Romney strong out of the gate in debate: Obama Stumbling

Originally posted by somuchhtosay41
Seems like Romney is just regurgitating info he has studied everyday for 2 hrs for the past 4 years. Obama seems like he is actually thinking on the spot. They are both still clowns. Also, Romney is being really rude to the moderator.

did we watch the same debate? Thinking on the spot? If he were thinking on the spot, he would have had SOME rebuttal back to Romney repeatedly saying that what he just said was a lie on some issues, Instead obama just kept repeating the lie.

Romney being rude to the moderator? I saw it more like Romney not letting some things go un-rebuttaled that obama said that simply were not his stand on an issue as obama had just claimed.

I swear you people are so used to obama getting protected by the media that you just cant take it when he has to actually stand on his own feet, without being "shielded." Did you catch that "Help me???" look that obama kept giving to the moderator?

Is this all you got? That the other guy was "rude?' Thank god he was rude, as you call it. It was nice to see somebody with a BACKBONE instead of this sneaking around secret stuff that we have seen from this usurper in the past 4 years. Passing all these ridiculous "executive decisions" and so forth.

I am not a big fan of ANY politician, but the truth is your boy stunk last night.

Originally posted by MRuss
reply to post by SilentKillah

 

Well, thanks for weighing in.

But since even people in is own party, on his own team, and his own media seem to think he lost the debate, I have a hard time believing you couldn't see him stumbling and bumbling.

The problem is, he just doesn't have a handle on the economy, on where jobs come from---that's not his training or his talent. He couldn't speak succintly or with authority on much, because well, he doesn't know much.

He was a community organizer.

He is a great orator (or was) without substance. It's always been this way, but people are just starting to realize it now.

edit on 4-10-2012 by MRuss because: (no reason given)

This is just more partisan spin. Tell me what Romney said he is going to do if his 20% cut across the board can't be paid for with loophole eliminations. Tell me what he said (last night) that he'll do to ensure that pre-existing conditions are not discriminated against by the Health Care Industry. Tell me what he laid out for Medicare and Social Security. You can't, and that's because he never gave any specifics whatsoever.

You people seem to think that a debate is won by sheer aggression, but the truth is that it's not. Style points aren't the whole story. And aggression in politics is not as attractive as it once was. If it was, then the loudest, stupidest and rudest Tea Party sideshow clown would have been on that stage last night instead of Romney. For the next few days the loud, stupid and rude partisans will have their say, but then the campaigns will start feeding the electorate snips of how it really went last night, and Romney's going to have a lot to explain to both the tea party and to the people who are sick of the fact that he'll say anything to get elected. Including lying without any shame whatsoever. I think that Obama was right to just 'let Romney be Romney' last night. It's not as if the guy isn't known for his self-contradictions, and he sure didn't disappoint when given the green light to go for it.

reply to post by NorEaster


I hope you don't mind. I just picked your post to respond to, because I had some of the same thoughts.

Romney undoubtedly won this debate. According to conventional debate standards, he was aggressive, engaging, alert, involved and prepared. He did seem too rehearsed to me and a LOT of what he said directly opposes what he has said before. I'm not sure the far right is going to trust him, but they'll still vote against Obama. So, he's not going to lose them, no matter what he does. He may lose some support from his more independent voters, however, for being so disingenuous. It will be interesting to see what the fact-checkers have to say.

It was a very interesting debate. I thought Romney was refreshing, actually. I've never seen him look more "presidential" and professional, but I don't trust him at all and he lied through his teeth, feigning compassion for the middle-class and poor. This is the guy who told poor people to go to Emergency Rooms for their health care. I'm not sure it's going to flush with the American people. But we shall see. For me, it doesn't matter how he "came across" in a highly-rehearsed and controlled situation. What matters is the real person and what he would do for this country. In that regard, I have zero faith and trust in Romney.

I'm not sure what Obama was doing. I like to think he has a grander plan, and that's why he didn't take ANY of the opportunities he had to challenge Romney on his previous issues (like the 47%, for example). But he came across as aloof, above it all, disinterested - well, you all saw him. My guess is that he wanted to remain cool as a cucumber and let Romney bury himself, which didn't really work in the short term. He's also not used to people standing up to him or arguing with him.

Like I said before, the debates are a show, and it was a good show. The substance is another issue. Watching someone act a part on a stage is one thing. Romney's true self has already come out and it's too late to close that particular barn door. We'll see how it pans out.

Originally posted by NorEaster
Romney's going to get butchered with video clip side-by-sides for the next few weeks.

It occurred to me this might be Obama's strategy - It was a smart move for Romney to move toward the center for this debate. However, if the Obama campaign wants to, they could have some killer ads that would alienate Romney's more independent voters. Because for me, this is a matter of who you trust. And I think a lot of Americans feel that way. I don't like a lot of Obama's policies, but I have a basic trust of the man that keeps me supporting him. Seeing the various Mitt Romneys I have over the years - from the center to the far right and back again - I can't possibly trust him to do or not do the things he's promising.

I look forward to the other debates to see if Obama changes his style. It also occurred to me that he will go for the jugular in the foreign policy debate, where Romney has no experience, but we can be sure Romney will rehearse for that, too, and be on top of his game for the next big show...

Originally posted by HostileApostle
I must be watching a different debate.

Obama is doing to things, agreeing and making Romney agree that they share the same position on many many issues.

And on the issues they disagree on, Romney's position is ALWAYS at the expense of the middle class.


Yes, you aren't seeing any strong rhetoric or much emotion from Obama, because he wants the focus to be on Romney. The only way Romney can distance himself from Obama is by highlighting the positions he holds that hurt the middle class, so Obama is calmly sitting back and letting Romney own those positions.


I see a lot of people here judging who is "winning" by who is being more aggressive. Romney is being more aggressive because he is desperate to become relevant, Obama doesn't have to do that. If you don't believe me, watch the fallout from this debate over the next week or so where some of Romney's own words will be used against him to show how damaging he will be to the middle class.

Just think about this, how many times has Romney had to defend or try to clarify his own position?

Prob not near as many times as obama has had to defend his lies to the American people: www.audacityofhypocrisy.com...

What is wrong with aggressive? Better than this snake in the grass guy that has been doing all these things behind the American public's back for four years. I for one was glad to see some BACKBONE in the repub candidate.

Obama came into the situation with a marathoner's perspective. "I can handle this. I do it every day, all day long."

Romney trained for the sprint and exploded out of the gate.

Obama looked bad at times because he knows too much and couldn't sift through it quickly, debating style, to make points concisely.

Obama had better sharpen up and take this seriously, because Mitt probably went home afterward and right back to the speed bag.

America should be very pleased because they have two excellent candidates. The next debate should be fantastic.

The reality is that whoever is elected will still have to grapple with the system of American politics, the special interest groups, the lobbyists and the oligarchical stakeholders. George W. Bush just let the system run wild and America wound up in the hospital in traction as a result.

From a Canadian perspective American politics is strange because Obama, operating in a republic, is campaigning against a man rather than against the record of the Republican party, as he would be doing in a parliamentary setting like the UK or most of the Commonwealth countries.

To me that is one of the downsides of the politics of a republic. It's as if the whole country wipes the slate clean with every presidential election and the record of each party is forgotten about. Obama will allude to the mess he inherited from Bush, but in a parliamentary setting, that mess would be blamed hugely for Obama's failure to completely dig out from under the mass of debt accumulated under Bush. It doesn't seem to be happening in this campaign.

It's one of the ways which foreigners, observing from parliamentary countries, don't really get American politics.

From the Washington Times:

"Not since Jimmy Carter faced Ronald Reagan has the U.S. presidency been so embarrassingly represented in public. Actually, that’s an insult to Jimmy Carter."

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

reply to post by MRuss

George W. Bush, the moron's moron?

Bush must have been more shocking than I realized. He's like one of those horrific accidents that the victim has wiped from memory.

I think Romney and Obama shine by comparison.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I hope you don't mind. I just picked your post to respond to, because I had some of the same thoughts.

I don't mind. I agree with your view of the short game here, but there's a long game here too, and that's the game that will ultimately overcome the short game. Obama has always been a long game player. And he does have two more debates. It's always best to be seen as improving as you approach election day, and Romney has literally nowhere to go from here. The decreased expectation game is lost for him now. Obama played him like the hyper rookie that Romney is.

I look forward to the other debates to see if Obama changes his style. It also occurred to me that he will go for the jugular in the foreign policy debate, where Romney has no experience, but we can be sure Romney will rehearse for that, too, and be on top of his game for the next big show...

Romney has no where to go and nothing at all to offer in this debate. The Rightwing will expect him to attack and attack and attack, but what's he got to attack with? His handling of the London Olympics gaffe? His bizarre manhandling of the Libyan embassy attack's initial news cycle? His claim that Russia is our #1 geopolitical threat? Maybe his foreign investment portfolio, or the fact that he pioneered offshore job outsourcing while CEO of Bain? Okay, that's foreign policy experience - in a sense - but let's face it, he's going to be hard pressed to dominate that debate with sophomoric mommy lectures about how much of a failure Obama has been as our foreign policy steward during years when so much has has gone right for him on the international stage.

Obama is free to ratchet up the pressure in the next two debates, whereas Romney's only increase will be to physically attack Obama. Romney was kinda screwed before that debate last night, and had no choice but to try and win it through hyper-aggression and outright false accusations that everyone knows are false. He had to 'win' or it was all over for him. Too bad for him that there are three debates - not just one. [heh heh] Obama sandbagged last night and we'll realize this in the weeks to come.

Sarah Palin is warning that Chicago is going to strike back.....after Romney's success last night in the debates:

"these guys in the Obama camp, they're not going go down without swinging. They're going pull something," former Governor Sarah Palin warned after tonight's debate..."


source: www.realclearpolitics.com...

Originally posted by MRuss
Do you notice that Obama will only look at the moderator when he's speaking...but Romney looks directly at Obama? Is this some type of strategy?... what does it say or mean?

edit on 3-10-2012 by MRuss because: (no reason given)

It means that you've obviously picked the wrong horse in this race.

It means that there apparently is still a little hope for the country's future.

It means that the biased leftist leaning media has been exposed as Obama hacks and that Romney does not eat children and old people.

It means that Barack Obama is a poser and a fraud.


...thanks for playing.

Originally posted by MRuss
From the Washington Times:

"Not since Jimmy Carter faced Ronald Reagan has the U.S. presidency been so embarrassingly represented in public. Actually, that’s an insult to Jimmy Carter."

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

I don't know about that. I seem to recall John Kerry soundly defeating George Bush in their first debate, only to get his hat handed to him the remainder of the debate series.

On topic, I was disappointed in Obama's lack of defending himself. I suppose that Obama is banking on fact checkers to get the word out that Romney lied through his teeth throughout the debate. Poor strategy in my opinion.

I realize that Obama was trying to come across as presidential and contrast himself with Romney without throwing any zingers. But this is a debate and appearances are everything.

I think the next two debates will be very different. The next is a town hall style debate and I'm not sure that Romney will be able to be folksy enough to win it. The last debate is on Foreign policy, which is Romney's weakest area. Will Romney rehearse enough to win those debates? Will Obama come out swinging? Only time will tell. But for now, never mind the facts, the clear aggressor in the debate was Romney; and for that, Round 1 goes to Romney.

Originally posted by MRuss
Sarah Palin is warning that Chicago is going to strike back.....after Romney's success last night in the debates:

"these guys in the Obama camp, they're not going go down without swinging. They're going pull something," former Governor Sarah Palin warned after tonight's debate..."


source: www.realclearpolitics.com...

My wife saw her on Dancing With The Stars. I didn't know she still does politics. Damn, that woman is all over the place now days.

I wonder what Rikki Lake thought of the debate last night.

Rmoney came out aggressive and wasn't awkward- that was about it. If people were actually paying attention to what he was sayin, it was complete BS and/or just a word salad followed by the usual folksy stories from the heartland that all candidates relay.

I think, as usual- While Romney was overly excited to score points right out of the gate (at some points he reminded me a child who really needed to pee) Obama is focusing on the long game and save he's most scathing attacks for the final debates so that the leave the most impression heading into the polls

There is no doubt that Romney made a very good impression and that the President didn't look razor sharp.

The elephant in the room, though, is military spending. Both of these guys are being very cagey about how they broach that topic. The answer to virtually all of America's problems lie in how that sacred cow, to switch animals, is handled.

I "accidently" watched a few minutes (The show I was watching on netflix ended and I didn't bother to pick up the remote before Tivo kicked over to live TV.), in those few minutes it was very clear that Romney was acting strong and appearing "Presidential" while Obama seemed downright timid and seemed to be playing right into Romneys hands. Obamas performance was so weak that it made me think "He must be doing this on purpose to come out with haymakers in the next debates".

Despite whoever won or lost the debate last night, the biggest loser was still Big Bird.

Win/Loss... Last night matters little in the entirety of the race for the White House.

The only debate that truly matters a whit, is the one the first week of next month, when the citizens who bother to turn out, vote. Romney did well, true enough, and from what little I saw before going to work last night, President Obama was ill-prepared. But little or nothing was settled.

Neither did anything to change my mind about voting for Johnson...and that's all that matters to me.

Originally posted by paxnatus

Originally posted by MRuss
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

Definintely one of the best lines of the night.

Any others that will we'll be seeing over and over for the next few days?

Obama talking about Romney outsourcing jobs overseas and getting a tax break..Romney's response"I have been in business 25 years and I have no idea what you are talking about". As if to say...Dude, what in the hell are you talking about??.Romney then explains to Obama how the tax code works.Obama grimaces and looks as if he needs a cigarette in the worst way! From that point on, Obama never looks at Romney again.....Truly a memorable moment!!

one of my favorite moments of the debate. obama could only get so many lies in, and I thought Romney rebuttled most of them very well.

Originally posted by MrPlow
Rmoney came out aggressive and wasn't awkward- that was about it. If people were actually paying attention to what he was sayin, it was complete BS and/or just a word salad followed by the usual folksy stories from the heartland that all candidates relay.

I think, as usual- While Romney was overly excited to score points right out of the gate (at some points he reminded me a child who really needed to pee) Obama is focusing on the long game and save he's most scathing attacks for the final debates so that the leave the most impression heading into the polls

okaaayyy... not sure how he will accomplish this without his teleprompter or his lapdog media shielding uncomfortable questions for him, Seems to me he won't fare any better than he did last nite.

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Obama looked bad at times because he knows too much and couldn't sift through it quickly, debating style, to make points concisely.

Okay, that's the funniest excuse I've heard this morning. Thank you for the laugh.