US Presidential Election Debate #1

[SuperLuigi]

And that’s the problem with Romney. He says he’s going to repeal Obama Care on the first day after his election. Anyone with knowledge on how the government works, knows he can’t do this.

However, as he said in a TV interview just a couple weeks ago, when pressed, he said he would not repeal it, but keep the things that are good, and he said there are lots of things he likes in Obama Care, and get rid of the things he doesn’t like.

So, reading between the lines, he could just say, he’ll modify Obama Care, but he should stop saying he’ll repeal it. Repealing it. scares the people who are already benefiting from it.

Jim

All I know is that Romney has said over and over he’s going to give Americans a waiver on the first day he’s in office.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/02/poll-obama-ahead-and-favored-to-win-debate-romney-has-edge-among-independents/

This poll shows viewers thought Romney won…95-5.

A foxnews viewers poll would be like asking the delegates at the GOP convention who they think will win the election.

Jim

 

[Dawnia]

Exactly. Voters like me and bellasbane are of little importance when it comes to debates. Neither of us are undecided, and neither of us is likely to be swayed by the opposing candidate.

Romney won the first debate, but there are more to come. He has to keep the momentum going, if he wants to win.

But, how many people actually watch the debates after the 1st one?

 

[SuperLuigi]

When it’s all said and done, the current president is always on the back foot at these debates as the opponent can point out things that have not changed since his current presidency and/or gotten worse. However, although the opponent offers new solutions - no-one knows if they will ever work, until another 4 years pass and then it’s back to square one again, i.e. the opponent criticising the existing president’s policies and offering ‘new’ solutions. Obama did look exhausted though.

Only one democrat president has won re-election in 60 years, and that was Clinton and he only won because he turned almost 180 degrees immediately after midterm losses and consulted a republican pollster to help him out.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

All I know is that Romney has said over and over he’s going to give Americans a waiver on the first day he’s in office.

He has constantly said, even last evening, that he is going to repeal Obama Care.

But the one time he was pressed by I believe David Gregory, he said he wouldn’t repeal it, but replace it. Pressed further, he was actually saying he would modify it, keeping what he thinks is good, and getting rid of what he thinks is bad.

If he gives the nation a version of Romney Care, 98% will remain Obama Care.

Jim

 

[rlg94086]

After thinking about the debate last evening, and having seen Obama debate back in the last election against Hillary and then McCain, and knowing that he has debate skills far surpassing last evening’s performance, I have to wonder?

Is Obama playing a “rope a dope,” strategy, holding back until the last debate? The last debate is the one the voters will remember before going to vote. Perhaps it’s there that Obama will come out swinging and land a knockout punch.

Not saying this is the case, but last night’s performance was not Obama’s best for sure.

So Romney supporters, don’t get over confident.

Jim

I heard a commentator on the XM POTUS channel compare that thinking to the battle of wits in Princess Bride.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I have no problem with Romney, I don’t think he looked bad last time in 2008 but before, he did have to make compromises to govern a state generally thought of being one of the most liberal ones in the nation.

However, that said, he could probably work with the Democrats if Romney wins and the Democrats drop some of these horribly radical progressive policies.

I generally agree, regarding governing and pragmatic approaches to that. I tend to view Romney as more of a pragmatist (and therefore more effective) when it comes to governing, less of a take-no-prisoners ideologue. I actually think that Obama was more pragmatic than ideological before he began his Presidency. It’s my opinion that hard-line Democrats have swayed him far more to the hard Left.

 

[rlg94086]

I will say this, though. If losing was Obama’s strategy, he is very good at it.

 

[bellasbane]

President Obama spoke significantly longer than Romney did, and didn’t stop for Lerher repeatedly when asked. The truth is that both candidates overran the moderator, but if anyone was worse, it was the President.

I also find it amazing that there are supposedly no details of Romney’s plans, but somehow the President, and apparently you, are able to tell what exactly his plans are to the level of detail that you can calculate his entire economic plan and make claims about how they supposedly do not add up.

Regarding the growth comment, pretty much every politician does that. The President used it repeatedly when trying to get the CBO to score ObamaCare in such a way that he could try to convince the American people that it wasn’t going to bankrupt the country. He built in projections for growth that were nowhere near accurate or a reflection of reality.

I don’t pretend to know what’s in Romney’s plan - because you’re right, he gives no details. However, both he and Ryan have repeatedly stated that they will lower the overall tax rate and make up for it by eliminating deductions - so which deductions?

Charitable giving is one of the biggest tax deductions people use. What do you think will happen if that is eliminated? I don’t like the uncertainty of wondering whether or not it’s on the table. It would be devastating to charitable organizations that depend upon their 501(c)3 status to encourage donations. I wouldn’t worry as much about it if the Catholic Church, like the Mormon Church, imposed a 10% tithe on all its members. Maybe that is Ryan’s plan - to get the Church to start imposing a tithe.

There are conservative Catholics in my parish who think the Church should impose a 10% tithe to weed-out those who do not contribute enough. They complain about having to foot the bill for things like religious education classes for public school kids whose parents never go to Church. I can see their point, but I fear they care more about money than about fostering the only chance we have to reach some of these kids. They don’t seem to understand that if we loose the parents - we loose the kids too.

That’s why I don’t support the idea of a tithe and want a guarantee that charitable deductions will remain in the tax code.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Last evening, Romney said that Obama spent 90 billion in clean energy, which far exceeds the amount of savings if he takes away the tax credits the oil companies get.

Looking at CNN Factcheck on this topic, Mitt was right.

The Department of Energy proudly touts that the 2009 stimulus authorized $90 billion “in government investments and tax incentives to lay the foundation for the clean energy economy of our future.”

cnn.com/2012/10/04/politics/fact-check-green-energy/index.html

Jim

 

[Elizabeth502]

Pressed further, he was actually saying he would modify it, keeping what he thinks is good, and getting rid of what he thinks is bad.

If he gives the nation a version of Romney Care, 98% will remain Obama Care.

Your two statements do not proceed from each other. According to you, R wishes to “get rid of what he thinks is bad” and give the nation “a version of Romney Care.” Since he didn’t specify (apparently) which version, you have no basis for saying “98% will remain Obama Care.” (Unless he said that.)

 

[LisaA]

I don’t think President Obama has an “A” game. He’s like a kid who makes it through school on social promotion, never tested, never really taught. President Obama has never been put to the test; he has never been challenged by anyone, let alone the media.

His practice was spending time on the “View” where everyone but Hasselback fawned over his presence. Then she was lambasted for daring to ask a tough question, which he never answered.

Agree totally. Obama seems to be a product of the “self esteem movement” where all you do is show up. I believe his entry into university was the result of affirmative action programs rather than his grades or accomplishments in high school or Occidental. He won elections not so much by swaying the voters but by disqualifying his competition or bringing up personal issues so late in the game that the opponent could not respond effectively. It’s been too easy for him, he’s not had to actually get results, just a lot of hot air and charisma wafting him up to the Presidency.

After four years we see reality hit us in the face with one grim statistic after another. The Emperor Has No Clothes. As one pundit put it, Romney had a secret weapon, the truth.

Lisa

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Your two statements do not proceed from each other. According to you, R wishes to “get rid of what he thinks is bad” and give the nation “a version of Romney Care.” Since he didn’t specify (apparently) which version, you have no basis for saying “98% will remain Obama Care.” (Unless he said that.)

Obama Care is based on Romney Care, and the parts that Romney would keep in Obama Care are 98% of it.

Romney would make Obama Care look more like Romney care, but mostly it would be left to the states to run rather than the federal government. What it covers would be essentially the same.

Jim

 

[pepipop]

You are just going to go and accuse someone of taking drugs, with no evidence or support whatsoever?

Stay classy.

Not accusing, but it is a very probable possibility.

 

[LisaA]

I don’t pretend to know what’s in Romney’s plan - because you’re right, he gives no details. However, both he and Ryan have repeatedly stated that they will lower the overall tax rate and make up for it by eliminating deductions - so which deductions?

Charitable giving is one of the biggest tax deductions people use. What do you think will happen if that is eliminated? I don’t like the uncertainty of wondering whether or not it’s on the table. It would be devastating to charitable organizations that depend upon their 501(c)3 status to encourage donations. I wouldn’t worry as much about it if the Catholic Church, like the Mormon Church, imposed a 10% tithe on all its members. Maybe that is Ryan’s plan - to get the Church to start imposing a tithe.

There are conservative Catholics in my parish who think the Church should impose a 10% tithe to weed-out those who do not contribute enough. They complain about having to foot the bill for things like religious education classes for public school kids whose parents never go to Church. I can see their point, but I fear they care more about money than about fostering the only chance we have to reach some of these kids. They don’t seem to understand that if we loose the parents - we loose the kids too.

That’s why I don’t support the idea of a tithe and want a guarantee that charitable deductions will remain in the tax code.

I believe that Romney’s approach is a means tested concept. Something like the home mortgage deduction that was designed to help Middle America achieve the American dream has morphed into a boondoggle where Mrs Gotrocks can get a “mortgage deduction” for her yacht.

Romney has also indicated that the special tax treatment for cap gains and dividends could also be means tested. We don’t want Grandma paying 40% on her dividends but someone whose income (like Romney’s) is almost totally investment income will pay more.

Further I wish Romney had used Rubio’s great line “We don’t need more taxes we need more TAXPAYERS.” High unemployment, reduced incomes, all lead to lower tax revenues. The best shot in the arm for the Treasury is a fully employed populace. Even those who don’t pay FIT pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. There was a time when those funds were not dumped into the Treasury but that ship sailed long ago.

The Obama economy is characterized by stagnation, minimal growth and lowered incomes. No wonder the tax revenues are down.

Lisa

 

[Jeanne_S]

Let’s not start picking out Romney’s White House china pattern just yet.

I would remind people that an incumbent Ronald Reagan was trounced by Walter Mondale in the first debate.

Keep the enthusiasm, the faith, and keep praying.

Pay no heed to the haters.

 

[pepipop]

Only one democrat president has won re-election in 60 years, and that was Clinton and he only won because he turned almost 180 degrees immediately after midterm losses and consulted a republican pollster to help him out.

I genuinely know practically nothing about US politics, however due to the current global economic crisis, I still think Obama will win this. Mostly due to the fact that most people are out of work, and even aside from Romney’s 47% quote, a ‘labour’ type government usually gets voted in, in these global conditions.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I don’t recall Ronald Reagan ever losing a debate, but I was a biased pro-Reagan republican back then, so my bias may have blinded me.

Jim

 

[kimmielittle]

New Song?
stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/new-obama-campaign-song/

 

[mary_bobo]

After thinking about the debate last evening, and having seen Obama debate back in the last election against Hillary and then McCain, and knowing that he has debate skills far surpassing last evening’s performance, I have to wonder?

Is Obama playing a “rope a dope,” strategy, holding back until the last debate? The last debate is the one the voters will remember before going to vote. Perhaps it’s there that Obama will come out swinging and land a knockout punch.

Not saying this is the case, but last night’s performance was not Obama’s best for sure.

So Romney supporters, don’t get over confident.

Jim

I am not overconfident and I realize this is only one debate. But how could the president refend his policies, which Romney attacked well, when they have been such a dismal failure. We are not in better shape than we were four years ago. The facts are a little hard to fight when they are staring you in the face.