View Poll Results: Who won tonight's debate?

Voters
120. You may not vote on this poll
  • Barack Obama

    15 12.50%
  • Mitt Romney

    98 81.67%
  • It was a draw

    7 5.83%
Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 172

Thread: Who Won?

  1. #131
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Who Won?

    Mitt Romney said: he wants to eliminate government service departments BY ATTRITION. Translation: he just takes away their money and then calls that their fault! No wonder this crook was a job destroying CEO. Is his name Mitt, because his mother got fed up with him when he kept losing his Mittens?

  2. #132
    Professor
    Glowpun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,709

    Re: Who Won?

    Although, not a Romney fan, I would have to give the edge to him otherwise, it would have been the scrap heap of history for him. I am not in agreement over his lack of giving details such as what deduction he will get rid of. He still strikes me as a used car salesman using all the guile he could muster to get people to buy into his fold.

    I am not sure about Obama. He missed opportunity after opportunity. Why? What the heck was the matter with him last night? He came across as unprepared. Was he just being lazy as Sununu was heard to describe him today? If Obama does not shape up on the next two debates he will probably be on the scrap heap of history.

    But I pray Romney will not be elected. God help this country from him if he does win. The mantra of the Republican Party is that this country be a plutocracy and not a democracy. This party only wants to give the illusion of a democracy. Plutocracy: rule by a wealthy few (billionaires, millionaires, the big corporations).

  3. #133
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    Leadership, confidence, diplomacy, negotiation, all of these things can and typically are driven by perception. Perception IS one form of substance for executive positions. Sometimes (maybe even typically) it's valued more than all other narrowly defined "substance" combined.

    For example, if the lobbyists and high-powered substance people get in a room with either candidate, who appeared to be better able to wrangle them, and not just roll over? Is that perception or substance? And while that's hypothetical and overly dramatic, remember Bush and it's not so hypothetical. Clinton in contrast to Bush, wasn't one to be out-gunned in a discussion either. Clintons intelligence and his folksy charm, that too was substance. Not really comparing the two, just that certain qualities have real substantial value for leaders.
    That's true, although it should be pointed out that it is possible for great leaders to be quiet, unassuming, low-key, and uncharismatic, while the reverse is true as well.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  4. #134
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,216

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by ab9924 View Post
    Mitt Romney said: he wants to eliminate government service departments BY ATTRITION. Translation: he just takes away their money and then calls that their fault! No wonder this crook was a job destroying CEO. Is his name Mitt, because his mother got fed up with him when he kept losing his Mittens?
    You may know this and just using sarcasm but he meant he'd lower federal workforce by just not replacing those retiring or leaving government. As far as destroying jobs in private sector, that is necessary if a company is inefficient. If widespread inefficiency in economy, costs would go up and living standards down. We do not need inefficiency just for jobs sake, we can have that now, we could hire 100,000 people at $20 an hour to rearrange picnic tables at public parks all day but that kind of policy would not only bankrupt us but that 100,000 could be utilized creating real wealth which increases growth, tax base, higher living standards across the board. What needs to happen is a great efficiency/quality control program across government done in the least painful way as possible and have an amazingly great job training program utilizing a national virtual university, free and easily accessed world class training for all.

  5. #135
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    In sum, I know that public perception and the majority are the most important thing for winning. This was never something that I contested. MY point has always been that we shouldn't judge debates by looks just because most of the public does and just because looks are the most important factor in winning. If you agree with that, great. If you don't, you're part of the problem.
    I agree, but what should be and what is are two different things altogether. You seem to take the position that we should have higher expectations for the general electorate. I'm not really all that optimistic - you can call it complacent if you want, but it's simply how I view the realities of group behavior. I think it's absolutely unrealistic to expect the general electorate to judge a debate based on facts and strength of arguments rather than style points.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  6. #136
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,145

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by ab9924 View Post
    Mitt Romney said: he wants to eliminate government service departments BY ATTRITION. Translation: he just takes away their money and then calls that their fault! No wonder this crook was a job destroying CEO. Is his name Mitt, because his mother got fed up with him when he kept losing his Mittens?
    actually, as a federal retiree, that was one of the things i most liked among romney's debate proposals
    first, because his downsizing would be via attrition, that means the union members, with contract protections, will be largely spared, exposing those who are not represented by unions - especially middle managers, who largely contribute nothing to the government effort
    second, because the number of federal employees, military and civilian is quite excessive, any position which is found not to be inherently government should be considered for either termination or oursourcing
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  7. #137
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by laska View Post
    You may know this and just using sarcasm but he meant he'd lower federal workforce by just not replacing those retiring or leaving government. As far as destroying jobs in private sector, that is necessary if a company is inefficient. If widespread inefficiency in economy, costs would go up and living standards down. We do not need inefficiency just for jobs sake, we can have that now, we could hire 100,000 people at $20 an hour to rearrange picnic tables at public parks all day but that kind of policy would not only bankrupt us but that 100,000 could be utilized creating real wealth which increases growth, tax base, higher living standards across the board. What needs to happen is a great efficiency/quality control program across government done in the least painful way as possible and have an amazingly great job training program utilizing a national virtual university, free and easily accessed world class training for all.
    This actually opens another efficiency related question, that none of them addressed yet. Every paid vacation is an inefficiency. When will American employees get raised to the level of paid vacations that Europeans and Chinese and Indian and Australian ... employess already have, all over the industrial world?

  8. #138
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 12:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,194

    Re: Who Won?

    Romney's flag lapel pin was bigger. I'd say he won.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  9. #139
    Guru
    cAPSLOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,927
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jredbaron96 View Post
    Curious to see how the polls play out. Only 15% of voters say the debates would change their mind. Maybe those 15% matter.
    Those 15% matter more than anything in the world of US politics right now.

  10. #140
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,667

    Re: Who Won?

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    I bothered not as to watching these so-called debates.
    Actually - true debates are neither won nor lost.
    And Romney "liking Big Bird" displays his intellect (childish)..
    Now that is really silly comment

Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •