Presidential Debate #2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
iloveangels said:
Brawling and pointing fingers is the only thing that Obama understands. We’ve seen that again and again. He can’t work with Congress because he can’t quit fighting with them long enough to communicate. The man only has 3 “channels”: 1) unconscious with his eyes shut, 2) unconscious with his eyes open and 3) in your face yelling nonsense.
Click to expand...
Obama is the epitome of a Chicago Democrat, I know because they’ve been controlling my state and running it into the groud for over a decade now.
JimR-OCDS said:
Yeah because Romney exceeded his time limit and tried to interrupt the moderator and Obama during his time frame. The moderator was trying to have him stop talking out of turn and it took 28 times and she still wasn’t able to control him.

At one point they showed the time light behind Romney as he spoke. He spoke through his Red and Green lights and then it went on, and Crowley let him keep going for another minute. When she tried to end his speech, he began to argue with her.

Romney didn’t come off well on that segment.

He performed like the business CEO he is, at a staff meeting where everyone listens and nods their heads and laughs at his jokes.

I’m saying this as some one who doesn’t have a horse in the race.

Jim
Click to expand...
Can you account for all the instances when the Crowley would interrupt Romney, allow Obama to speak, and not allow Romeny to retort? This happened more than once and there were some instances when she would ask Obama two questions in a row before Romney got to say anything. There were also several “let’s move on” instances when Romney would get cut off and Obama wouldn’t be made to answer.

The fact of the matter is that in the second debate Obama received over two entire 2-minute segments worth of speaking time over Romney and still complained during the debate that he didn’t have enough time to speak. I credit Romney for being able to keep his wits about him and not getting frustrated to the point of losing it over this blatantly obvious bias.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
I don’t know about that, but you could see the clock behind Romney when he in fact went over his time and then argued with Crowley when she eventually tried to stop him.

Jim
Click to expand...
Sorry…I didn’t see it. I haven’t seen the whole debate yet and only listened to the bit I did get to tune into.

EDIT: I did get to see Obama arguing over time with the mod when I first turned the TV on.
 
iloveangels said:
Obama was NOT COOL. Obama was argumentative and aggressive, and he was argumentative and aggressive because his coaches told him he had to be.

In the first debate, he was collected, but when he’s collected he can’t defend his record because it’s so incredibly lousy. So this time, they decided to come out like great guns and at least that covers up the fact that he has nothing to run on.

Obama was obnoxious. He only has 3 modes: 1) unconscious with his eyes shut, 2) unconscious with his eyes open (what you call “cool”), and 3) in your face yelling nonsense and lying his tail off. That’s it.

PS. He has a “poker tell.” You can always tell when he’s about ready to let a big whopper fly. A look goes over his face and he hesitates and says UH. And then he lets her flicker. Happens almost every time he speaks for more than about 20-30 seconds when he’s under pressure and not on a prepared script (teleprompter). He just makes up this **** as he goes along. :mad:
Click to expand...
Argumentative and aggressive…this is ironic. 😛
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Argumentative and aggressive…this is ironic. 😛
Click to expand...
Not really. Obama doesn’t work with Congress in a bipartisan fashion because he’s either:
  1. completely disengaged (what people who like him call “cool”).
  2. so argumentative and hysterical that he can’t communicate with them.
The debates have shown both these aspects of Obama, first one and then the other.

It’s so bad that no one can actually figure out which one of these is the case re Benghazi:
  1. the Clintons are really running foreign policy out of the State Department and Obama has no idea what’s going on and that’s why he had a false explanation for 2 whole weeks, or
  2. Obama knew and lied, because he does that too.
 
iloveangels said:
Not really. Obama doesn’t work with Congress in a bipartisan fashion because he’s either:
  1. completely disengaged (what people who like him call “cool”).
  2. so argumentative and hysterical that he can’t communicate with them.
The debates have shown both these aspects of Obama, first one and then the other.
Click to expand...
Please don’t be aggressive with me. I’m not trying to be argumentative. 😃
 
iloveangels said:
Not really. Obama doesn’t work with Congress in a bipartisan fashion because he’s either:
  1. completely disengaged (what people who like him call “cool”).
  2. so argumentative and hysterical that he can’t communicate with them.
The debates have shown both these aspects of Obama, first one and then the other.
Click to expand...
Seriously, I saw the same thing from both candidates. 🤷
 
Dawnia said:
I know…and Romney is the bad guy for talking over time. :hypno:
Click to expand...
I’m voting for Romney, of course…but what are you guy’s points? :confused:

That Crowley should have allowed Romney more time to speak than Obama and interrupted Obama more?

Maybe you want a conservative moderator to moderate the debate next time? Maybe someone from Fox News?

You want an “objective” moderator? Unfortunately, there is no such thing. Unfortunately.

A “fair and balanced” (in the sense of being truly allowing all sides equal time)----yes. Absolutely. But “objectivity” is a myth that the media strives for. Will never happen.

You are saying Crowley leaned left? She’s with CNN.

What we need is moderators from CNN, Fox News and even Msnbc to even out the pool at the debates.

THAT’S what we need.

But harping on “Obama got more time” is just “duh…”

Just saying.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Please don’t be aggressive with me. I’m not trying to be argumentative. 😃
Click to expand...
I’m not being aggressive with anyone. I’m simply telling the truth. Unlike Obama I have a “sit at the kitchen table and quietly tell the truth” mode.
 
In one of O’s final answers?his closing? you could see the time clock count down to 4 sec and then the camera didn’t show it anymore and O got to continue UNINTERRUPTED for at least another minute (I counted).
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Yeah because Romney exceeded his time limit and tried to interrupt the moderator and Obama during his time frame. The moderator was trying to have him stop talking out of turn and it took 28 times and she still wasn’t able to control him.

At one point they showed the time light behind Romney as he spoke. He spoke through his Red and Green lights and then it went on, and Crowley let him keep going for another minute. When she tried to end his speech, he began to argue with her.

Romney didn’t come off well on that segment.

He performed like the business CEO he is, at a staff meeting where everyone listens and nods their heads and laughs at his jokes.

I’m saying this as some one who doesn’t have a horse in the race.

Jim
Click to expand...
I believe going over their time limit and interupting was happening on both sides of the debate. Several times Obama would interupt Romney and the moderator. Several times Obama tried to get the moderator or Romney to change the subject while Romney was talking. He also tried to prevent Romney from answering questions by trying to get the moderator to stop Romney, so if interupting people is what is going to decide who you vote for then I can see why you don’t have a horse in the race but there are more important issues at stake here. As Catholics we need to be fighting for our religious rights or soon it may be too late.
 
You know what’s missing from this discussion? Substance.

Of course they did no more than talk about each other a lot more than what they actually have planned.
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
I’m voting for Romney, of course…but what are you guy’s points? :confused:

That Crowley should have allowed Romney more time to speak than Obama and interrupted Obama more?

Maybe you want a conservative moderator to moderate the debate next time? Maybe someone from Fox News?

You want an “objective” moderator? Unfortunately, there is no such thing. Unfortunately.

A “fair and balanced” (in the sense of being truly allowing all sides equal time)----yes. Absolutely. But “objectivity” is a myth that the media strives for. Will never happen.

You are saying Crowley leaned left? She’s with CNN.

What we need is moderators from CNN, Fox News and even Msnbc to even out the pool at the debates.

THAT’S what we need.

But harping on “Obama got more time” is just “duh…”

Just saying.
Click to expand...
It would be very difficult to find a fair and balanced media and moderator. How would you find someone who is unbiased?

The majority of the media today is far left and beyond. I do believe we are fortunate to have Fox news to bring in the right but I know that no matter how big the media is and how much they push Obama and things that go against our Catholic faith, I know we have a bigger God.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
You know what’s missing from this discussion? Substance.

Of course they did no more than talk about each other a lot more than what they actually have planned.
Click to expand...
That was intentional. Obama can’t talk about his record.
 
Diana_Catherine said:
It would be very difficult to find a fair and balanced media and moderator. How would you find someone who is unbiased?

The majority of the media today is far left and beyond. I do believe we are fortunate to have Fox news to bring in the right but I know that no matter how big the media is and how much they push Obama and things that go against our Catholic faith, I know we have a bigger God.
Click to expand...
It would have been very easy to get someone less biased than Crowley.

I thought Jim Lehrer did a good job. He didn’t insert himself and he let the candidates talk. I don’t want to hear the moderator because the moderator’s not running for office. I could not possibly care less what Candy Crowley has to say on any other day of the year.

The next and final debate will be very much like the first, an open one-on-one. Expect Obama to come out yelling on that one too. It obscures his record with a certain number of people who just want to see the aggression because they think that’s what politics is really about.
 
Diana_Catherine said:
It would be very difficult to find a fair and balanced media and moderator. How would you find someone who is unbiased?

The majority of the media today is far left and beyond. I do believe we are fortunate to have Fox news to bring in the right but I know that no matter how big the media is and how much they push Obama and things that go against our Catholic faith, I know we have a bigger God.
Click to expand...
The point is, though, that complaining about unbiased moderators is very pointless. You can’t find any. The best to do is to allow a variety of moderators from various venues chair the debates. The PTB that chair the presidential debate commissions will not do that, unfortunately. 😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top