While I was recovering from the president’s asinine remark on gas prices, Romney refuted a Democrat claim, offered via an “undecided voter” in a question, that he will raise taxes on the middle class. No, Romney said, “I won’t raise taxes on the middle class under any circumstances.” Obama repeated the claim. Romney refuted it again, and then explained how taxes impact the economy. Obama likely heard the Charlie Brown adult voice during that portion of the debate. Supply and demand and their impact on the economy elude him.
At 33 past, Crowley asked Romney what he will do if his plan’s numbers don’t add up. Romney riffed on his considerable business experience and saving the Olympics, and laid it next to Obama’s record of spending and debt. “Of course my numbers add up.” Then: “When we’re talking about math that doesn’t add up, how about four trillion dollars in deficits?” It was a massive moment. Obama reacted from the back of the stage as if he had been sucker punched, before he finally stood and attempted to refute Romney. Obama’s most specific answer thus far: a defense of government spending on Big Bird and Planned Parenthood.
Another “uncommitted voter,” a young woman, asked about equal pay for women, to set Obama up to discuss the Lilly Ledbetter Act – one of his few actual legislative achievements that have not blown up in his face. Both Obama and Romney answered fine, but Romney’s answer scored much better with women than with men. Some tweeters LOL’d at Romney’s answer that he sought to hire women when he was governor in Massachusetts, by having “binders full of women” (their qualifications) brought to him. Had Bill Clinton been anywhere near the stage, the debate would have taken an interesting turn. He got to the bottom line when he said that the current economy is hurting everyone including women.
Another “uncommitted voter” asked Romney to differentiate himself from former President Bush. This was an obvious call to attack a fellow Republican and dispirit his party’s base. She did allow that Obama has “disappointed” her. It’s funny how no “uncommitted voters” ask Obama how he isn’t Jimmy Carter. But that might hit a little too close to home. Romney said that he and Bush are “different people” with different policies before launching into several detailed critiques of ObamaCare and its impact on business, and Obama’s deficits, which have eclipsed those racked up by Bush.
An “uncommitted voter” who allowed that he voted for Obama in 2008 asked the president to justify voting for him again. Softball city. Obama claimed to have created 5 million jobs and said that he had kept all of his promises. Obama ripped Romney for what the president called a lack of leadership. Obama bragged when he should have sounded a note, at least, of regret. Romney took his turn to note that the economy Obama described is not good and electing him to four more years will yield more of the same. He dinged Obama for promising to have us at 5.4% unemployment, to reform Medicare and Social Security by now, and to deal with immigration. Obama, Romney said, has done none of these while he has also doubled the national debt. “The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who does not understand” the economy, Romney said. Whether Romney won the “uncommitted voter” over or not, he succinctly detailed Obama’s record of failure. “The president has tried, but his policies haven’t worked.” It was, as one tweeter noted, Romney’s “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” moment. It could have come across more clearly, though.
Why did Candy Crowley have a Latina ask the question about immigration? Because that’s just how things are done now. It’s as if the only immigrants who matter are from Mexico and are here illegally. What a disservice to everyone from every country who respects our laws and sovereignty. The answers might come in less predictably if Crowley had, say, a black construction worker ask about immigration policy and enforcement. On immigration policy, both candidates welcomed legal immigrants. Obama called illegal border crossers “undocumented workers,” going politically correct rather than legally accurate. Obama said we need to keep “gangbangers” out. Who disagrees with that? Obama accused Romney of supporting Arizona’s immigration law, which still enjoys majority support nationwide.
“The first question came to Romney from a 2-year old college student”
Sounds like my kind of guy.
It was a twenty-year old college student.
Excellent summary, Bryan. You’re right, Obama did not change the trajectory of the race.
Obama’s mission: Gain ground. Romney’s mission: Hold ground. Completely different challenges.
Obama gained some ground, but (to my right-leanin’ lyin’ eyes-n-ears) not enough. Romney held his ground. Good job, Mittens.
About 2/3s into the debate, during the LIBYA segment, Obama actually lost his temper (twice).
That.was.weird.
Did he lose temper, or was it an attempt to intimidate?
The First Debate shows the emperor has no clothes, the Second Debate shows the emperor wears briefs.
Briefs? His nether garments looked more like Pampers to me.
He was very bitter and angry; he began to blink excessively , which usually means that he lied his ‘a*s off with his tag team partner Crowler.
It was that moment, that mooch began clapping leading audience member to join her.
Romney won big on body language.
Obama’s logic on gas prices is that (a) it is set by WORLD demand, and (b) he likes it high. He sort of said the first, and sort of sort of said the second.
Romney had a couple of length declamations about Obama’s failures.
I suspect these will be the crucial points, if ANYONE’s mind was changed today, it would be by that.
The pit yorkies of the fringe left will be happy with Obama, but who cares, they weren’t really up for grabs anyway.
One opinion I’m interested in: Candy Crowley’s.
She did a creditable job as moderator, I feared for far, far worse.
–
Under a Romney administration, do we think PJM can upgrade their servers to not crash in live-blogging situations?
Can’t agree on Candy Crowley. She was a lousy moderator. See Bryan’s Update. She also gave Obama three full minutes more to talk and allowed him to constantly interrupt Mitt Romney.
She chose all the questions that slanted toward Obama’s campaign strategy.
She absolutely did slant in favor of Obama! Candy selected which questiones were aired, right? What was with the question she selected about how Romney was different from Bush? I though this was a debate about Romney vs. Obama. Obama had absolutely no investment in the question and it was a no lose for him so why was he afforded a rebuttal?. If you think about it, the question provided him an opportunity to walk back all his whining about Bush and even, in an indirect way, suggest that he agreed with Bush on a lot of stuff and caricature Romney as extreme. It was a totally inappropriate question for the forum and wasted time that should have been spent comparing the candidates ideas.
That was Crowley giving Obama top-cover.
The only way the GWB comparison was valid would have been make Obama’s question “How would your next four years fulfill the second term of Jimmy Carter?
It seems to me, if Romney and company take the opportunity, the value of the debate is to pick apart the nonsense statements Obama made throughout it, and put them on commercials during the remaining days of the campaign. Certainly, Obama has spewed enough lies that they can be refuted in commercials, at least. The big disappointment is Romney has a multitude of disasters Obama is responsible for, and he still hesitates to go for the jugular on them.
This was my take also. One whopper after whopper by Obama gives the Romney campaign a springboard for numerous ads. If the MSM had an ounce of integrity left (I realize it doesn’t) it would pick apart Obama’s lies, especially Libya and domestic oil, gas and coal production.
The debate for the most part was fairly tedious with both men regurgitating worn talking points, but I realize these debates are for the puzzling goofs who are “undecided”. Does this bunch have any guiding principles in their lives at all?
Romney’s answer on “assault” rifles was pitiful. I took it as coded to an extent, we know he will not do anything about them and, of course, shouldn’t. We know Obama would take all of our guns if he could. Law abiding citizens shouldn’t have their 2nd amendment rights curtailed because of the actions of a few nut-jobs who are products of a society being destroyed by liberalism itself. As our society is collapsing it is more important than ever that citizens be well armed.
My conclusion is that Obama may have slightly won a temporary victory, but his lies leave him vulnerable to any who is willing to do even the slightest research. Obama though, was whiney and obnoxious (but nearly all liberals are)Romney maintained the new impression that he is a capable man which was important. The needle probably won’t move much either way as a result of this debate.
Speaking of exactly that:
Coal miners to Obama: YOU LIE!
If I may, these independents may, indeed, be independents. As someone who will not be voting for either candidate, I do not see them the same as you. I think it is a fair question, for example, to ask Romney how he is different from Bush. You can see it as an Obama plant, or you can see it as a low-info voter who would like to vote for Romney, but wants assurances, or it may be someone giving him an opportunity to make that differentiation. I would rather he have asked that of Obama, though. That would have been delicious….
Malone, you are hopeless. ABO2012
Who chose the question? Don’t attack the person who asked the question but ask why CNN chose that question.
I still adore you Marc Malone (even when you sound like the pain pills have taken your genius brain off-kilter)…but:
A man who stands for nothing can fall for anything.
xoxoxox,
Delia
That’s retarded. The woman, Susan Katz was a hardcore NY liberal plant who wanted to create wiggle room for Obama’s stupid “crypto-Nazi “Forward” meme. She hoped to plant in people’s minds that Romney is Bush redux. Bush isn’t running. His record has been hashed and re-hashed. Obama’s sorry record is the issue that matters.
Sigh. Once again, Bush is NOT A PART OF THIS DEBATE. Bush became irrelevant the MINUTE Obama took office. By constantly bringing up the subject of a past president, it is only being done because of the negative associations the Left has with the man. They are still blaming Bush because they have nothing else. Bush had no part in this debate and Romney should have laughed and told that fat pig Obama media shill that he was here to debate Obama and not George Bush.
Absolutely right!
Obama was much improved tonight. Last time he was asleep.
Tonight he was awake.
With a pulse. Barely but then again..
Awake or asleep, he’s still a damned nightmare.
He was more awake…his lies can’t be blamed on talking in his sleep.
Romney won easily in my opinion.
The “Town Hall” format is absurd though; it lends itself to manipulation and doesn’t really let the candidates engage each other at length in a decisive way. They spend too much time and effort trying to empathize with “undecided voters” and cadge a few more seconds from the moderator.
With a choice as stark as the one I’m seeing, who in the hell could be undecided at this point?
Who is still undecided? That’s east to answer. People who like lots of attention. How else would those morons we saw tonight at the debate and in the focus groups have every gotten on national TV?
I don’t know if he won the debate, but Obama probably wasn’t able to slow down his momentum.
I don’t know, even right-leaning commentators like Krauthammer are saying Obama won.
However, Obama didn’t get the big knockout “Win Line” that he was going for so badly.
Krauthammer will check the facts and discover that Obama, like Biden, is “all hat and no cattle”. ABO2012
Krauthammer gave Obummer the win on looks and style I’m guessing. When the facts are checked and weighed it won’t be close – but don’t look for the MSM to claim that Romney won based on points of fact.
enchanted by Obama’s fork-tongued bluster, he showed himself blind to facts right before his eyes
krauthamer usually has a few decent things to say but he was off tonight
during the debate, i was expecting obama’s nose to grow like leslie nielson’s on “airplane”
this was like an olympic boxing match especially with the way it is scored
early on romney was pummeling obama and the ref/moderator kept jumping in to save the messiah- the debate could have been judged a tko early
then, like many olympic matches in london, mysteriously, obama gets credit from the media for his 100% lying rate– in other words, none of his “points” were real yet krauthammer seems to think they were
Your site, PJMedia, was down the entire time of the debate. I’m writing from Florida, so you can determine if this was national or local. This has never happened before, as far I know.
it never went down for me but i do admit it took longer than usual to “log in” as i had to retry a few times
Obama says we have to do something about assault weapons. He did it for us. Handed them to the drug cartels to murder people, including Americans.
Point 2: If Obama said in the Rose Garden day 1 that this was an act of terror, how come Idiot Rice five days later on Sunday leftist news TV she blamed a video for the attacks?
How come Obama, himself, two weeks later at the UN said the cause of the attack in Benghazi was a video? President Coverup strikes again. But this time Obama struck out.
When I check the transcript I walk away with the impression that Obummer was referring to the Terror attacks of Sept 11 2001, not the Benghazi attack of September 11 2012 when he refers to the Terror attack.
But it depends on the meaning of “September”, you see.
“Eleven” is also insufficiently quantifiable. Who can say for sure what that actually means.
It’s a matter of he said, she said, so, let me make this perfectly clear….
….the word “terror” was in fact spoken in the Rose Garden.
A single spore of pollen from a fig tree MUST be a leaf, because Candy Says so.
I don’t see that Obama won anything and here is why.
What did Obama do to convince the people his possible second term would not be a continuation of the first? So he was more aggressive. But was anymore informative?
Not a thing. If any minds changed tonight, it was simply to convince Mitt Romney was not a one debate flash in the pan.
Tomorrow, we will check facts and it will become obvious that Obama lied through his teeth from start to finish; from hydrocarbons to Libya.
So I take it the Pocket Obama book sales on amazon will take a slump?
Wondering how long it will be before we hear the phrase in the MSM referring to Obama as “The Comeback Kid”?
Already happening over at Huffpo.
– is doing is best too.
Mitt Romney look powerful and I think the men like that and the women who need good father like that just like Brigham young was powerful man with 55 children. As far as this comment of his binders full of women I know some of those women in his binders
This may not look so good to women today because too many are beast whores. Only one wife rebel against Brigham Young , Ann Eliza Young, nineteenth wife of Brigham Young, claimed that Young coerced her to marry him by threatening financial ruin of her brother. Brigham Young was 67 years old and Butt ugly ,Eliza was 24. Forceful salesmenship worked for Brigham.
Mitt Romney is still handsome just like me and women fling themselves at me but i tell them I am faithful to God. So Mitt can use his handsome to put more women in his binders I believe
Did you forget your medication today?
Lol look at the Moby ^^
Proverbs 31
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+31&version=NIV
dude, you’re getter stranger by the day. Give it a rest
Ummm…huh? What on earth are you talking about?
okay, are you (1) high-functioning schizophrenic
(2) not acquainted with the english language
(3) some bizarre Chinese language program designed to be a troll for Obama?
(4) off your meds
????
ya trains ain’t running on the train tracks, in any case.
As we all know, this is Romney election to lose. He should come swinging on foreign policy next week.The way he followed up on Bengazi was not good. Instead of hammering BO on failing to provide the requested security enhancement, he started talking on what BO had said. Who cares what he said!?
“Four American lives were lost, Mr. President, and it was a tragic consequence of your incompetent and irresponsible foreign policy!” – that’s what Romney should have said clearly.
I find it impossible to comprehend the mind of an undecided voter, so I won’t try to guess how they viewed the debate.
For me, after they expected Romney to explain how to bring down the debt in one minute, then asked Obama about the women in the workplace, I turned it off. Why should anybody waste time on this farce?
Obama was simply not credible.
Romney showed amazing restraint. He was presidential.
Regarding the Crowley cut-in, it doesn’t matter if Romney was right or wrong. I think he was technically right (that old ‘depends on what the definition of is is thing) but let’s assume he was wrong.
By Crowley telling Romney he was wrong, it signaled to everyone watching that if both the President and Crowley said so, it must be so.
But when the President talked about increasing oil production, and not reducing oil leases to the extent Romney suggested, she was silent. She didn’t know so she didn’t say anything.
Obama was certainly wrong but the audience didn’t know. Romney was “maybe” wrong and she jumped in.
She got the audience clapping and hooting and it most certainly took Romney aback.
Not fair. Not at all.
Crowley just admitted she was wrong…
Hey!
Yeah, but they MEAN well, those liberals….
Thats why the want extra bonus points for FEELINGS rather than ACCOMPLISHMENTS…
Evil productive, competent bastards like Mitt need to be hamstrung to “level the playing fiield” doncha know?
Almost an hour into the debate before Obama faced a question that was not designed to feed into his campaign narrative. The question was on Libya and Obama scolded the questioned with a how dare you ask that because I care about people tirade.
Once again the moderators show their bias by the questions chosen.
Also, for the last question addressed to both candidates you notice that Romney said that Obama couldn’t run a campaign about what he will do in the future but instead makes character attacks. What was Obama’s answer? It had nothing to do with answering the question and was instead a 2 minute character attack.
“It is outrageous that a reporter inserted herself into the debate…”
But she already gave notice that she intended to exactly that. The only questions were At what point? and How often?
Has the successor to Journolist ever been outed, or is it still operating outside of public scrutiny?
My wife and I both thought Romney’s points were clearly more cogent and ACCURATE. It was clear that Obama was either lying or trying to widen the “gray area” on most of the questions. Curious that so many “journalists” (propagandists) are spinning it the other way.
By Obama, I think Obama slaughtered Romney in this debate and will slaughter him again in the next debate if he even shows up! Obama will go on to an easy 57 state landslide. Any talk of his defeat is merely an insane prattle. The fact is that as soon as Mitt Romney reached the stage, Obama besieged him and slaughtered him. Wherever Romney tried to run away on the stage he found himself encircled by Obama’s great intellect and command of the facts. Mitt Romney was burnt. Mitt Romney was buried. Obama tackled him. Obama hit him with shoes! Obama’s opponents will soon be committing suicide by the thousands as they realize that Obama can not lose.
LOL You nearly had me . . . had to read to the bottom to make sure this was delusional Obama sarcasm. Good job . . . I nearly ranted and would have made a fool of myself!
This election is over! Why, because Obama has zero answers for the economy. Zero, nada, zip, and not even an educated guess. I thought Romney’s summary of Obama’s record is something everyone watching will remember even on election day. Sorry, your time is up, I thank you for watching.
They also said that Biden won on “points”. How did that I e work out for him?
How is it that Crowley had the Obama Rose Garden speech top of mind to the point where she could insert a correction? Interestingly, Romney was right on the substance of the remark and the lack of an appropriate response of the Administration to the attack. This is the real story, but Crowley deflects attention from that all on the basis of a specific word “terror” being used somewhat ambiguously in the Rose Garden speech. Since that one liner was hardly the substance of the speech, how exactly did she remember Obama’s exact wording? Worse — her challenging Romney’s legitimate point (since his was the more accurate depiction of the White House’s reaction and the Libya attack was never explicity called an “act of terrorism”, Crowley really undermined the integrity of the debate.
Maybe tomorrow obama will release his college transcripts to show us how he really is smart….. he aint doin’ very well this way.
Is this the first time Obama’s openly come out in favor of an assault weapons ban? As far as I know it is the first time he’s admitted that he’d try and reinstate it. Romney missed an opportunity to drive home to voters how worthless and counterproductive an “assault” weapons ban is and how asinine the distinctions they make are. I pray the repblicans turn this into a campaign issue because gun control is a known loser nationally, hence why Obama’s kept his mouth shut on it for so long. All Romney had to say in response to that question was: “I’d start by not giving them to mexican drug lords and not taking them away from our embassy security.”
Great line:
“All Romney had to say in response to that question was: ‘I’d start by not giving them to mexican drug lords and not taking them away from our embassy security.’”
Hope the Romney team is paying attention.
Owebama now has 2 Achilles’ heels: unemployment and Libya. That ought to be enough to cripple him. Romney needs to attack attack attack on those 2 points.
Watching our unworthy leader squirm like a worm on a hook–priceless.
Trying to look at the debate from the vantage point of someone so ill informed and so superficially engaged as to not have made up their mind at this stage of the campaign is not easy. The fact that those voters probably have gotten the information they do have from the MSM makes trying to read the effect of this debate even more difficult.
Add to that that the moderator seemed to be on Obama’s side and the questions seemed designed to help Obama. But this had been expected and wasn’t nearly as bad as it could have been.
How Romney should have tailored his his answers given these challenges is hard to say.
However, here are some ideas.
Probably just about everybody has heard about the keystone pipeline and Romney should have hammered much harder on Obama’s shutting it down when we need all the oil we can get to ease our dependence on the Middle East.
He also could have done a much better job attacking Obama’s performance on the Libyan incident, another issue even the most disinterested political observer would probably have some knowledge of.
A little more emphasis on the Fast and Furious issue might have resonated with Hispanic voters, if any of them were actually watching.
Romney clearly won the debate on the facts but given that anyone who hasn’t made up his/her mind by now clearly isn’t that concerned with the facts.
Obama, with his confident delivery of ignorant nonsense, may have scored a few points with the woefully uninformed, ill informed and misinformed.
The real winner, however, just might be the MSM for having dumbed down enough of the electorate to the point that they are now able to sell them just about anything they want.
Just reminding everyone that Dick Fuld leveraged Lehman’s real estate portfolio thirty to one and that Hank Greenberg sold credit default swaps which exceeded AIG;s net worth.
That kind of behavior crashed this economy.
As G W Bush slinked out the back door of the White House, Barack Obama was expected to deal with the financial collapse of these irresponsible magnates.
Once again, the free market failed, and only a careful re-regulation and re-inflation of collapsed assets saves our recalcitrant ass.
Bullshit, BOTH of those companies went BROKE. The free market WORKED. Remember, insolvency is a feature NOT a bug.
Bailing them out with YOUR MONEY however…
housing bonds were not sound by presidential fiat. Remember Carter? and fairness in housing? People did not have to prove they had the income to purchase a house- they did not have to prove they could make the mortgage. Ann Coulter found an illegal immigrant yardworker who bought a half-million dollar house, for instance.
Nearly 1/3 of the house loans were from this. In 2008, it was scheduled to be over 33%.
You can leverage on real, solid assets. There is nothing you can do with cooked books. Carter turned mortgage lenders, banks, real estate agents, land agents, builders, into lying crooks. They were trying to be honest, and he forced them into lying. 2+2=5, says the lying totalitarian freak in Star Trek, and in 1984, and in the world Carter created.
Carter built the monster, Barney Frank defended the monster, Democratic operatives pulled money from the monster. George Bush 43 tried to stop the monster.
Gitmo is still open because that’s where Obama belongs and will end.
I’m sticking with Luntz’s focus group results for the same reasons that I did last time: the focus groups are always more reliable than the polls, snap or otherwise, and we saw that in the 1st debate as well as the VP debate. The first focus group said it was a walk-off win for Romney; the VP focus group said it was a draw on substance.
23 undecided voters from Nevada. Most of them voted for Obama in 08. Luntz was again stunned to see the overwhelming majority give the win to Romney on style and substance. He was also shocked that they decided then and there to vote for Romney. Only 7 gave the debate to Obama and decided their vote for Obama.
Candy Crowley did no other MSM debate moderator did – tell Romney he was wrong in saying Obama did not call Benghazi as “acts of terror”. Crowley was wrong. For two weeks, the Obama administration placed the blame on the video, including the lies of Susan Rice and the highly unusual step of buying TV time in Pakistan to the UN itself, a full fortnight later, still vigorously plugging the “it’s the video, stupid” line. How does this gel with Obama’s acceptance that it was a terror attack by al Qaeda from Day 2?
It doesn’t and Crowley knew it. Under the not-unfriendly push back by her fellow CNN consexuals like Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper and David Gergen, she was forced to eat crow … saying Romney had it right in the main but simply chose the wrong words … or something.
trained independent zombie troupe ought to go on tour in the cow-patty frisbee and tall-tale telling circuit
>>It is outrageous that a reporter inserted herself into the debate to correct a candidate and was, herself, wrong on the facts. It is outrageous that she defended Obama on a point on which he was wrong. She turned one of the most important moments for one side and against another.<<
Dude! What do you think she was there for? That's her job.
Lost and yet not mentioned by anybody was Obama’s gun control question answer.
The object in his response, Chicago, is the Obama hometown where Obama practiced and learned his ideology. Chicago, the giant one party dream utopia where government intervention solutions are implemented for every possible individual human failing.
I don’t understand the mechanics of why Romney and Ryan agree to debates moderated and orchestrated by the socialists. I assume there is some reason other than stupidity. Anyone know why?
A small point, perhaps, but to me a revealing one. I was struck by Obama stating he was the one who “greets” the caskets of dead Americans coming back from the Middle East. What, is he wearing a party hat and tossing confetti on the coffins? Strange choice of word.
He also had numerous brain freezes, where he’d just trail off uncertainly in mid-sentence, grasping for coherency and sustained thought. Nothing new there.
Candy Crowley did Romney a huge favor by “correcting” him on the Libya terror question.
The MSM will have to detail the timeline concerning when Obama said it was a terrorist attack, and when Rice went on the Sunday talk shows blaming the Youtube video, and then when Obama was at the UN talking about Youtube. They can’t keep hiding this story.
And for the next debate, does anyone believe that the moderator, Bob Schieffer, is going to correct Romney?
Thanks for this summary of the debate. Since I am not a boxing fan, I chose to avoid it, especially after reading the bio on the moderator. It seems to me debates are by the media for the media. If a person has not been paying attention to what is actually being done by the administration, they would have learned nothing by watching the slugfest. Maybe it’s time to stop these circuses, as it would be more entertaining to see the candidates in a game show setting with questions about the constitution, economic principles, American history and world history. Geography might be another topic. No old media to skew the results, either.
Ha ha, i like this idea! Obama might have to brush up on Geography though.. How many states do we have mr president?
I find some of the comments in the thread to be highly humorous. It’s almost as if people were watching different debates. And, those who might disagree with the “party line” that Romney won overwhelmingly are branded as drinking some sort of poisonous kool-aid. I watched about 3/4 of the debate. While Romney scored some points, he came across more often as stumbling and even inept. I gave the debate to Obama by a 55 to 45 margin.
It also would have been good to have Gary Johnson in the debate. Would have been obvious very quickly, I would think, that he is the true conservative in the race.
#25 Joey “because Obama has zero answers for the economy…….” Romney has no answers either. I have yet to see how he will balance the budget given his plans for massive tax cuts and major increases in defense spending. Do it by smoke & mirrors?
#31 Chuck “keystone pipeline……we need all the oil we can get……” You may want to read Trans Canada’s filings for Keystone XL. The primary purpose of the pipeline is to allow the company to ship product to its overseas markets in Europe and Latin America.
Steve B: wrong on both points. The Obama campaign has already admitted that there are at least $4 billion of deductions and credit to cut–and they overwhelming cost the richest. No sense saying which ones now because 1. why irritate those who like them, 2. better to take an open mind to the negotiations with Dems, and 3. maybe the best idea is an overall cap [as Romney said] where you can choose your own up to the cap.
on the Pipeline you forget all of the jobs created, the profits from the exports, and the fact that the oil can be diverted to refineries here at any time; actually at least 25% of it will not be exported from the beginning.
I make it 54% Romney 40% Obama and 6% Crowley
Like I said, we watched different debates. Your thought about oil being diverted from Keystone XL to our refineries and ending up in our gas pumps is “wishin’ and hopin’.” Did you research the filings?
Jobs created? Some right wing politicos last year were saying 20,000 jobs were lost. They also didn’t read the fine print. The truth was 20,000 employment years. Pipeline will take 4 years to compete, which equals 5,000 jobs.
Gary Johnson is looking better and better.
Go ahead and vote for Obama then. Or write in Gary Johnson. Same thing.
obama comes across as a pipsqueek. He was shrill, strident and obviously ignorant. He stuttered and stammered and was full of false bravado. It’s obvious that he is intimidated by Romney. The Fraud is incompetant and now he has been exposed with clarity. He doesn’t have the ability to serve effectively in a municipal office.
This is what many of us have known for the last five years, but amazingly, Romney is the only person in all of that time who didn’t defer to him, or worse, feed him softballs that a teenager could hit out of the park.
He is a humiliation for this great country.
And I don’t want to diminish Romney’s performance, which for the second time was outstanding…but imagine, just imagine, if Gingrich had been on that stage yesterday. The Fraud, and his accomplice, would have both skulked off in tears.
MSM thinks Obama won; however, when you look at the truth meter, he lost big time. He even trotted out the story that he was raised by a single mother. That was true for the first few years of his life but then she remarried. His step-father helped raise him. He was later sent to live with his grandparents sans mother. The lies then just kept coming. And getting mad at Romney for politicizing what happened in Libya, really! As if he hadn’t already done so himself.
Obama’s response, re: Keystone Pipeline, was really stupid. I mean “we have enough pipelines.” That isn’t the point.
I wished someone had asked questions about the Injustice Dept. Romney needs to go after Obama on politicizing justice just as Obama went after the Republicans in 2008. While “fast and furious” is the most notable example of the DOJ’s workings, many more exist such as the slap on the wrist given to the New Black Panthers for intimidating voters in Philadelphia in 2008 and again in 2010.
Re: The 2007 financial mess. Republicans, Democrats, bankers and investment firms were equally to blame. Blaming everything on George W. Bush is ridiculous since the problem started well before 2000. I mean that would be just like blaming Obama for what happened. Oh wait a minute! Obama did contribute to the financial mess. In the 1990′s he won a lawsuit. As a result of that win, banks relaxed their lending requirements for poorer potential home buyers.
Romney should have said, “Under Obama, 800,000 women now don’t even get 70 percent. They get zero percent because they’ve lost their jobs.”
Hey, is it just me, or does the Crowley media-stooge look like a moose with bad hair, and a sex change operation?