• 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.

Obama Blasts Mitt Romney's Debate Claims: 'You Owe The American People The Truth'

RDS

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
5,398
Reaction score
1,323
Location
Singapore
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What Obama did was size up his opponent during the first debate. Romney will be trashed at the next debate.

In a conference call with reporters, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said the president would make "adjustments" and would need to determine by the next presidential debate on Oct. 16 in Hempstead, N.Y., how best to counter what the campaign considers Romney's evasions on a series of issues.
Comparing it to a playoff game in sports, Axelrod said: "You evaluate after every contest and you make adjustments and I'm sure that we will make adjustments. I don't see us adding huge amounts of additional prep times. There are some strategic judgments that have to be made and we'll make them."
Axelrod sought to turn the questions about the debate into a matter of character, repeatedly accusing Romney of "hiding the truth and the facts" from the American people.
"It was a very vigorous performance, but one that was devoid of honesty," Axelrod said of Romney. He said the Republican presidential nominee offered well-delivered but "fraudulent" lines that will be hard to hold up over the remainder of the campaign

Obama Blasts Mitt Romney's Debate Claims: 'You Owe The American People The Truth'
 
Why did Obama wait a day to blast Romney's claims when he could have done it to his face last night? Because he had no rebuttal.

And because he didn't know what to say until he got back to his teleprompter.
 
It probably hasn't occurred to Romney's supporters that some of the things Romney said weren't true.

Hence the whining about Obama's statement.
 
It probably hasn't occurred to Romney's supporters that some of the things Romney said weren't true.

Hence the whining about Obama's statement.

And apparently it doesn't matter unless Obama had the real figures in front of him at the time, or knew the correct information off the top of his head. Except that in several cases, like with the 5 trillion tax cut, he did.

Romney is basing his policies and promises on demonstrably false information. If he told the truth, I don't see how his promises would stand up at all. Several of them were mathematically impossible.

It would be hard to imagine any harm that would come to America if the entire Move ON membership were to be vaporized or kidnapped by aliens


Obama appeals to the stupid and the failures of the world


And, you know... the people who can count.
 
The claim is based on a study done by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group that has analyzed the tax plans of the candidates. The center examined Romney’s proposals for a 20 percent reduction in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions.

The center estimated that altogether, the lost revenues would total $480 billion by 2015. The Obama campaign adds up the cost over a decade and winds up with $4.8 trillion, which it then rounds up to $5 trillion.

The conclusion is accurate but misleading. Yes, the cuts would total that amount, but as Obama himself noted as he continued speaking, Romney hopes to offset the lost revenues by closing loopholes and deductions. The reductions in tax breaks are as much a part of Romney’s plan as the tax cuts.

But Obama is right in pointing out that Romney has yet to specify what tax breaks he would change. The most Romney has personally said is that he might cap deductions at $17,000, but that is a broad figure and does not describe how the number would be achieved.

The impact of changing deductions on the scale needed to offset the tax cuts would be great. The largest deductions include interest on home mortgages, state and local taxes and the tax free treatment of health benefits. These are real pocketbook issues for most households and tinkering with them could have significant effects on large sectors of the economy.

Romney offers key details on the taxes he would cut. But in explaining how to pay for them, he has essentially said only that he would keep the overall tax burden the same across all income groups by changing unnamed tax breaks.

Our ruling

President Obama said Mitt Romney seeks a $5 trillion tax cut.

The $5 trillion figure accounts for only half of Romney’s plan -- and it's cumulative over 10 years. The governor says he will offset those lost revenues by reducing tax deductions and eliminating loopholes. However, he has never said what those changes would be.

The president made a misleading statement about an incomplete plan, but he did describe what the plan was missing and Romney would not fill in the gaps.

We rate the statement Half True.

PolitiFact | Obama says Romney's plan is a $5 trillion tax cut

So the 5 trillion is fairly accurate, however it is only half the plan where Romney promises to make up the lost revenue by closing loop holes and tax breaks. The issue with that is Romney hasn't specifically named a single loop hole or tax break he'd end, so his plan lacks specifics.


More on the debate:
PolitiFact | Fact-checking the Denver presidential debate
 
Isn't the TPC affiliated with the Brookings Institute?
 
LOL. Are you for real? That was the worst beat down of a sitting president in a debate in television history. Why did Obama wait a day to blast Romney's claims when he could have done it to his face last night? Because he had no rebuttal.

AGAIN, I'd like to throw around a fun little fact: Kerry had about a big of a margin of victory over Bush in the first debate as Romney had over Obama in this one. So no, it was not the biggest rear kicking in presidential history, and it did not just determine the direction of the presidential race.
 
AGAIN, I'd like to throw around a fun little fact: Kerry had about a big of a margin of victory over Bush in the first debate as Romney had over Obama in this one. So no, it was not the biggest rear kicking in presidential history, and it did not just determine the direction of the presidential race.

Who decides who won? I thought Obama did.
 
He does not explain exactly how his $5 trillion tax cut won't add to the deficit.

"What I've said is that there is ... I won't put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit. That's part one. So there's no economist that can say Mitt Romney's tax plan adds $5 trillion if I say I will not add to the deficit with my plan."

The circularity of this argument is mindboggling. Basically, Romney is saying "My plan works because I say so."


Read more: Romney's Tax Plan Just Magical Thinking - Business Insider
 
LOL. Are you for real? That was the worst beat down of a sitting president in a debate in television history. Why did Obama wait a day to blast Romney's claims when he could have done it to his face last night? Because he had no rebuttal.

Isn't the bolded really the crux of the issue? Romney was ready and willing to call Obama out for alleged falsehoods, half-truths, or out right lies, and yet Obama really kind of failed to do so. And yet the next day his advisers come out trying to discredit Romney's performance. That should have been done during the debate. You had rebuttal opportunities and you spoke LONGER than Romney did.
 
Considering a thrust of it will be foreign policy, already seen as a benefit to the President, don't be surprised when you are partly right, but only incidentally.

He has to explain when this point probably comes up "Russia is our No 1 enemy".
 
it would have been better if he had called Romney on some of this during the debate. some of Romney's claims were absolutely jaw-dropping for those of us who have watched him in the primary and on the campaign trail. however, they were less so for those of us who have followed him since Massachusetts. there are basically three Romneys : the liberal who ran against Ted Kennedy, the reasonable moderate, and the Romney wearing a mask to appeal to conservatives and tea partiers. reasonable, moderate Romney showed up at the debates Wednesday, and Obama seemed to barely show up at all. my guess is that Romney assumed that the majority hadn't followed the race closely enough to catch the costume change and might not follow the news enough to fact check. he was probably right. additionally, playing to an audience is certainly common to all politicians; Obama also has liberal and moderate modes. however, i find him in general to be less hawkish on foreign policy, and less supply-side here at home, so he is closer to my own views. hopefully his next debate performance will be better.
 
Not sure how Obama plans to get Romney to focus on the economy in the foreign policy round of the debates. He already criticized Romney in the first debate several times about not giving specifics and that did not seem to help Obama any, so go right ahead and beat your head against the wall again, Mr. President. Fishing for specific cuts is nothing more than fishing for soundbites for Romney is a bad guy commercials. Countering the Obama Will Kill Coal commercials with ones about a coal worker feeling coerced by his employer to stand behind Romney at a speech is not going to win many votes.
 
Look at how defensive he is.

“This is not what a real recovery looks like. We created fewer jobs in September than in August, and fewer jobs in August than in July, and we’ve lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs since President Obama took office. If not for all the people who have simply dropped out of the labor force, the real unemployment rate would be closer to 11%. The results of President Obama's failed policies are staggering – 23 million Americans struggling for work, nearly one in six living in poverty and 47 million people dependent on food stamps to feed themselves and their families. The choice in this election is clear. Under President Obama, we’ll get another four years like the last four years. If I’m elected, we will have a real recovery with pro-growth policies that will create 12 million new jobs and rising incomes for everyone.”


Read more: Romney: September Jobs Report 'Not Real Recovery' - Business Insider
 
Look at how defensive he is.

How is that defensive? He's not saying anything about himself or his policies. He's pointing out the existing conditions under the incumbent, which is a pretty sound policy to utilize when you're trying to beat that incumbent.
 
Back
Top Bottom