who won the debate?

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

blame the moderator..obama had 2 more min than romney..and still looked stupid.im pretty sure riot has spoken to him..and he will come back strong..

It will be more like "You see, none are you are smart enough to see that Obama won the debate handily. If you knew anything or read the websites I read, you would clearly see that. Poor ignorant people."

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

It will be more like "You see, none are you are smart enough to see that Obama won the debate handily. If you knew anything or read the websites I read, you would clearly see that. Poor ignorant people."

cant wait to see the bobble head bieden get cut to shreds..

[sham]

Mayo is $6 bucks a jar. Gas is $4 dollars a gallon. 20 million Americans can't find a job and many have been looking for years. Half of college grads can't find work. The national debt is $16 trillion. The feds are printing money like crazy and robbing everyone's net worth. US credit has been downgraded for the first time ever and may soon drop again. The middle East is on fire. AND Iran is about to get nukes. Obama will not look good in any debate because he is running against himself this time ... not against W. Bush. The gig is up for the boy who would be king. Ironically, the winner of this election may be the real loser historically because the US economy may collapse into a deep, deep depression worse than the Great Depression of the 30's during the next presidential term.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

cant say im thrilled about the future..but id like to see a new liar give it a shot.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

cant say im thrilled about the future..but id like to see a new liar give it a shot.

no one said it better than the who.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q


meet the new boss, same as the old boss

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

cant say im thrilled about the future..but id like to see a new liar give it a shot.

Fact Check from Last Night

OBAMA: “I’ve proposed a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. ... The way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 in additional revenue.”

THE FACTS: In promising $4 trillion, Obama is already banking more than $2 trillion from legislation enacted along with Republicans last year that cut agency operating budgets and capped them for 10 years. He also claims more than $800 billion in war savings that would occur anyway. And he uses creative bookkeeping to hide spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Take those “cuts” away and Obama’s $2.50/$1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases shifts significantly more in the direction of tax increases.

Obama’s February budget offered proposals that would cut deficits over the coming decade by $2 trillion instead of $4 trillion. Of that deficit reduction, tax increases accounted for $1.6 trillion. He promises relatively small spending cuts of $597 billion from big federal benefit programs like Medicare and Medicaid. He also proposed higher spending on infrastructure projects.

———

ROMNEY: Obama’s health care plan “puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don’t like that idea.”

THE FACTS: Romney is referring to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a panel of experts that would have the power to force Medicare cuts if costs rise beyond certain levels and Congress fails to act. But Obama’s health care law explicitly prohibits the board from rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits or raising the Medicare eligibility age. So the board doesn’t have the power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe.

Romney seems to be resurrecting the assertion that Obama’s law would lead to rationing, made famous by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s widely debunked allegation that it would create “death panels.”

The board has yet to be named, and its members would ultimately have to be confirmed by the Senate. Health care inflation has been modest in the last few years, so cuts would be unlikely for most of the rest of this decade.

———

OBAMA: “Over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up — it’s true — but they’ve gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years. So we’re already beginning to see progress. In the meantime, folks out there with insurance, you’re already getting a rebate.”

THE FACTS: Not so, concerning premiums. Obama is mixing overall health care spending, which has been growing at historically low levels, and health insurance premiums, which have continued to rise faster than wages and overall economic growth. Premiums for job-based family coverage have risen by nearly $2,400 since 2009 when Obama took office, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. In 2011, premiums jumped by 9 percent. This year’s 4 percent increase was more manageable, but the price tag for family coverage stands at $15,745, with employees paying more than $4,300 of that.

When it comes to insurance rebates under Obama’s health care law, less than 10 percent of people with private health insurance are benefiting.

More than 160 million Americans under 65 have private insurance through their jobs and by buying their own policies. According to the administration, about 13 million people will benefit from rebates. And nearly two-thirds of that number will only be entitled to a share of it, since they are covered under job-based plans where their employer pays most of the premium and will get most of the rebate.

———

ROMNEY on the failure of Obama’s economic policy: “And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is 1 out of 6 people in poverty. The proof of that is we’ve gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can’t find work.”

THE FACTS: The number of unemployed is 12.5 million, not 23 million. Romney was also counting 8 million people who are working part time but would like a full-time job and 2.6 million who have stopped looking for work, either because they are discouraged or because they are going back to school or for other reasons.

He got the figure closer to right earlier in the debate, leaving out only the part-timers when he said the U.S. has “23 million people out of work or stopped looking for work.” But he was wrong in asserting that Obama came into office “facing 23 million people out of work.” At the start of Obama’s presidency, 12 million were out of work.

His claim that half of college graduates can’t find work now also was problematic. A Northeastern University analysis for The Associated Press found that a quarter of graduates were probably unemployed and another quarter were underemployed, which means working in jobs that didn’t make full use of their skills or experience.

———

OBAMA: It’s important “that we take some of the money that we’re saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America.”

THE FACTS: This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn’t create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government’s borrowing.

———

ROMNEY: “At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up.”

THE FACTS: He’s right that the average price has doubled, and a little more, since Obama was sworn in. But presidents have almost no influence on gasoline prices, and certainly not in the near term. Gasoline prices are set on financial exchanges around the world and are based on a host of factors, most importantly the price of crude oil used to make gasoline, the amount of finished gasoline ready to be shipped and the capacity of refiners to make enough to meet market demand.

Retail electricity prices have risen since Obama took office — barely. They’ve grown by an average of less than 1 percent per year, less than the rate of inflation and slower than the historical growth in electricity prices. The unexpectedly modest rise in electricity prices is because of the plummeting cost of natural gas, which is used to generate electricity.

———

OBAMA: “Gov. Romney’s central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut — on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts, that’s another trillion dollars — and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn’t asked for. That’s $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make, without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans, I think is one of the central questions of this campaign.”

THE FACTS: Obama’s claim that Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion doesn’t add up. Presumably, Obama was talking about the effect of Romney’s tax plan over 10 years, which is common in Washington. But Obama’s math doesn’t take into account Romney’s entire plan.

Romney proposes to reduce income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminate the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group, says that would reduce federal tax revenues by $465 billion in 2015, which would add up to about $5 trillion over 10 years.

However, Romney says he wants to pay for the tax cuts by reducing or eliminating tax credits, deductions and exemptions. The goal is a simpler tax code that raises the same amount of money as the current system but does it in a more efficient manner.

The knock on Romney’s plan, which Obama accurately cited, is that Romney has refused to say which tax breaks he would eliminate to pay for the lower rates.

———

ROMNEY: “What would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test, if they pass it: Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?”

THE FACTS: China continues to be portrayed by Romney and many other Republicans as the poster child for runaway federal deficits. It’s true that China is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt, but it only represents about an 8 percent stake. And China has recently been decreasing its holdings, according to the Treasury Department. Some two-thirds of the $16 trillion national debt is owed to the federal government, with the largest single stake the Federal Reserve, as well as American investors and the Social Security Trust Fund.

———

OBAMA: “Independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Gov. Romney’s pledge of not ... adding to the deficit is by burdening middle-class families. The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more.”

THE FACTS: That’s just one scenario. Obama’s claim relies on a study by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group. The study, however, is more nuanced than Obama indicated.

The study concludes it would be impossible for Romney to meet all of his stated goals without shifting some of the tax burden from people who make more than $200,000 to people who make less.

In one scenario, the study says, Romney’s proposal could result in a $2,000 tax increase for families who make less than $200,000 and have children.

Romney says his plan wouldn’t raise taxes on anyone, and his campaign points to several studies by conservative think tanks that dispute the Tax Policy Center’s findings. Most of the conservative studies argue that Romney’s tax plan would stimulate economic growth, generating additional tax revenue without shifting any of the tax burden to the middle class. Congress, however, doesn’t use those kinds of projections when it estimates the effect of tax legislation.

———

ROMNEY on cutting the deficit: “Obamacare’s on my list. ... I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. ... I’ll make government more efficient.”

THE FACTS: Romney has promised to balance the budget in eight years to 10 years, but he hasn’t offered a complete plan. Instead, he’s promised a set of principles, some of which — like increasing Pentagon spending and restoring more than $700 billion in cuts that Democrats made in Medicare over the coming decade — work against his goal. He also has said he will not consider tax increases.

He pledges to shrink the government to 20 percent of the size of the economy, as opposed to more than 23 percent of gross domestic product now, by the end of his first term. The Romney campaign estimates that would require cuts of $500 billion from the 2016 budget alone. He also has pledged to cut tax rates by 20 percent, paying for them by eliminating tax breaks for the wealthiest and through economic growth.

To fulfill his promise, then, Romney would require cuts to other programs so deep — under one calculation requiring cutting many areas of the domestic budget by one-third within four years — that they could never get through Congress. Cuts to domestic agencies would have to be particularly deep.

But he’s offered only a few modest examples of government programs he’d be willing to squeeze, like subsidies to PBS and Amtrak. He does want to repeal Obama’s big health care law, but that law is actually forecast to reduce the deficit.

———

ROMNEY: “Simpson-Bowles, the president should have grabbed that.”

OBAMA: “That’s what we’ve done, made some adjustments to it, and we’re putting it before Congress right now, a $4 trillion plan.”

THE FACTS: At first, the president did largely ignore the recommendations made by his deficit commission headed by Democrat Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson. He later incorporated some of the proposals, largely the less controversial ones. He did not endorse some of the politically troublesome recommendations, such as trimming popular tax deductions like the one for home mortgage interest.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Fact Check from Last Night

he spoke of his family alot.'obama' .his grand parents wife ect..didnt he have an aunt who was living in sec 8 housing getting lots of aid..even though she wasnt a us citizen?...

[Dahoss]

While obviously Romney "won" the debate, did he really say anything last night? He was better at one liners and was able to fall back on Obama's 4 years as President which is an obvious advantage.

But what did he actually say that would influence someone on the fence about who to vote for? I ask this genuinely, because all I saw was someone who is a better debater, but his ideas still don't make much sense and won't benefit those of us who aren't millionaires.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

While obviously Romney "won" the debate, did he really say anything last night? He was better at one liners and was able to fall back on Obama's 4 years as President which is an obvious advantage.

But what did he actually say that would influence someone on the fence about who to vote for? I ask this genuinely, because all I saw was someone who is a better debater, but his ideas still don't make much sense and won't benefit those of us who aren't millionaires.

I haven't seen a performance like Obama's since the Bills went up 21-7 in the 3rd quarter this past weekend. He had all the bullets but didn't fire them.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

While obviously Romney "won" the debate, did he really say anything last night? He was better at one liners and was able to fall back on Obama's 4 years as President which is an obvious advantage.

But what did he actually say that would influence someone on the fence about who to vote for? I ask this genuinely, because all I saw was someone who is a better debater, but his ideas still don't make much sense and won't benefit those of us who aren't millionaires.

It's nothing more than a circus sideshow anyway. They make a million promises and break every single one of them once in office, and are never held accountable.

Romney swears that your impression stated above is not true, and believes that the Obama campaign is responsible for distorting the truth about his positions.

whatevah.

They did exactly what politicians do best - they talked for 2 hours and said nothing.


I'm just glad we finally got to see them discuss-debate serious issues facing our nation;

Civil liberties, privacy rights, due process, Wall Street crime....





Oh wait.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

They did exactly what politicians do best - they talked for 2 hours and said nothing.


I'm just glad we finally got to see them discuss-debate serious issues facing our nation;

Civil liberties, privacy rights, due process, Wall Street crime.... Oh wait.

You said this better than I tried to.

They both said nothing at all. So it kind of confusing to me why people are excited after last. It's like, "YAY!!! Our guy was a better liar last night, let's e-high five and act excited about our guy being not so bad last night."

Kind of mind boggling.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You said this better than I tried to.

They both said nothing at all. So it kind of confusing to me why people are excited after last. It's like, "YAY!!! Our guy was a better liar last night, let's e-high five and act excited about our guy being not so bad last night."

Kind of mind boggling.

i guess its true what your saying..but after 12 months of riot ..just a glimmer of romeny doing better is cause for some yay.in the end it wont matter..hey keeneland starts friday..YAY !!

[jms62]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

i guess its true what your saying..but after 12 months of riot ..just a glimmer of romeny doing better is cause for some yay.in the end it wont matter..hey keeneland starts friday..YAY !!

Keenland will do more harm to my bankroll then Romney's "Tax Cut"

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

i guess its true what your saying..but after 12 months of riot ..just a glimmer of romeny doing better is cause for some yay.in the end it wont matter..hey keeneland starts friday..YAY !!

I get the Riot stuff, trust me, so point taken.

But I don't know how someone can watch that last night and be excited about our future as a country going forward. Just the opposite for me.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I get the Riot stuff, trust me, so point taken.

But I don't know how someone can watch that last night and be excited about our future as a country going forward. Just the opposite for me.

I think the excitement stems more from Obama looking terrible, than the future (at least in the near term) of the country (which probably speaks volumes as us as a society). I'll admit that I'm guilty of this too. But after watching the President be treated as a rock star and seem to never be taken to task for anything, I enjoyed watching him get mopped up last night. He has always been a good speaker (maybe it really is the teleprompter), but last night he just didn't seem sharp or foucused and it hurt him. I felt that four years ago his entire campaign was I'm not Bush and everytime he played that card, his ratings seemed to spike. Last night Romney through some ideas and numbers out there and the President didn't seem to have any answers or comebacks. Also Rommney seemed to have the responses for anything the President through at him.

In the long run, these guys are just politicians and will probably say anything to get elected. I think we all realize this. We just have to hope the lesser of two evils gets elected and somehow gets some things done to get this country going again. Despite what Riot says or posts, things seem like they haven't gotten better during the last 4 years.

As far as if Romney actually said anything, here's what I got Hoss (but I'll admit that I'm far from a political know it all, besides I was also flipping back and forth from the Yankees & O's games). I liked his thoughts about domestic energy. We rely too much on foreign oil, period. I have a good job and what it costs to have two vehicles is obscene. He said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class and he seemed to dispel Obama's myth that he's cutting the deficit. He will also repeal Obamacare. At times he sounded like a buisnessman last night and maybe that's what the country needs to get going again. Obviously it could all be lip service, but the president didn't seem like he had any answers for any of it. I think someone else said it, Obama had his 4 years, lets see what the next guy can do.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

While obviously Romney "won" the debate, did he really say anything last night? He was better at one liners and was able to fall back on Obama's 4 years as President which is an obvious advantage.

But what did he actually say that would influence someone on the fence about who to vote for? I ask this genuinely, because all I saw was someone who is a better debater, but his ideas still don't make much sense and won't benefit those of us who aren't millionaires.

yeah, that's what i'm thinking. he may have won the debate itself-but exactly what does that mean? does it do anything, provide anything, sway anyone? you can win a 100 of those, doesn't mean you'll win the vote.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I get the Riot stuff, trust me, so point taken.

But I don't know how someone can watch that last night and be excited about our future as a country going forward. Just the opposite for me.

exactly.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

It will be more like "You see, none are you are smart enough to see that Obama won the debate handily. If you knew anything or read the websites I read, you would clearly see that. Poor ignorant people."

Oh, no - Romney won the debate. Happily I'll admit that.

Because the fallout of Romney's debate performance from here to election day is gonna be sublime

Again: offer stands until 9:00pm tonight, I'll bet anybody on the board $50 that Obama will win the election over Romney.

[lord007]

Originally Posted by Riot

Oh, no - Romney won the debate. Happily I'll admit that.

Because the fallout of Romney's debate performance from here to election day is gonna be sublime

Again: offer stands until 9:00pm tonight, I'll bet anybody on the board $50 that Obama will win the election over Romney.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/spa...s-in-november/
... Bet Barry heavily... hopefully this will open some of your eyes..the fix is in

[lord007]

Wow look at that the CEO donated to Obama's campaign..It is beyond me how this is possible we can not even count our own votes

[Riot]

Originally Posted by lord007

Wow look at that the CEO donated to Obama's campaign..It is beyond me how this is possible we can not even count our own votes

Yes, and one of Romneys donors supplies the voting machines for Texas and four other states. Hello?