Ways that you can tell that President Obama must have won the debate last night...
The the right wing world on Dawgtalkers.net is silent.
Chin up, its not over until its over.
It is better for all when two candidates show up.
There will be no playoffs. Can’t play with who we have out there and compounding it with garbage playcalling and worse execution. We don’t have good skill players on offense period. Browns 20 - Bears 17.
no, seriously. too busy watching Verlander nearly have a panic attack as his bullpen did their best to try and lose another game (he literally got so finicky that he went into the tunnel to get away from the cameras).
no, seriously. too busy watching Verlander nearly have a panic attack as his bullpen did their best to try and lose another game (he literally got so finicky that he went into the tunnel to get away from the cameras).
Same here.
I went down to our workout room last night and both TVs were on very loud with the debate raging....but nobody was in the room. I flipped to the game and never thought about it again.
Seems like a lot of people felt the same way....."meh".
Verlander was awesome, but he was beating up a unfocused Yankee team. Too bad the O's couldn't beat the Yanks in the previous round, they would have been so much better against the Tigers. Oh well.
“...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
It was a much, much closer debate. Romney completely blew the chance he was handed to hand Obama his head over Benghazi. I really didn't get what he was trying to do with that whole exchange, other than to get the President to admit that he lied. The President lied about a lot of stuff last night. What was one more?
I had Obama as coming out slightly ahead on the debate, mostly because expectations were much lower for him this time around.
However, on the one item that almost every poll says is the single most important issue to voters, the economy, Romney still won the economic debate according to 65% in the CNN poll. I would agree with that poll. Obama was so busy trying to show fire by attacking Romney and defending his first term, that he had no time left to lay out an agenda for the future. CBS had the debate overall as 37% - 30% Obama. I don't think that it was a game changer.
However ...... I watched part of FoxNews' coverage last night as I changed channels all night, and they had a focus group of undecided voters, and most of them went for Romney. One woman who voted for Obama the first time around, but did not like him this time around, said that she was trying to decide whether to vote for Romney or stay home entirely. She was swayed to vote for Romney. There were many others who were Obama voters last time who were leaning Romney after this debate.
I really think that Obama may have slightly won the battle while losing the war. His inability to lay out a future agenda will, IMHO, hurt him with undecided voters. I do believe, however, that many undecided voters are not trying to decide which man to vote for, but rather if they will vote for Romney .... the man in the moon, or stay home. I think that Obama will find it very difficult to win undecided voters at this point. If they are still truly undecided at this point, then they are almost certainly not going to vote for the incumbent. The big questions is whether Romney can get the to vote for him.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
it's strange watching the ALCS. i cannot root for either team, so i'm just watching. it's good baseball (Miggy actually made one of the defensive plays of the night running into foul ground from the shift?), but man I hate those guys (both).
Quote: It was a much, much closer debate. Romney completely blew the chance he was handed to hand Obama his head over Benghazi. I really didn't get what he was trying to do with that whole exchange, other than to get the President to admit that he lied.
Romney dropped the ball on this, unfortunately. But he did have to actually battle the moderator too on this topic. IF Obama admitted it was terrorism the day after in the rose garden, why did he go to the UN and apologize and blame a video days after? Next debate is on foreign policy and Romney has to be better on the Libya topic. He let Obama waffle and let the moderator perpetuate the cover-up. The moderator later did say Romney was correct in what he was trying to say.
“Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.” -AOC
I listened to the debate (I didn't even mute Obama's voice this time) and my impression is that Romney handed Obama his butt again and he cleaned the colon that was attached to it.
Most of the criticism that I've heard about Romney's performance come around not hammering Obama on the terrorist attack in Benghazi. I think that's the classic case of a 'red herring'. Obama is going to get hammered on foreign policy on Monday evening. I know, going up against MNF is going to be hard to overcome and that's Obama's best hope.
I'm still wondering whether I'll cast a vote for Romney or not. I'll probably record the debate on Monday and watch it afterward just so I can see how pathetic Obama will look and to see what Romney's responses will be. I know that Romney's foreign policy won't be in tune with mine, but I will watch to see where he's coming from and whether it makes any sense to me. Obama's already doesn't. As pathetic as I view Ron Paul's foreign policy, it's preferable to Obama's.
I fully expect that Romney will plow Obama under for the third time.
I only got to watch the last 1/2 hour and both annoyed the hell out of me. It is too bad we don't have any good candidates, and haven't for a long time.
Until we take the massive amounts of money away from politics and government, we'll be stuck with this crap - sadly.
The Obama supporters will not like this, but here's why Romney won again:
Romney kept bringing the debate BACK to Obama's record...and that is why he is surging in the polls.
Obama cannot hide from his record and Romney has done a great job of re-focusing the moment(s).
The Benghazi incident is Obams's Watergate...except with Americans being killed on US soverign soil. He desperately tried to spin it...his henchmen tried to spin it...Hillary tried to wait it out. Obama flat out lied and got caught...then backtracked to the View.
Then Biden lied about it...then Obama lied about it again...and Romney hammered him in the debate. Candy saved O's butt in a fashion that will likely result in her never moderating a POTUS debate again. It was pathetic and I think the American people saw that.
Obama stumbled, stammered, and rambled like he always does without a teleprompter - so much for his preparation.
Sure, he got in his talking points, but in the usual dis-jointed - and nearly incomprehendible - way he always does when thinking on his feet.
When a guy gets points for finally looking like he was actually interested in being there, you know his supporters are grasping at straws.
It is so tiring to watch these spectacles. Why did they have a town hall style meeting in New York? They might as well paint that state blue every year - undecided voters in NY? As if a conservative vote in that state even makes a difference.
On the topic of the moderator. My 10 year old son wanted to watch the debate last night so I let him stay up to do so. About an hour into it he stated "why is the moderator on Obama's side all of the time?" This is from a 10 year old that has no opinion whatsoever about this election. He doesn't understand conservative vs. liberal or who I am even voting for. This was purely an observation on his part. It's amazing the insight a 10 year old can have when all of the clouds in judgement are removed. When are they going to let someone from Fox moderate, lol.
They really should have had this in VA or OH in my opinion as I think there may be more undecideds in those states, plus they are huge swing states at this point. I also think most of the undecideds are deciding if they should even vote - see if they can be sold on Romney's plan.
Romney brought the debate back to Obama's record, but also to his plan for the economy. (much of which I agree with)
Obama really has nothing to run on right now. he tried to defend his record, but Romney did a solid job of indicting Obama over his economic policies. However, he didn't just stop there, he also laid out his vision for the future.
What vision did Obama lay out? "More of the same"? I don't believe that's a winning message.
The polls say that Obama edged Romney, yet they also say that Romney did far better in many regards.
In the CNN poll, the 2 had the following results: LinkieDoodleDo
- Who did the debate make you more likely to vote for? 25% - Obama, 25% - Romney, 48% Neither - Who seemed to be a stronger leader? 49% - Romney, 46% - Obama - Who was more likeable? 47% - Obama, 41% - Romney - Who spent more time attacking his opponent? 49% - Obama, 35% - Romney - Who cared more about audience members? 44% - Obama, 40% - Romney - Who answered the questions more directly? 45% - Romney, 43% - Obama
- Who would better handle the economy? 58% - Romney, 40% - Obama - Who would better handle health care? 49% - Romney, 46% - Obama - Who would better handle taxes? 51% - Romney, 44% - Obama - Who would better handle the deficit? 59% - Romney, 36% - Obama
So Obama was rated as more likable by 47% to 41% ....... and Obama was seen as caring more about audience members by 44% to 40%. He was also seen as spending more time attacking his opponent.
Romney did better as being seen as a stronger leader, answering questions more directly, would do a better job handling the economy, handling healthcare, taxes and the deficit.
I wonder how and why people say that Obama won the debate when he only won a couple of metrics within the poll.
In the end, the question of whether or not the debate made people more likely to vote for one of the candidates .... it stayed rather neutral. However, this could be a debate where if people were paying attention, and think about the other questions they answered, (and how they answered them) I cannot see how Obama could pick up any late deciders, where I can see someone thinking back and going "Hmm, Romney was better on the economy, on taxes, the deficit, healthcare, and he's a better leader ....... but I like the President personally .......so what carries more weight?" I cannot see that happening with someone thinking about the Obama side of things.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Interesting poll numbers. I said before the debate happened that unless Obama just fell flat on his face that he would be declared the winner.. no way was the mainstream media going to give 2 debates in a row to Romney.
While the media does lean left, it also benefits financially from a close and contested race
The last Debate was a clear win for Romney.. this one, not so much. Obama came out as if he wanted it more I think.
But in the end, here's what I got out of it:
Romney: President Obama said X Obama: That's not true
Obama: Gov. Romney said Y Romney: That's not true
Then there was a whole bunch of Blah Blah Blah
In the end it's simple, they are both liars.
I was really serious about writing in my own name, But I've decided to be GREEDY for once in my life and not look at what's best for America.
Unless some earth sharttering revelation comes to light like maybe Romney was a "JOHN" for the Zumba dance instructor in Kennebunk Maine, then he's getting my vote.. And I'm not sure if that would stop me, That woman was fairly hot.. not sure I'd blame him
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Man, you guys really just see what you want to believe.
Obama won this debate handily for the same reason Romney won the first handily - style.
Substance has very little bearing in the outcome of a debate. Most undecided voters aren't paying attention to issues and details - its about likability and the appearance of confidence.
I forget his name but someone who worked for the McCain campaign said that he didn't think Obama was head and shoulders above Romney, but Obama had the better soundbyte, and that's what counts.
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Dropped the ball.... more like face-plant. Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
There will be no playoffs. Can’t play with who we have out there and compounding it with garbage playcalling and worse execution. We don’t have good skill players on offense period. Browns 20 - Bears 17.
Quote: Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
Regarding what?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Quote: Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
Regarding what?
He claimed Obama didn't call it a terrorist attack for over two weeks, when he in fact did so right away.
Romney thought he had a 'gotcha' moment, and it backfired.
The only problem with that statement is that it's not true.
Obama never called the attack in Benghazi a terrorist attack in that Rose Garden speech. He called it an "outrageous and shocking attack". He called it "brutal acts".
He then spoke of 9-11, and said that "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." ... when speaking about 9-11 in general.
He then went on to speak of this "terrible act".
He never once used the word "terrorist", and absolutely not in reference to the Benghazi attack. In fact, the following weekend, his administration sent Susan Rice out on to every network Sunday news show to speak about the "video". Hillary Clinto then spoke the next day about the video. The Rice again, then the President again .......
Then they finally started calling it a terrorist attack ..... then Obama and his wife went on the morning show with the biddies ..... and said that they were still investigating whether or not it was terrorism .......
The entire administration denied that it was a terrorist attack until they could no longer do so wothout looking like total idiots. Then we saw things like Jay Carney trying to bury the story answering a reporter's question by saying that it was "self evident that it was a terrorist attack". This was more than a week later, and after dozens of speeches about a video .......
Romney was accurate. He never said that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. He used the word terror in a very generic manner referring to 9-11 in general.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Quote: Romney was accurate. He never said that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. He used the word terror in a very generic manner referring to 9-11 in general.
Exactly. Obama did say "Acts of Terror" in his speech, but he wasn't really directly refering to the Benghazi incident. And that's even more shown by all that talk about the stupid video, and his underlings talking about the video too.
Unfortuantely, the damage at the debate was done, and the political shows talk about what a winning point this was, instead of talking about the context it was used in his speech, and that Obama and Co. were way out of the loop with Libya
Yep. Just because a speech has 2 different terms in it does not mean that the 2 are connected by the speaker.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
I only got to hear the first 30 minutes of the debate. I cannot take much from it as I found it more humorous on how it was just a shouting match between two school kids. You are lying.. No, that is the truth, you are lying and so on.
Frankly, I don't care too much about the last debate and didn't care to listen to the rest of the second.
Unfortunately, the 3rd party debate has about as much significance as the UFL playoffs.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Quote: Unfortunately, the 3rd party debate has about as much significance as the UFL playoffs.
And the US limiting themselves to a selection of two people is as effective as driving a car with 4 flat tires. Sure, you'll be able to still drive down the highway and go forward, but eventually you'd end up driving on stubs that used to be rims and you'd eventually get stuck.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Yeah, I don't get that.. I find it impossible to believe that that didn't come up in debate prep. How in the hell can he make a statement he knows isn't fact without a way out if he's caught.. Or,, if he thought it was fact, then who on his staff should have the tar beat out of them for not getting the info right?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Dropped the ball.... more like face-plant. Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
The moderator backtracked on her comment immediately after the debate.
She was wrong and admitted so. Obama lied about the attacks...again.
It is laughable to suggest that O immediately came out and called the attack an act of terrorism.
O was flat out caught with his pants down again. His comment to Romney?
"Move on Governor."
It didn't work until Candy saved the day...but it was too late. The damage to O had already been done.
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Dropped the ball.... more like face-plant. Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
The moderator backtracked on her comment immediately after the debate.
She was wrong and admitted so. Obama lied about the attacks...again.
It is laughable to suggest that O immediately came out and called the attack an act of terrorism.
O was flat out caught with his pants down again. His comment to Romney?
"Move on Governor."
It didn't work until Candy saved the day...but it was too late. The damage to O had already been done.
Hey, I hadn't heard that candy backtracked.. that's good. Can you link me up to that please?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Yeah, I don't get that.. I find it impossible to believe that that didn't come up in debate prep. How in the hell can he make a statement he knows isn't fact without a way out if he's caught.. Or,, if he thought it was fact, then who on his staff should have the tar beat out of them for not getting the info right?
So you believe that O called the attack an act of terror from the start?
How do you explain the next 14 days of claiming the attack was a result of outrage from the video?
The effectiveness of the liberal spin is incredible.
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Dropped the ball.... more like face-plant. Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
The moderator backtracked on her comment immediately after the debate.
She was wrong and admitted so. Obama lied about the attacks...again.
It is laughable to suggest that O immediately came out and called the attack an act of terrorism.
O was flat out caught with his pants down again. His comment to Romney?
"Move on Governor."
It didn't work until Candy saved the day...but it was too late. The damage to O had already been done.
Hey, I hadn't heard that candy backtracked.. that's good. Can you link me up to that please?
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Yeah, I don't get that.. I find it impossible to believe that that didn't come up in debate prep. How in the hell can he make a statement he knows isn't fact without a way out if he's caught.. Or,, if he thought it was fact, then who on his staff should have the tar beat out of them for not getting the info right?
So you believe that O called the attack an act of terror from the start?
How do you explain the next 14 days of claiming the attack was a result of outrage from the video?
The effectiveness of the liberal spin is incredible.
Slow your damn horses down man.. I think I've made my intentions clear already so back the hell off that garbage already,
Tell me, wouldn't you consider it stupid for a candidate, any candidate to make a statement like that without a way out if it's untrue? I sure as hell would.
All you want to do is attack.. I made an observation that it was dumb to say it and not be correct and then get caught.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
I am still amused at the fact that Romney was fact checked on the spot, he thought he had Obama cold, and knocked himself out.
Dropped the ball.... more like face-plant. Battle the moderator... yes, because he was obviously wrong and she knew it, and now you complain about the moderator.
The moderator backtracked on her comment immediately after the debate.
She was wrong and admitted so. Obama lied about the attacks...again.
It is laughable to suggest that O immediately came out and called the attack an act of terrorism.
O was flat out caught with his pants down again. His comment to Romney?
"Move on Governor."
It didn't work until Candy saved the day...but it was too late. The damage to O had already been done.
Hey, I hadn't heard that candy backtracked.. that's good. Can you link me up to that please?
Thanks But I have to say this,,, Fox news is to republicans what the Huffington Post and MSNBC is to the Democrats.
So I'll have to read the transcripts and if I have the time, look it up on the DVR to see what actually was said.. time has a way of making some things fuzzy..
Then I'll try and find a video of Candy retracting (which it doesn't sound like she did, she seems to have just said that on the broader point, Romney was correct, but in the moment, it appeared he was wrong) Gotta check that.
So before I say more, I need to check and I don't know when I'll have the time, but I'll do it.
Thanks for the link
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
There can never be a true 3rd party Presidential candidate. Not at this point.
The country is polarized, with about 38-40% of voters dead set on D or R .....That leaves a maximum of 22% of voters for a 3rd party to contest.
Further, in order to win the Presidency, you have to win states. In order to win states, you have to win Congressional districts. In order to win Congressional districts, you have to have a serious ground game. No 3rd party has anything even close to approaching that in even 5% of Congressional districts nationwide, let alone all of them.
Now, one day a truly charismatic 3rd party guy may come along who somehow manages to get enough support to win the Presidency ....... but it is awfully unlikely. Usually what a 3rd party guy does is take support away from the candidate closest to his ideology, allowing the candidate further from his positions to win. That's what Perot did.
Look at Perot's race. Even with him pulling out, and then jumping back in, he was really never above that 20-25% mark. He was only really competitive in Maine, Kansas, and Oklahoma.(from scanning the list) He would have had to double his vote totals in most states just to win states. He won only a handful of Congressional districts .... which are the stepping stones to winning national elections.
Perot hit 39% in the national polls, very early in the summer of 1992. By mid July he was down to 25%. He then dropped to about 20% in August or so, and then pulled out of the race. He finished with about 19% of the vote. It was much like this year's rotating Republican at the top of the leader board. People liked Perot when they didn't know very much about him.
The 2 parties may be broken down cars, but the 3rd parties are an auto parts depot, minus the engines. People hope to cobble together a vehicle, but there is no way to make it into one that can ever make it down the road, except by "Flintstone propulsion". Even if Fred Flintstone did somehow manage to win an election, he would have no Congressional allies, and would have to fight for each and every piece of legislation he wanted to pass.Not only that, but he would have to fight everyone for every piece of legislation .... even those who would seem to be natural allies. The 2 major parties would make it impossible for such a President to get anything done. People would become incredibly unhappy with him, and no amount of likability and charisma would help such a candidate at that point.
The best chance for a 3rd party to win would be if 2 fringe parties entered an election, one left and one right, both with charismatic candidates, and split the states up to the point where a 3rd party guy could win a state with 26% of the vote. Even a guy like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson could never come close to those numbers.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
She said it on CNN ... but they are another rather left organization, so I don't now what you'll find there ...... but I am sure that with a rather modest internet search you can find actual video of the exchange the day after the debate.
However, the day after the debate was too late. She played her role, did her damage, and then apologized the following day when few people were paying attention.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif)
As if a conservative vote in that state even makes a difference. 
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png)
