by Jack Lee
Romney’s people were looking for a clear win, Obama’s team figured they were ahead in the polls, so the president just needed a draw and then let his past campaign momentum carry him on to victory in Nov. It was all on Romney to land enough punches to save his campaign…and he did.
There were no knock downs, but Romney came away as the winner on a technical score. He was the more aggressive of the two, as he launched salvo after salvo of facts and figures and this occasionally made Obama cringe and look down. This is exactly what the Romney supporters have been asking for and Romney delivered and he looked very presidential doing it too! But, Obama didn’t give up any ground easily. He did pretty good, even without his teleprompter, but he was not the orator we’ve seen in the recent past.
Republicans were ecstatic over Romney’s performance, but not everyone else was. Many conservative voters, including some of my Libertarian friends, would have preferred Romney be even more aggressive. They wanted him to lay into Obama’s dismal record even more, but he held back and in hindsight he probably looked better for doing it.
The Dems had to give credit where credit was due and most had to admit Romney gave a pretty good performance and probably got the edge on Obama…this time. But, there are two more debates left and Obama may be going for a rope-a-dope in the final round. But, if you have learned only one thing tonight, it’s that Mitt Romney is no dope.
The next two debates promise to be very interesting.
Whatever side you are on, one thing is obvious, given the margin for error in the polls, this is a very, very close race. Underdog Romney is picking up the momentum just when he needs it most. But, to defeat an incumbent president, Romney needs to go three for three with a strong finish.
Let me leave you with this final thought. This election is not about deciding which candidate will win, it is literally about deciding the future path for America. Either we will continue to drift left into irreversible socialism or it we will be put back on course, in line with our founding principles about capitalism, limited government and free enterprise.
Well, I saw the first half hour or so and Willard clearly won, even with Jim Liar doing everything he could to help Obammie.
In fact it was so one sided I stopped watching because I felt sorry for Obama.
But I think it will make no difference.
I just don’t see the average voter electing a rich white guy with the economy so bad, especially running against someone promising the moon.
But what do I know?
Rand Paul says the election was already over more than a week ago.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/20/rand-paul-i-think-the-election-is-over-i-think-that-romney-has-already-won/
Romney handled himself very well in this debate. I felt that he out performed Obama on many levels.
I watched the debate on CNBC. I listened to the comments afterwards by Maria Bartiroma and others. They all were impressed with Romneys performance.
I also watched the tweets as they went by on the bottom of the screen. One that really caught my eye was by Bill Maher.
He tweeted that he wouldnt sit in Obamas class in the 2nd semester, if tonight was any indication. Very telling. Other remarks were to the effect that Prof. Obama was being taught by his pupil.
I have a very pro Obama friend that actually was impressed by Romney tonight.
Joseph, despite the broken promises, the costly mistakes, the high unemployment, the stalled economy and the embarrassing apology tour, many leftist democrats still fall back on this line:
“Let him finish what he has started. He inherited a mess from Bush and it’s going to take a little longer to fix it.”
I’ve heard this said by intelligent, educated democrats, isn’t that amazing, still blaming Bush?
And then there is the sympathy/racist opinion:
“He was our first black president, we need to give him more time, it wouldn’t be right to throw him out after one term and replace him with a rich white guy.”
This one is a very popular opinion on the left, although it’s not always stated so bluntly. This is far worse than, “Obama’s gonna give me some free SH#@ so I’ll vote for him.” Because this is condescending and it’s 100% racist and racism feelings should have nothing to with how we measure a candidate for the White House.
Pal, that’s encouraging to hear, because I feel Obama doesn’t deserve a second term. I’m angry over all the usual things, but I also resent how Michelle Obama blew through so much of the taxpayers money on frivolous things related to their vacations. The millions she wasted without a second thought could have helped change the lives of hundreds of American forever. That really ticks me off, she acted like 15th century royalty, with no regard to the desperate times her minions faced. And when Obama said he was constantly working on the problems before America, I had to choke, because I knew he found time to play over 100 rounds of golf and take more vacation days than anyone I know.
Romney was well prepared and very well spoken in the debate. Obama had a Bob Newhart stutter going.
However Romney has changed his position on many of his plans. No plan to pay down the debt. A new 5 point plan, of which 4 of the points are identical to Obama’s, and he has changed his tax plan. He must have been shaking his etch-a-sketch overtime. He made many promises, I doubt he could keep, or even wants to. Over and over again, Romney has proven he will say anything to get elected.
I really enjoyed my popcorn and beer last night. If there had been a cover charge I would have gladly paid it to see the Romney mop the floor with Obama.
Obviously, Romney came prepared and Obama missed the writings of someone else to read from his teleprompters.
Romney presented his plans and points and corrected and challenged Obama the whole night. Obama looked like a student who wanted to crawl under the podium he looked at most of the night and couldnt wait for recess so he could go play on the golf course.
I thought the best statement was when Romney compared Obama to his five sons saying just because you keep repeating a false statement lie doesnt make it true.
Best statement of the whole night was Romneys closing statement. Worst statement was Obamas closing statement when he begged for people to vote for him.
By the end of the night I actually felt sorry for Obama and hopeful for Nov. Keeping in mind Obama and his minions will gather to strategies and come back very strong.
Polls are now showing Romney won by 67% and Obama got 25%. Isnt that close to a technical knockout?
This fight is not over. Romney just won round one.
Re Jack: “He was our first black president, we need to give him more time, it wouldn’t be right to throw him out after one term and replace him with a rich white guy.”
And Joseph: “In fact it was so one sided I stopped watching because I felt sorry for Obama.”
I have felt sorry for Obama from the beginning. This man was not ready for the presidency. He has little real world experience. He has been indoctrinated to the point where he cannot think critically. He has no grounding on which to stand. He cannot defend his policies because they are based on a belief system that he does not experience personally. China, the Soviet Union…even the little Castro brother in Cuba have all admitted that socialism fails…Obama continues to be a true believer. It’s incredible to watch! But the worst thing for this man is the way he has been promoted and propped up, placed on a pedestal, fawned over and admired, virtually without criticism that had any possibility of creating the “aha”…the fall, when it comes, has got to be humiliating and devastating.
Obama is the left’s monument to itself and instead of a golden bust we find a crumbling mass of clay.
Jim are you sure Romney changed his positions? I hear this all the time but I haven’t seen it. I have seen a media and left pundit meme but that comes out of what they think he said or what they assume. Can you give us an example?
“I’ve heard this said by intelligent, educated democrats, isn’t that amazing, still blaming Bush?”
Well, it’s true, isn’t it? We’re in the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression and, if we’re not going to launch a third world war for to spend our way out (and we’re not … the machinations of a lot of Islamophobes notwithstanding), it’s going to take a good long time to get out.
Jim is right: the Obama/Romney economic plans are virtually identical. Apparently, they’re taking the same (hopefully good) advice. The only real issue in this campaign is who’s going to bear the brunt of the cost of the recovery.
Take your pick.
Libby: Well, it’s true, isn’t it? We’re in the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression
Yes we are, thanks to the Democrats.
I dont have five sons who keep repeating something trying to convince me that a lie is the truth. So hearing you and the rest of your party repeating this lie will never ring true.
The facts are the Democrats were in control of both houses in Congress since 2007 to 2010 and hold 2/3 today. Obama was also a member of that Congress and voted to pass the very bills into law that he and the Democrats are now blaming Bush for.
The flip side of the coin is the Republicans were in control of Congress during Clintons last term in office when Soc. Sec. and Welfare reform was done, and when we last had a balanced budget with a surplus, under the leadership of Gingrich.
Clinton also gets credit for moving to the center and becoming a moderate, while Bush again gets ALL of the blame for the actions of the Democrats Congress that along with the mortgage mess lead by Dodd and Frank brought us to the fiscal and economic cliff of today.
Bush is blamed when the Democrats were in control and Clinton gets all the credit when the Republicans were. Somethings very wrong with this picture of attempting to rewrite the facts of history by repeating talking points by Democrats trying to convince everyone their lies are the truth.
Republican controlled Congress resulted in a budget surplus AND entitlement program reform
Democrat controlled Congress resulted in $16+ trillion of debt. All of it added since Clinton left office.
Libby: “…the Obama/Romney economic plans are virtually identical.”
No.
“Jim are you sure Romney changed his positions?”
Well it looks that way. First that $17,000 cap on deductions was new, it’s not even on his website. A couple months ago he was going to cut the upper tax rate, now it looks like that is gone or at least he isn’t taking about it.
Back in September Albert R. Hunt from Bloomberg said this:
“Mitt Romney has proposed huge tax cuts that principally benefit the wealthy, while refusing to say how hed pay for them by closing unspecified loopholes. This lacks credibility and may become one of the rare tax-cut promises that is a political loser.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-16/romney-s-tax-cuts-may-be-a-hard-sell-with-voters.html
Romney now only says things that poll well, or are popular. Which reenforces the view that you don’t really know what he stands for. The man will say what ever he thinks you want to hear.
There is a lot more on this leftist website:
http://www.classwarfareexists.com/romneys-debate-strategy-create-alternate-universe-promise-everyone-gets-a-pony/#ixzz28JHAz2kl
Now did Obama do everything he said he was going to do in the campaign? NO, of course not. However over the last 3 years, we have a good idea of what he is about and going to do.
I’m disappointing with Obama, however I just don’t trust Romney one bit.
Jim, surely you’re not suggesting that candidates for high office will alter their talking points over time in order to garner the most votes? Thank God Obama never did that, oh he evolved his positions, but that’s different.
Here’s an example of one of his most drastic flip-flops:
Mitt Romney implemented an individual mandate in his state because he realized that if everyone has insurance for basic preventative care, health costs for everyone will go down. Here’s what Romney said in 2008, in defense of the individual mandate, which he calls “the ultimate conservative position:”
“If somebody could afford insurance they should either buy the insurance or pay their own way. They shouldn’t be allowed to just show up at the hospital and say, somebody else should pay for me.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gn42BFs0_b4
This did not used to be controversial; Newt Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation used to advocate this common sense wisdom as well.
Yet here’s what Mitt said a few weeks ago on “60 Minutes:”
PELLEY: Does the government have a responsibility to provide health care to the 50 million Americans who don’t have it today?
ROMNEY: Well, we do provide care for people who don’t have insurance, people — we — if someone has a heart attack, they don’t sit in their apartment and — and die. We — we pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care.
PELLEY: That’s the most expensive way to do it.
ROMNEY: Well the…
PELLEY: In the emergency room.
ROMNEY: Diff — different, again, different states have different ways of doing that. Some — some provide that care through clinics. Some provide the care through emergency rooms. In my state, we found a solution that worked for my state. But I wouldn’t take what we did in Massachusetts and say to Texas, “You’ve got to take the Massachusetts model.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/mitt-romneys-mindbending-flip-flop-on-emergency-rooms-and-health-care/262781/#
Mitt Romney has not only changed his position on healthcare. He has changed it for the worse. As the interviewer pointed out, letting people go without insurance causes them to wait until there is an emergency to seek care, which is the most expensive way to pay for healthcare. Costs go up for everyone go up when this happens.
So why has Romney changed his position? Romneycare was a success. The individual mandate works. Romney has simply run away from his signature accomplishment out of fear of his own party, whose agenda now amounts to nothing other than “If Obama is for it, we’re against it, even if we were for it before Obama.”
Chris: “So why has Romney changed his position?
Has he? He spoke about individual state solutions. It is possible to have a different position as a governor because the Constitution specifically states that those things not given to the federal government to provide (which are limited) are relegated to the state or the people.
The idea that the federal government has been given too much power is gaining in strength and popularity. I think this is due to the fact that we realize we stupidly created programs at the federal level that we cannot sustain and it is causing our debt to rise. If Romney has changed his mind, and I can’t say that he has given his position on state power vs. federal power, it is a wise change.
“Romney has simply run away from his signature accomplishment out of fear of his own party, whose agenda now amounts to nothing other than “If Obama is for it, we’re against it, even if we were for it before Obama.”
He isn’t running away from it; he acknowledges that the people of Mass. like his plan. Also keep in mind Romneycare IS NOT Obamacare. There are significant differences!
THE BEST ANSWER IS WE JUST CAN’T AFFORD IT! It would be irresponsible and unconscionable to foist the explosion in the debt that will continue if we keep it on YOUR GENERATION and future generations. We need to dial back at the federal level…that should be a big concern for you Chris!
There are better ways to fix our healthcare problems without adding to the debt.
Tina, the new healthcare law does not add to the debt. In fact, it reduces the debt by $109 billion by increasing revenue. What we cannot afford is the ridiculous solution Romney proposed on “60 Minutes”–letting people go without health insurance until they get sick or injured enough to go to the emergency room, and then can’t pay. As the interviewer correctly pointed out, this is the most expensive way for a country to pay for its healthcare, and this is why our nation spends more on healthcare than any other. Countries with universal healthcare actually spend less.
It’s funny that sometimes you say that Obamacare is too expensive, and other times you say that it is cutting costs in a draconian manner that amounts to “rationing.” Which is it? Both can’t be true.