says it is. He says he close enough loop holes (impossible on it's own and it would disproportionately affect lower income people) and otherwise people will be doing so well under his rule that they'll all be rich and paying more taxes to make up the difference (classic trickle rhetoric). Thing is, it won't happen. Romney's big tax cut actually is impossible as he describes it. Not a serious proposal. I mean yes, he can keep saying he won't have a $5T tax cut on stage, but that's the policy he goes around talking about...that's what it is. And when he says he'll make up for it...that's a huge hole (really impossible without doing very drastic things)...yet he doesn't talk about it at all. Revenue is not only off the table, but even more so. If just doesn't work. The bottom line is you can't just go w/ that level of reduction and not talk about the other end...if it were less drastic you could...but it's too much to say nothing and be serious. So you keep repeating this $5 trillion tax cut math. Source for the math, please?
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 I don't think the 5T was a new number. The problem is that the gap is supposed to be closed by tightening loopholes and such which Mitt hasn't clearly defined (not that average joe would be familiar with each loophole the top earners use). I've heard specifics. He went over specifics on Meet The Press. But, of course, no one actually WATCHED Meet The Press, they just heard the media report "Obama flip-flopped on Obamacare!" and missed the specifics on tax policy.
VABills Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Big Bird Parmesan on Nov 7th at my house. Plenty to go around.
Gary M Posted October 4, 2012 Posted October 4, 2012 Big Bird Parmesan on Nov 7th at my house. Plenty to go around. And some snuffleupagus on weck?
Recommended Posts