shiang
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2012
- Messages
- 937
- Reaction score
- 159
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Much better debate than the first, Obama seemed more comfortable and is himself again. More importantly he seemed to have had a good night sleep the day before.
Romney did ok, no big gaffs, a few mis-steps on immigration, came off a bit sexist on addressing equal pay for equal work when saying women need to get off work early to take care of children, and showed a bit of his flip-flopping skills on corporate taxes. When it came to deficit and small business, no tax cuts and even hints at tax raises for big business. When it came to attracting companies he said yes tax cuts for ALL business. Sounds great, only problem is you can't raise and lower taxes on corporate executives at the same time. I personally believe the money they keep for themselves should be taxed at the same progressive tax rate as any other American, the money they invest back in the economy should be tax deductible. Other than that I did not detect (new) major flaws.
...oh and "licking my wounds from losing to John McCain", ya probably not the smartest thing he's ever said.
Romney was also smart in not bringing up medicare with Obama Care. As there's no need to give Obama an opportunity to defend, when he already failed miserably on the first debate and practically ignored the issue.
With the 20th anniversary behind him, Obama seemed more focused today. He hit 75% of questions compared to the 0% in the first debate. Not perfect, but good enough to best Romney. Not by as much as he lost in the first debate simply due to lethargy, but still a slight but clear win.
A few notable things for Obama,
Things he hit:
One of the most brilliant moves Obama made in this debate was the reference to the 47% remark at the very end. A brilliant move, or ploy if you will, for the other side. Why? He uses his trump card and at the same time doesn't jeopardize it since Romney had no opportunity to respond.
He started giving legitimate defenses to his record, which he did little if any of on the first debate. Such as his handling of Syrian attack on our embassy, the growth of employment, a clear outline of immigration where he said deport the law breakers but give honest workers a chance at neutralization, and the differences between him and Romney on social issues.
Things he missed, or at least didn't hit:
When Romney attacked Obama on unemployment. He again failed to mention that shortly after taking office, the unemployment rose over 10%. Well before his policies could possibly have any effect. Since it fell from 10% to 7.8% in about 3 years, then at this rate it would be at 5.6% by the end of his 2nd term. So he didn't break his promise
. ... ok a bit of false reasoning I know, but in debates you're allowed to "stretch the truth".
When Romney attacked Obama on the deficit. Again, Obama didn't quite explain that the mess the policies of the previous administration left him, and the same policies advocated by Romney, almost forced a 1.5T deficit on him in 2009, it came down to 1.4T in 2010, a 1.3T in 2011, and is on track to be slightly lower this year (at 1T right now with about 1/5 of the year to go). Of course he could not spend stimulus money and pray to the Gods for a miracle. I understand that he doesn't want to scare your average joe with numbers like Trillion, heck the average American probably doesn't even know what a Trillion is, but I still think he should say it because it'll help educate the smarter audiences, who are the one's that could think for themselves and change their votes.
When Romney attacked him for slow job growth , then referred to how much better Reagan did. Obama could've responded with any of the following. Regan didn't inherit a recession nearly as bad. Regan added even/much more deficit by %.
Obama again didn't mention nuclear energy. Understandable, after what happened in Japan. However it is THE energy source of the future with it's enormous potential. Hiding it from the public and kicking the can down the road to me is not presidential. When it comes to energy policy, nuclear is probably the one word that grabs my attention.
In short Romney came in with almost the exact same game plan and was taken aback when the other team adapted (to his brand new set of ideology).
If voters react fairly to the debates then I expect Obama to recoup most, but not all, of the points he lost in the first debate. Putting Romney's on the ropes once again.
...you know, this is so much like a reality show, and we're the one's getting played for fools. Go do your own research and make up your own mind is what I'll always say.
Romney did ok, no big gaffs, a few mis-steps on immigration, came off a bit sexist on addressing equal pay for equal work when saying women need to get off work early to take care of children, and showed a bit of his flip-flopping skills on corporate taxes. When it came to deficit and small business, no tax cuts and even hints at tax raises for big business. When it came to attracting companies he said yes tax cuts for ALL business. Sounds great, only problem is you can't raise and lower taxes on corporate executives at the same time. I personally believe the money they keep for themselves should be taxed at the same progressive tax rate as any other American, the money they invest back in the economy should be tax deductible. Other than that I did not detect (new) major flaws.
...oh and "licking my wounds from losing to John McCain", ya probably not the smartest thing he's ever said.
Romney was also smart in not bringing up medicare with Obama Care. As there's no need to give Obama an opportunity to defend, when he already failed miserably on the first debate and practically ignored the issue.
With the 20th anniversary behind him, Obama seemed more focused today. He hit 75% of questions compared to the 0% in the first debate. Not perfect, but good enough to best Romney. Not by as much as he lost in the first debate simply due to lethargy, but still a slight but clear win.
A few notable things for Obama,
Things he hit:
One of the most brilliant moves Obama made in this debate was the reference to the 47% remark at the very end. A brilliant move, or ploy if you will, for the other side. Why? He uses his trump card and at the same time doesn't jeopardize it since Romney had no opportunity to respond.
He started giving legitimate defenses to his record, which he did little if any of on the first debate. Such as his handling of Syrian attack on our embassy, the growth of employment, a clear outline of immigration where he said deport the law breakers but give honest workers a chance at neutralization, and the differences between him and Romney on social issues.
Things he missed, or at least didn't hit:
When Romney attacked Obama on unemployment. He again failed to mention that shortly after taking office, the unemployment rose over 10%. Well before his policies could possibly have any effect. Since it fell from 10% to 7.8% in about 3 years, then at this rate it would be at 5.6% by the end of his 2nd term. So he didn't break his promise
. ... ok a bit of false reasoning I know, but in debates you're allowed to "stretch the truth".When Romney attacked Obama on the deficit. Again, Obama didn't quite explain that the mess the policies of the previous administration left him, and the same policies advocated by Romney, almost forced a 1.5T deficit on him in 2009, it came down to 1.4T in 2010, a 1.3T in 2011, and is on track to be slightly lower this year (at 1T right now with about 1/5 of the year to go). Of course he could not spend stimulus money and pray to the Gods for a miracle. I understand that he doesn't want to scare your average joe with numbers like Trillion, heck the average American probably doesn't even know what a Trillion is, but I still think he should say it because it'll help educate the smarter audiences, who are the one's that could think for themselves and change their votes.
When Romney attacked him for slow job growth , then referred to how much better Reagan did. Obama could've responded with any of the following. Regan didn't inherit a recession nearly as bad. Regan added even/much more deficit by %.
Obama again didn't mention nuclear energy. Understandable, after what happened in Japan. However it is THE energy source of the future with it's enormous potential. Hiding it from the public and kicking the can down the road to me is not presidential. When it comes to energy policy, nuclear is probably the one word that grabs my attention.
In short Romney came in with almost the exact same game plan and was taken aback when the other team adapted (to his brand new set of ideology).
If voters react fairly to the debates then I expect Obama to recoup most, but not all, of the points he lost in the first debate. Putting Romney's on the ropes once again.
...you know, this is so much like a reality show, and we're the one's getting played for fools. Go do your own research and make up your own mind is what I'll always say.
Last edited: