Vice Presidential Debate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Luigi_Daniele said:
“No one” watched last night, though. Which is the historical normal. I think that Romney would have to make a huge gaff in the remaining two to move the poll numbers.
Click to expand...
That’s a good point. Biden’s non-verbal (minus the smirking) was really quite good, but the problem is good body language will only go so far in defending that awful record they have.
 
IbnFiktur said:
LisaA: I point you to a response I already made to a different poster:

Talking about “economic growth” that may or may not happen as a means of raising revenue is all well and dandy… But there is NO WAY it will generate enough revenue to cut the deficit in half before their first term is up without significant cuts. And yet they continue to rail about how “immoral” the deficit is without offering a single solution for how to get rid of it!!

Their specifics are vague because it doesn’t add up to what they’re promising. In a magical world we could have a balanced budget, a gigantic military, and no budget cuts all at once, but we live in the real world where we’re a trillion dollars per year in debt, and all I’ve seen from Romney on the subject is a lot of hot air: criticizing the president while offering nothing practical himself.
Click to expand...
After four years of failing to have a balanced budget, no budget cuts, impossible spending and no effort at all to reduce the debt, it seems to me the burden ought to be on Obama to show just why he didn’t, after promising that he would, and why anyone should believe he would do so in the future when he presents no plan to do so.

There are reasons to believe that economic growth really is the key to a balanced or at least less catastrophic budget. It may be noted that the deficit definitely climbed after the two wars and the tax cuts that preceded them. But it must also be noticed that the deficit reduced significantly for years, reaching its low point in 2007, when it was about 1/10 what it has been during Obama’s administration.

Why the difference?
Well, as liberals used to be fond of pointing out, the economy makes a lot of difference in budget deficits. If people aren’t employed, they’re not paying taxes. If economic activity is slack, taxes generated on activity is diminished. Liberals don’t talk much about it now because the economy is not growing and, depending on what one looks like, is either shrinking or is on the cusp of doing so.

And who is more likely the improve the economy? The man who imposes limitations on business and therefore job creation, or the man who encourages it?

Further, the spending has increased massively during the Obama administration. It did try to fudge the numbers by attributing Obama’s “stimulus bill” to Bush, but that didn’t last very long.

I have no doubt the federal budget is a good deal more complicated that those of Massachussetts, Bain Capital or the SLC Olympics. But they, and particularly Romney’s governorship, are at least instructive. Obama managed no budget, ever, other than his own personal budget. His mismanagement of the federal budget is plain to see. So one has to ask himself which candidate is more likely to propose and initiate a sensible budget; the one who has done it before or the one who has never done it.
 
There are lots of thinly veiled partisan comments in this thread, in addition to some very obvious partisan comments. I am not voting for either major party candidate, so here is my non-partisan analysis of the first two debates:

Romney won the first presidential debate. Not because he said anything memorable, because other than mentioning Big Bird, he didn’t. He won because Obama basically failed to show up.

Biden won the VP debate. It was about as convincing a win as his VP debate last time against Palin. Keep in mind, however, that the VP debates aren’t all that important in the grand scheme of things. After all, Dan Qyayle was soundly beaten by Lloyd Bentsen in the 1988 VP debate, but it didn’t change the outcome of the race. Rather, Biden accomplished the same thing that Cheney did against Edwards in 2004 - essentially stabilizing things for the ticket after a poor first debate for the incumbent.
 
IbnFiktur said:
…so I’m taking it you agree that defense cuts are in order…?
Click to expand...
To a degree, along with a complete overhaul of Social Security and Medicare and the welfare system, elimination of the depart of education, drug enforcement agency, TSA, and a host of other worthless agencies.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
To a degree, along with a complete overhaul of Social Security and Medicare and the welfare system, elimination of the depart of education, drug enforcement agency, TSA, and a host of other worthless agencies.
Click to expand...
The DEA regulates the sale of narcotics. I am no big government fan, but I think the DEA is a necessity.
 
Christopher68 said:
:

Romney won the first presidential debate. Not because he said anything memorable, because other than mentioning Big Bird, he didn’t. He won because Obama basically failed to show up.
Click to expand...
But was that really Romney?
 
Christopher68 said:
There are lots of thinly veiled partisan comments in this thread, in addition to some very obvious partisan comments. I am not voting for either major party candidate, so here is my non-partisan analysis of the first two debates:

Romney won the first presidential debate. Not because he said anything memorable, because other than mentioning Big Bird, he didn’t. He won because Obama basically failed to show up.

***Biden won the VP debate. It was about as convincing a win as his VP debate last time against Palin. ***Keep in mind, however, that the VP debates aren’t all that important in the grand scheme of things. After all, Dan Qyayle was soundly beaten by Lloyd Bentsen in the 1988 VP debate, but it didn’t change the outcome of the race. Rather, Biden accomplished the same thing that Cheney did against Edwards in 2004 - essentially stabilizing things for the ticket after a poor first debate for the incumbent.
Click to expand...
There are many who would disagree with you on both points. Clearly Biden wasn’t the obnoxious jerk with Sarah Palin but even her detractors were amazed that she held her own, if not having a slight edge.

With respect to Obama, you’re right he didn’t show up to some extent but Romney said PLENTY. Obama would spout off one of his silly talking points and Romney would blow a hole in his argument…the small number of businesses in the upper 3% provide HALF of the total jobs…the $90 Billion spent on green energy could have hired a million teachers…etc. If you didn’t hear Romney poke holes in Obama’s abysmal record, you weren’t listening closely. I think Obama has been in a bubble for so long he was shocked when someone questioned his pontificating.

I am falling in with Jason’s assessment, that Biden was spin testing various arguments, various techniques so Obama can dial in his next performance accordingly. OTOH his record is so bad and with Benghazi looming, it will not be easy to overcome the drubbing he took previously.

As to not voting for either party, please reconsider if you have any true concern about your country and more importantly about your faith. Obama is at war with the Church. He is MILITANTLY PRO ABORTION. He is not “pro choice” if that oxymoron could actually be applied to anyone. A vote for a 3rd party, Donald Duck or Big Bird is a vote for more slaughter.

Lisa
 
Michael_Mayo said:
But was that really Romney?
Click to expand...
Yes. Mitt Romney has succeeded in every endeavor he has engaged in. His statements in opposition to Obama’s bulloney points were spot on. He was prepared, convincing and effective.

Lisa
 
Anyone know if Romney and Obama are given the questions that will be asked before the town hall debate?
 
Congrats to Biden, he had control in the debate last night. Ryan is to “young” to be going up against a pro like Biden. And I love that Biden was using the Senate courtesy rules (which is the reason everyone thinks he was being rude) because that demonstrated that he really is a political figure and knows his way around congress.
 
JFarah said:
Congrats to Biden, he had control in the debate last night. Ryan is to “young” to be going up against a pro like Biden. And I love that Biden was using the Senate courtesy rules (which is the reason everyone thinks he was being rude) because that demonstrated that he really is a political figure and knows his way around congress.
Click to expand...
LOL. Hahahahahahahahaha
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
To a degree, along with a complete overhaul of Social Security and Medicare and the welfare system, elimination of the depart of education, drug enforcement agency, TSA, and a host of other worthless agencies.
Click to expand...
I think you and I are more or less on the same page.

LisaA: I am NOT an Obama apologist, and I am NOT voting for Obama. In fact in the end I’ll probably end up voting for Romney (as opposed to third party). At the same time I’m truly disappointed with the state of the Republican Party, and have been since Obama took office. Since then they have focused more on what Obama supposedly stands for than figuring out what THEY stand for.
 
The Calm Adult vs. the Petulant Scoffer
Last night, two Catholic candidates for vice president squared off in a nationally televised debate.
Click to expand...
On our right, we observed a young pro-life Catholic provide measured, intelligent, thoughtful statements and answers to questions.
Click to expand...
On our left, we watched a “pro-choice Catholic” deliver smirks, scoffs and laughs that fully overshadowed and undermined whatever substance was contained in his statements and answers.
Click to expand...
The fellow on the right was smart, sincere and likable. The older man on the left was rude, obnoxious and unlikable.
Click to expand...
 
IbnFiktur said:
I think you and I are more or less on the same page.

LisaA: I am NOT an Obama apologist, and I am NOT voting for Obama. In fact in the end I’ll probably end up voting for Romney (as opposed to third party). At the same time I’m truly disappointed with the state of the Republican Party, and have been since Obama took office. Since then they have focused more on what Obama supposedly stands for than figuring out what THEY stand for.
Click to expand...
I am in the “disappointed” category for a bit longer. 😃
 
Joe Biden: “Under Law Planned Parenthood Can’t Perform Abortions”
Campaigning in Wisconsin, pro-abortion Vice President Joe Biden misled voters today by saying Planned Parenthood, the nation’s biggest abortion business doesn’t do any abortions.
Click to expand...
“Now these guys pledge that they’re gonna de-fund Planned Parenthood, which under law cannot perform any abortions,” Biden said.
Click to expand...
The Obama campaign is already having to clean up the misstatement, saying Biden meant to say that, under law, Planned Parenthood can’t use the federal funding it gets to pay for abortions.
Click to expand...
my emphases
A new report released by the Alliance Defense Fund suggests that Planned Parenthood, contrary to the law of the Hyde Amendment, is not content to use your money for only sex-education resources, birth control, and STI testing. The powerhouse group is determined to manipulate Government money, taxpayer money, so that it can be used to fund abortions as well
Click to expand...
 
bellasbane said:
Classless behavior is Paul Ryan telling a story about kids paralyzed in a car crash to a man who lost his wife and daughter in one.
Click to expand...
Actually,It was crazy Joe who told of his wife and daughter dying in a car crash.😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top