• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did Obama intentionally lose?

Guy Incognito said:
The plan is obvious to anybody who is not too biased to see it. It's all about momentum. And despite a slew of ad hominem attacks against me, you still have not managed to provide a counterargument to my point. Therefore I happily accept your de facto concession.
Click to expand...

No, Guy; you simply pretend that the counterpoints are never posted (such as in this case, re: Obamacare). That's not the same thing at all. You ignore what's inconvenient to you. It's what you do. It's what you've always done. I don't know who you think it fools. No one I've seen.

And this is pretty rich from someone who never, ever, posts any substantive support for what he says. The best you EVER do is five minutes of Googling to find something, based on the title, you think MIGHT support you, but ends up not really doing so.

And this post here is a fantastic example of Guy Incognito's debate (sic) style -- declare something "obvious" and treat it as established fact. You rarely ever do anything other than this.
 
wolfman24 said:
If I were Obama I would conduct a true debate. the moderator would give me a subject and I would talk about that and nothing else. I would not challange slinky or respond to his jabs. it would drive him nuts and he would probably not be able to know what to do or he would pop off. Tell the people what you are going to do and how, forget the infightng and playground antics. Talk to us not him. we are the ones that count, slinky is just a prop.
Click to expand...

There's very little in Obama's history which indicates this is anything like his personality.
 
I can see no logical reason for Obama intentionally throwing this debate. Perhaps his intention was to remain reserved in hopes of playing on some particular flaw his advisers expected to see in Romney, but once that didn't manifest he should have switched gears.

I can't see this performance having been calculated to fail.
 
tessaesque said:
I can see no logical reason for Obama intentionally throwing this debate. Perhaps his intention was to remain reserved in hopes of playing on some particular flaw his advisers expected to see in Romney, but once that didn't manifest he should have switched gears.

I can't see this performance having been calculated to fail.
Click to expand...

It's the type of thing that people who wanted him to win come up with to explain his loss. It's poppycock. No one plans to lose a debate.
 
Monserrat said:
Really? The entire debate he was talking over the moderator and interrupting Obama. At one point he told Lehrer he wasn't going to answer his question because he was going to first talk about something else. That's not how you comport yourself in a presidential debate (or any structured debate for that matter). It was horrendous, the answers for the most part were non-specific (from both candidates) and the only redeeming quality of the debate was the fact that in a poorly moderated forum Obama was able to keep his cool by remaining calm, composed and by thinking first before just talking over everyone else.

They were suppose to be discussing domestic issues, they barely tipped the surface because Romney kept rambling on and on and on and Lehrer had no control over it.
Click to expand...

I don't think his treatment of Leher or behavior during the debate was any worse or better than Obama's. Interrupting the moderator happened on both sides, refusal to answer direct questions happened on both sides, and inappropriate means of addressing the moderator happened on both sides.
 
I really hate to say this, but I agree with Michael Moore on this:

Here's a sample of some of Mr. Moore's tweets:

"Get This Obama spoke FOUR minutes longer than Romney did tonight! Didn't feel that way, did it? That sorta says it all."

"Hey Barack, there's no bonus for winning this without using '47%'. It's not f****ng Galaga."

"If Romney keeps this up...Obama is going to vote for him!"

"Is Bill Clinton coming in to sub next quarter? O! Wake up! Attack! That is not Joh McCain over on that podium!"

"Romney is channeling the look and sound of Reagan. Obama is giving a professor's lecture. Note to O: Don't wait til later to throw a punch."

"Pres Obama -We know u were miffed that Biden pushed u on gay marriage. Have u ever thought of surprising him w/ a big kiss on the lips?"

"This is what happens when u pick John Kerry as your debate coach."

PICKET: Michael Moore to Obama - 'This is what happens when u pick John Kerry as your debate coach' - Washington Times
Click to expand...

I think Obama failed this debate like he's failed most everything else he's done in the last four years.
 
Dion said:
Actually he did not lose. If the contest was about who was most authoritarian, smirky and short on facts yet big on bravado ... Romeny won hands down.

Obama is not a fool. I suspect he intentionally let Romney go rampant with obvious deception to circle around as Romeny is the blowhard who will say anything to win and even lie.

Seriously .... the 700+ billion cut from medicare was the exact number that was taken from bottom line profiteering to protect citizens like me to continue covering their families with private insurance. Romney is not senile and he knows that number is not shaved from medicare as he smirked and bellowed out in the debate ... I suspect Obama was giving Romney rope to hang himself.

Not one economist or says Romney has any chance of cutting the deficit and giving the tax breaks he promises.

Fact check is blowing up right at this moment with Romney's deceptions spewed during the debate.

yes ... if there was not a nagging detail like facts and truth Romney won ... or possibly supplied the October surprise on himself that will hang him.

I agree Romney came off more smirky and full of hot air so in that sense he did win. He is still a loser. Americans are not that stupid and factcheck and Obama will have a field day with Romney's stats and facts. I was able to call BS on most of them. I am sure I missed a few.

I do not think Obama got a spa day like Romney and botox fillers and hair color touch up ... or had the lack of character to go spewing **** to the American people.

Romney set the stage for himself as the guy who will say or do anything to win and not consider reality of "We the People".

I believe Obama was correct to speak to the American people and not waste his two minutes correcting baseless assertions and deceptive numbers spewed by Mitt.
Click to expand...

Then why did Obama acknowledge the cuts via provider payouts when Romney made the original statement? Is HE lying about it, too?
 
I think it's possible that Obama's team studied Romney's gubernatorial debates and discovered that the only one he really won (big) was the last one, where his opponent aggressively tore into him. That made Romney seem much more sympathetic. Obama may have been trying to avoid that mistake but overdid it a bit, so he seemed too flat.
 
Grim17 said:
I think we saw Obama for what he has always been. A not very experienced politician who won in 2008 not on policy, but on "hope & change."

The most glaring thing that stood out for me tonight, was how Romney absolutely knew the answers to everything concerning the economy. You could see that what he was saying wasn't political speak, but words based on his years of business experience, while Obama seemed to still be selling a pipe dream.

That is of course exaggerated, but I clearly remember a point in the debate when Romney was talking about jobs and I was looking at Obama's reaction, and got this sinking feeling in my stomach. That feeling was something that came out of nowhere and I hadn't expected at all... I all of the sudden felt sorry for Obama. Romney was taking Obama to school on how economics works, and I could see it in the presidents face, that he had no answer. All he had was the same "hope & change" that he offered 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

When Romney was talking about jobs and how he will create 12 million new ones didn't you ask yourself "why wait?".....why is a country so desperatley in need of job creation listening to a politician claiming that he can create 12 million jobs if he is elected....why hasn't this politician and his republican co-horts already put these 12 million new jobs on the table to help this economy?....I don't buy into this promise!!
 
Some people might be too busy trying to derail the thread with personal attacks to discuss the topic, but I am very interested to know what reasonable people think about the obvious strategy of the Obama campaign to take it easy last night.

If he had come out guns blazing, and trounced Romney, it would have looked unpresidential for one thing, and could have severely backfired. Two more debates, remember.

What is the status now? Obama, no worse the wear; Romney, a Pyrrhic victory that may end up costing him some of the Norquistian vote. No chance he's going to move up in the polls after this.

Obama was just there to parry Romney's jabs and get in the occasional sound byte. If he had gotten lucky, Romney would have gaffed, but Romney performed well. If Obama had been agressive, he might have pleased his base but he would have risked losing the independents who are leaning towards him.

And Obama has someplace to go in the next two. This was sound strategy.
 
Last edited:
Harshaw said:
No, Guy; you simply pretend that the counterpoints are never posted (such as in this case, re: Obamacare). That's not the same thing at all. You ignore what's inconvenient to you. It's what you do. It's what you've always done. I don't know who you think it fools. No one I've seen.

And this is pretty rich from someone who never, ever, posts any substantive support for what he says. The best you EVER do is five minutes of Googling to find something, based on the title, you think MIGHT support you, but ends up not really doing so.

And this post here is a fantastic example of Guy Incognito's debate (sic) style -- declare something "obvious" and treat it as established fact. You rarely ever do anything other than this.
Click to expand...

And there's a good example of Harshaw's "debate" style: all ad hominem, all the time.
 
Verax said:
I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I think he's playing it safe while allowing Romney's own words lose Romney the swing states....the 47% comment,as well as Bain Capital attacks. He's not going to hit him on those things which have been in my opinion a large reason for Romney losing in the polls. Why give him a chance to obfuscate those two topics? Keep hitting those states with Super Pac ads and play it close in the debates.

Oh...not mention.....he got Romney to state he wanted a voucher program for Medicare.
 
Higgins86 said:
Too be honest this was a debate where Romney had to come after him but yet I felt he spent most of his time defending his own policies rather than attacking Obamas! Not really sure why everyone thinks this is a big win for Romney, I thought it was a stale debate!
Click to expand...

I'm sure it seemed stale to you. Obama looked like his expiration date had expired.
 
Mycroft said:
I really hate to say this, but I agree with Michael Moore on this:



I think Obama failed this debate like he's failed most everything else he's done in the last four years.
Click to expand...

Considering what a putz Michael Moore is, you can pretty much guarantee that if he says it, it's wrong.
 
AdamT said:
I think it's possible that Obama's team studied Romney's gubernatorial debates and discovered that the only one he really won (big) was the last one, where his opponent aggressively tore into him. That made Romney seem much more sympathetic. Obama may have been trying to avoid that mistake but overdid it a bit, so he seemed too flat.
Click to expand...


or maybe Obama is dumb as dirt and a myth.. maybe the mask came off the kenyan fraud.. maybe hes scumbag idgit that was and is a spoon fed let em eat cake lib..

Obama is a fraud..a zero
 
Personally I am extremely piss at Obama right now. He had the opportunity to bury this guy's campaign and he decided to play passive. Not once did he call him out on his stance on pre-existing condition vs what he said a week ago. And no mention about the 47% !!!!!!!!! WTF Mr. President. Last night he acted like Lebron James in the finals against Dallas.

On the flip side I think Romney was really good last night.
 
AdamT said:
And there's a good example of Harshaw's "debate" style: all ad hominem, all the time.
Click to expand...

Adam needs to look up "ad hominem," because every single point there is about what Guy posts and how he reacts to posts. It is very much about his arguments, not himself.
 
Verax said:
I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...


maybe Obama is a loser scumbag dope.. a radical that was only allowed into Harvard because he lied and said he was from kenya... maybe you just saw the real Obama ( I know who he is, sorry you didnt).. I know you love "Obamaprompter" but see thats not real.. whats real is the record of Obama, a radical anti american dumb as rock loser...
 
Harshaw said:
Adam needs to look up "ad hominem," because every single point there is about what Guy posts and how he reacts to posts. It is very much about his arguments, not himself.
Click to expand...

just ignore him or put him on ignore.. dont fall for the bait..we all know the truth bro..
 
straykatz said:
When Romney was talking about jobs and how he will create 12 million new ones didn't you ask yourself "why wait?".....why is a country so desperatley in need of job creation listening to a politician claiming that he can create 12 million jobs if he is elected....why hasn't this politician and his republican co-horts already put these 12 million new jobs on the table to help this economy?....I don't buy into this promise!!
Click to expand...

...are you serious? The ENTIRE ECONOMY only created 23 million new jobs in the 8 years Clinton was president, and you're asking why ONE man can't create 12 million jobs in 4 years w/o the aid of govt. influence and access to resources to prompt the entire economy to expand?
 
tessaesque said:
I don't think his treatment of Leher or behavior during the debate was any worse or better than Obama's. Interrupting the moderator happened on both sides, refusal to answer direct questions happened on both sides, and inappropriate means of addressing the moderator happened on both sides.
Click to expand...

Leher had no control over this debate...and Romney clearly lacked respect towards the moderator.....aggressively rude in a few instances....Obama was definately subdued in most cases but I've noticed on more than one occasion in the past 4 years the Obama clearly believes in letting the other guy speak without interuptions....it's called manners....should manners be thrown out the door in politics?...I don't think so!
 
AdamT said:
And there's a good example of Harshaw's "debate" style: all ad hominem, all the time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think it's hilarious how his idea of a counter arument is, "I disagreed with you on a different topic, therefore you are dumb and everything you say is wrong." And he somhow doesnt think that's ad hom.

I might very well be dumb and wrong, but you would never know it from Harshaw's failure to address my arguments on their merits.
 
Grim17 said:
Honestly, I don't understand that at all. I saw nothing from Romney that in any way struck me as loud or obnoxious. I thought both of them came off as cool, reasonable, intelligent men. I didn't even see that classic Obama arrogance I was expecting.
Click to expand...

Both candidates behaved themselves and were more professional and competent 1000 times more than the absurd media political talking heads. I congratulate and thank both Obama and Romney.
 
straykatz said:
Leher had no control over this debate...and Romney clearly lacked respect towards the moderator.....aggressively rude in a few instances....Obama was definately subdued in most cases but I've noticed on more than one occasion in the past 4 years the Obama clearly believes in letting the other guy speak without interuptions....it's called manners....should manners be thrown out the door in politics?...I don't think so!
Click to expand...

Jim Lehrer was G R E A T because the debate wasn't about him and his views. He just kept the candidates pointed at each other - exactly what he was suppose to do. His job was NOT control! It was to keep it moving along relatively balanced. If BOTH candidates wanted to talk for 4 minutes instead of 2 and it mostly balancing, that's just fine. Obama spoke 4 minutes longer than Romney. Neither were rude. Both cut the other off a few times, allowable in a debate.
 
MaggieD said:
I'm sure it seemed stale to you. Obama looked like his expiration date had expired.
Click to expand...



"for best freshness use this kenyan fraud by Nov 6 2012, keep refrigerated, dispose of properly, do not recycle"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom