Presidential debate...

[joshh]

I think there is a better chance of fair under Romney, at least he'll get the country moving in the right direction. And his overall plan makes sense get more people working jobs and then lower the tax rate. It will benefit everyone and most importantly the country as a whole.

Agreed.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-coal-shares-idUSBRE8930ZD20121004

And that puts him on the map that much more. The man simply knows business far better than Obama and for that reason alone will make this country a better place for Americans. Thus his comment about more jobs equal more revenue...schooling Obama on economics 101.

[Wh33lhop]

I don't have any input other then this: Romneys forced smile is awful.

It was so awful it was actually distracting from the uselessness of the rest of the debate.

[DaButt]

None of this matters...

because the electoral college has already decided who they're voting for.

[Kershaw]

It was so awful it was actually distracting from the uselessness of the rest of the debate.

i could not get over romney's constant forced persona he put on. that smile made me cringe. and the crap he said was ridiculous. broad, sweeping and unsubstantiated feel good statements. lots of, "let's make america better!" very little of how he was going to do that. :loco:

i think obama was genuinely caught off guard by what romney was saying. i did chuckle when obama said, "if you think wall street needs less regulation and oversight, romney is definitely the candidate for you."

When I got on the stage, I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney. But it couldn't have been Mitt Romney, because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. The fellow on stage last night said he didn't know anything about that.
The real Mitt Romney said we don't need any more teachers in our classrooms, but
the fellow on stage last night, he loves teachers, can't get enough of them.
The Mitt Romney we all know invested in companies that were called pioneers of outsourcing jobs to other countries, but the guy on stage last night said he doesn't even know that there were such laws that encourage outsourcing. He's never heard of them!
Never heard of tax breaks for companies that shift jobs overseas? He said that if it's true he must need a new accountant.
Now, we know for sure it was not the real Mitt Romney because he seems to be doing just fine with his current accountant.
So, you see, the man on stage last night does not want to be held accountable for the real Mitt Romney's decisions and what he's been saying for the last year. And that's because he knows full well that we don't want what he's been selling for the last year.
So Governor Romney may dance around his positions, but if you want to be president you owe the American people the truth.
So here's the truth: Governor Romney cannot cannot pay for his $5 trillion tax plan his tax plan without blowing up the deficit or sticking it to the middle class. That's the math.
We can't afford to go down that road again. We can't afford another round of budget busting tax cuts for the wealthy. We can't afford to gut our investments in education or clean energy or research and technology.
We can't afford to roll back regulations on Wall Street, or oil companies, or insurance companies. We cannot afford to double down on the same top down economic policies that got us into this mess. That is not a plan to create jobs. That is not a plan to grow the economy. That is not a plan to create change. That is a relapse. We don't want to go back there. We've tried it. It didn't work and we are not going back. We are going forward.

[mrcheezle19]

i could not get over romney's constant forced persona he put on. that smile made me cringe. and the crap he said was ridiculous. broad, sweeping and unsubstantiated feel good statements. lots of, "let's make america better!" very little of how he was going to do that. :loco:

i think obama was genuinely caught off guard by what romney was saying. i did chuckle when obama said, "if you think wall street needs less regulation and oversight, romney is definitely the candidate for you."

Romney didn't give every single detail about what he's going to do because that's not the way to go about it and win a presidency. He gave decent details on pans. Even listing 5 or 6 steps on multiple occasions (much more than Obama did) After you outline steps in enough detail for people to get an understanding you then work with congress to set up your policies following the guidelines you said in your campaign. It's not a I'm president and therefore all the things I want will be law and there is no say in how the country will be run. He's a president not a king. He's not going to explain every last detail down to what pen he will use to sign the documents.

[evandael]

Decent details? All the man did was rebuke the existing plans and cherry pick vague statements from arguments made during the debate.


By not offering anything of substance, Romney (and by endorsing him, the whole of the Republican party) comes across as a man without a plan. You act like these people are schoolchildren with a big secret.

[joshh]

Romney didn't give every single detail about what he's going to do because that's not the way to go about it and win a presidency. He gave decent details on pans. Even listing 5 or 6 steps on multiple occasions (much more than Obama did) After you outline steps in enough detail for people to get an understanding you then work with congress to set up your policies following the guidelines you said in your campaign. It's not a I'm president and therefore all the things I want will be law and there is no say in how the country will be run. He's a president not a king. He's not going to explain every last detail down to what pen he will use to sign the documents.

Kershaw is whining about the very same thing Obama did when he was running for President. But against Romney.....

[joshh]

Decent details? All the man did was rebuke the existing plans and cherry pick vague statements from arguments made during the debate.


By not offering anything of substance, Romney (and by endorsing him, the whole of the Republican party) comes across as a man without a plan. You act like these people are schoolchildren with a big secret.

What should it be run like? In detail please.

[mrcheezle19]

Decent details? All the man did was rebuke the existing plans and cherry pick vague statements from arguments made during the debate.


By not offering anything of substance, Romney (and by endorsing him, the whole of the Republican party) comes across as a man without a plan. You act like these people are schoolchildren with a big secret.

Then please explain to me or show me facts about what Obama plans to do? Romney was explaining things and then reinstating it when Obama didn't seem to get it or meandered off topic so far away from the original question. Obama can't speak of a plan or go back on his last 4 years because 1. His last 4 years were terrible and citing them as reference or example to his future plans would be laughed upon and 2. His plan is to keep course with what it is now. Let every American become jobless and have the rich pay their share.

Plan under Obama:
If 10 people work and pay $10 in taxes that's 100 dollars. Now only 5 people work so let's charge them $20 and let the other 5 sit on their ass and subsequently keep raising taxes until there's one guy left paying all the taxes (the rich). That plan only works till the rich guys runs dry.

Romeny plan:
Lets get all 10 guys working and then add 4 people so we have 14 working and oh by the way lets drop the rate X% (in this case I'll use 10%) oh look now all 14 of you pay $9 and we are making money to lower the deficient because we simply got more people working which is exactly what he said last night.

Don't go nit picking what I just said above as it is a very very basic model but the general idea is there.

[Kershaw]

that's what im talking about.

you're just adding 4 people out of thin air. that is exactly romney's line of thinking. "im going to make more jobs and lower taxes guys, vote for me!" congrats on demonstrating it so well.

[mrcheezle19]

that's what im talking about.

you're just adding 4 people out of thin air. that is exactly romney's line of thinking. "im going to make more jobs and lower taxes guys, vote for me!" congrats on demonstrating it so well.

What do you mean out of thin air? no he's not going to go out and take job interviews for them and tell a company you better hire this man because I say so. But he will do a better job and helping the economy so companies will want to hire worker 1,2,3,4. Compared to what Obama has done which is basically encourage people that yes it is ok to not work. The government will do everything we can to keep you on that couch and collecting every form of free possible because hey, someone else will pay your share.

[evandael]

What should it be run like? In detail please.

what exactly are you addressing? in detail please.


RE: taxes and job growth/loss.. never in all my years have i heard my father, a small business owner, say 'gee, taxes are high, i'm gonna have to lay off one of my guys'. small businesses can't afford to lose competent, trained employees. they tough it out together because the alternative is too costly in the long run.

by contrast, corporations can cut people left and right because ultimately, they don't care about their employees, and their employees don't matter to them. outsourcing, downsizing, cost-cutting, taking advantage of tax loopholes, shifty investment strategies.. it's all driven by corporate greed. shall we continue to pander to that mentality?



let people be laid off. let them find other work with a smaller company, a newer company, a company that gives a shit.. and let the giants crumble under their own poor employee-employer relations strategies. and in the meantime, let these people collect a little unemployment. it's not like they're living the high life off of their $200/week checks. you guys paint such a fantastically overblown picture of people who receive entitlements. where is your human side? or are you as soulless as the corporate fucks who continue to puppeteer our economy?

[z31maniac]

Why are you laughing? This country is not a business. People like Romney who have spent their lives in pursuit of financial gain for themselves and their fellow dancing horse and car elevator owners aren't suddenly going to change their tune and begin working for the benefit of the rest of us. Romney is a shape-shifting chameleon adept at turning himself into whatever he feels will get him where he wants. Did you know that when he was campaigning for Senator in a Democratic state that he ran on a platform that was pro-gay marriage and pro-abortion? And after saying then that these were core beliefs handed down from his parents and that he would not waver from them, suddenly here he is pro-life and anti-gay marriage? Anything to get elected.....

Now that's laughable.

I think you should know where I stand, in other words, fiscally conservati and socially liberal.

My agreeing with his fiscal policies in no way means I agree with his or the R party in general social policies.

And yes, I believe the gov't should be accountable to certain financial rules......much like state and local govt's are.

[Kershaw]

What do you mean out of thin air?

go read over your incredibly flawed example again if you dont get it. you cant just say, "he'll add 4 jobs." without explaining HOW he is going to do that and no mention of obama creating jobs as well. (which he has a proven record of doing.) it's just a bad argument and you should feel bad.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/04/14219336-the-triumph-of-style-over-substance?lite

Indeed, it seems to me Romney thrived in large part because he abandoned the pretense of honesty. And as it turns out, winning a debate is surprisingly easy when a candidate decides he can say anything and expect to get away with it.

Romney told viewers his proposed $5 trillion tax cut isn't really his proposed $5 trillion tax cut. He suggested he could eliminate a $1 trillion deficit by going after Big Bird. He said his non-existent health care plan protects those with pre-existing conditions when in reality the exact opposite is true. He cited trumped up "studies" from far-right ideologues as if they're legitimate, assuming the public won't know the difference. He said a deficit that's shrunk has actually "doubled."

And when Romney wasn't repeating falsehoods, he was furiously shaking an Etch A Sketch, rolling out yet another version of himself.

This new model -- version 8.0? 9.0? -- likes regulations of the financial industry, wants to work with Democrats, thinks his Massachusetts health care law was a great idea, and has no use for the goals of his running mate's budget plan that Romney enthusiastically endorsed. Does this in any way reflect the candidate who's been running for president the last year and a half? No, but the Republican assumes most voters won't realize and most news organizations covering the campaign won't tell them.

He might very well be right.

[Cliche Guevara]

Romney didn't give every single detail about what he's going to do because that's not the way to go about it and win a presidency. He gave decent details on pans.

No. Time and time again Romney and Ryan have been asked to explain how they would make up the $5 trillion their tax plan adds to the deficit. Their answer has consistently been "fuck you it's not $5 trillion" (without ever giving their own figure) and "fuck you I'm not gonna tell you." $5 trillion is a lot of fucking money and when someone says they can save that much through eliminating deductions and loopholes alone they should be greeted with pure incredulity until they offer some explanation. They say the math works out. If that's true then at some point in time they did the math and should have it documented. At the very least they could put it online for us to see. The simple fact is that if they actually have a plan for making up that money there is no reason we should not know the details of it.

Regarding the debate, while I was watching it I didn't consider it a victory for Romney in the least, just a draw. Obama wasn't being the least bit aggressive, but Romney was busy lying 90% of the time so it seemed out even. But that perspective arose purely because I'm well informed and knew when Romney was lying. Sadly, most people don't, and in that light he clearly came out ahead. I'd say that Obama's plan was to play it cool and not say/do anything retarded, which he certainly accomplished. In the meantime Romney was busy backtracking on previous stances and just flat out making shit up, and because of that Obama will be armed to the teeth with false claims and misdirections that he can bring up in the next debates. Let's face it, the first debate won't matter much because the voters will be thinking about the most recent one when their casting their ballot.