Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mastermou. Show Mastermou's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    Romney employed and interesting, and from what I've read and heard this morning, effective tactic. Lie about your positions, policies and intentions. Adopt all the winning features of Obama policies (at least for the debate). Wow!!! The man has not one ounce of integrity or courage. It does seem to have gone over very well, so I am guessing this will be his theme for the rest of the election season.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    "winning features of Obama policies"?   LOL!   And those would be.......?

    [/QUOTE]

    At least there are things to argue about.  Romney's policies have no features at all.  Tax cuts that will be paid for somehow...  16 million jobs will be created somehow...  

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to BloggetyBloop's comment:

    That was the most lopsided debate I have ever witnessed. Obama looked flat out disoriented, and was all over the place with his responses. I had a very hard time staying focused when he spoke. I think that could be because I have heard him speak so much over the past 4 years. Romney was much more lively, streamlined, and organized.  If Obama does not make a vast improvement over the next 2 debates, this election could turn out to be another Reagan/Carter type of landslide.




    Why is everyone surprised?

    Obama without a speech crafted by someone else, and a teleprompter can't compete on substance.

    What has this man ever done for anyone to have great expectations from him in a debate?

    What has he ever accomplished other than write books about himself?

    A community organizer who in 4 years has destroyed our economy divided the citizenry in class warfare, plunged the country into un sustainable debt and alienated every close friend our country has.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    Romney clearly did a good job.    I'm not voting for him, but I was happy for him because it's been painful for the past few months watching him tank his own campaign.  

    Maybe I wear rose colored glasses, but Obama did fine.  Not great, but fine.   Obama has a record of 4-years he can't possibly hide, and his supporters are willing to give him 4 more years, debate points scored or lost.

    Romney got a boost, no doubt about it.    But did he get any of the 47% on his side?  :)

    When Romney said he would "cross the aisle" that was the one place I thought Obama had a hard time not laughing out loud; he exercised restraint.  :)

    The families congregating after the debate was a nice human touch, albeit a photo-op.   

    Romney came out of the gate very gracefully when he congratulated the President on his anniversary and made the joke about spending a romantic evening with him -- that was the first time I've ever heard Romney make a joke that was actually funny.  

    Rejoice Romney supporters; heating up the race is a very good thing.   

    "Beware the fury of a patient man."   Obama is not done.  




    Obama didn't do as bad as some are portraying, it is an expectation game.  However, I don't understand the issue with Romney saying he wil lreach across the aisle.  That's his history in Massachusetts, one of the reaosns why conservatives don't like him.  Obama, on the other hand wouldn't reach across the aisle to save his life.  That's his record.  Not once. 

    So, laugh?  Maybe the stifling of the laugh is Obama being smug about his lack of bi-partisan ship.

    But I say this not to be divisive, but to point out that you, like many Obama supporter,s are supporting him for reasons that simply are not factual.  You really need to consider laying your ideology aside and support Romeny, if for no other reason than your guy had four years and failed.  Give our guy a  chance.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Romney hit this one out of the park and he'll get a debate bump, it is now game on for the White House. Romney was a man on fire; a master with his facts, confident with every answer, even masterful with a little humor but also firmly ans strong in going after Obama



    Good lord. Wipe your nose off Mr. "moderate". ROFL. Couldnt' get it any further up there.

     

     

    Romney was certainly energetic but he was completely full of it. Absolutely zero detail. His excuse for not having detail? Reagan.

     

     



    Funny, how even the liberal pundits up and down the dial said Romney walked away with this, yet I'm not moderate for saying so.   

    Like it or not Romney was energetic, personable (added little stories to make a point), knew his numbers and data, and he was in command and his confidence increase throguh the debate.

    Obama was worse then any expectation I may have had; a buddy said the most likley cause is that it was his anniversary and got f'd silly before the debate.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    However, I don't understand the issue with Romney saying he wil lreach across the aisle

     

     

    Nevermind that it is irrelevant. He "reached across the aisle" in Mass. because he had to.


    If Reps keep the house, if they take the senate, there won't be any reaching because there won't be any need to.



    Romney reached becasue he had to and Obama should have because he had do; but he didn't.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    But I say this not to be divisive, but to point out that you, like many Obama supporter,s are supporting him for reasons that simply are not factual.  You really need to consider laying your ideology aside and support Romeny, if for no other reason than your guy had four years and failed.  Give our guy a  chance.




    Alas, divisive it is.

    It's still not clear what, if anything - other than letting GM and Chrysler go bankrupt - Romney might have done differently that would have made any difference in the result.  To my knowledge, nobody has made the case that the recession would have been less severe or the recovery less slow as we have experienced.

    But then, if you told me four years ago that the 2012 field would consist of a former senator from Chicago and a former governor of Massachusetts, that too would have been a surprise.

    Caveat emptor

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    But I say this not to be divisive, but to point out that you, like many Obama supporter,s are supporting him for reasons that simply are not factual.  You really need to consider laying your ideology aside and support Romeny, if for no other reason than your guy had four years and failed.  Give our guy a  chance.




    Alas, divisive it is.

    It's still not clear what, if anything - other than letting GM and Chrysler go bankrupt - Romney might have done differently that would have made any difference in the result.  To my knowledge, nobody has made the case that the recession would have been less severe or the recovery less slow as we have experienced.

    But then, if you told me four years ago that the 2012 field would consist of a former senator from Chicago and a former governor of Massachusetts, that too would have been a surprise.

    Caveat emptor

     




    I think I did tell you that.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    "President Obama better hope a kicked asz is covered under Obamacare" - Dennis Miller  tongue
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Obama should have because he had do; but he didn't



    Yeah cause they simply tookit from him. Man gets his @ss kicked in negotation, generallys peaking.

     



    The debate wasn't about the decided; it was about the undecided and Romneys' story played well to the undedcided crowd as to why he won't have gridlock.  Your opinion doesn't really count on this.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Your opinion doesn't really count on this




     

    Yours does? ROFL.




    Good point, I was speaking for the undecideds.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    Nevermind that this is Massachusetts so it wouldn't matter if I did vote Romney. No way does Obama lose mass.




    No surprise there after watching Fat Ted's act for 47 years.

    He got away with murder (no pun intended).

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    I'm late to this discussion but my take is that romney was too hopped up on sugar, he lied his but off , he totally disrepected the voters of this country with that tactic and he didn't make up any appreciable ground in Oh, Mi, and Pa.

    Concerning Obama I didn't like his tactic of being reserved or appearing surprised by a pathological liar and not confronting those lies right away.

    So in my opinion romney won for this reason and this reason only he won't let his campaign be dictated by " FACT-CHECKERS" !

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    If nothing else, this should lay to rest the idea that the main-stream media is rigging the election.  Can anybody explain how Romney got away with pretending he had never heard of the bring jobs home act, which would have ended tax breaks to companies moving their businesses overseas?  It was just blocked by senate Republicans four months ago.  He also acted as if he had never heard of his own 20% marginal tax rate cuts, which would add up to $5 trillion over 10 years.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from cookie-rojas. Show cookie-rojas's posts

    Re: Your take on the first Presidential Debate?

    Well, all I know is that Chris Mathews has a huge hangover today, plus a sore you-know-what.

    Romney was Presidential, get used to it.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share