PDA

View Full Version : Top Reasons Obama Lost The Debate



IGetItAlready
10-07-2012, 03:01 AM
Well, it's been a few days and even more stunning than Obama's dismal performance in last week's debate has been the Obama campaign and media reaction with an astounding list of excuses for Romney's solid win. First up, we heard that Romney dominated the clock and bullied Lehrer. Of course anyone who really wanted to know who had spoken longer and didn't bother to run their own stop watch during the debate could have found the truth to this one within minutes of end of the debate. Obama Spoke Four Minutes Longer Than Romney (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-usa-campaign-obama-debate-idUSBRE8930AW20121004)

Next was MSNBC's complaints that Obama didn't go after Bane Capital, the "47%", the "conservative war on women and women's rights", immigration, and all the other bullshit cover stories the the drones at MSNBC and Media Matters have created in order to provide Obama cover for his failed record. I think it's pretty easy to understand why Obama didn't bother with these disingenuous nothings but was clear that Mathews, Maddow and the rest of the goon squad at MSNBC took a great deal of offense to their working so hard to manufacture massive piles of bullshit for the president to hide behind only to have him not bother to jump behind them.

Then we had the excuse that only Al Gore could have conceived; The nonsense that Romney had acclimated himself to Denver's altitude whereas Obama on the other hand was suffering from some sort of oxygen deficiency or something. Great Al, just great. From one master debater to another...

Then we had Bill Maher who came closest to taking a stab at some uncharacteristic honesty in his post debate tweet in which he stated his belief that Obama was in fact incapable of speaking without his trusty teleprompter.

Then of course we had Obama's uber honest campaign manager Stephanie Cutter attempt to blame Obama's piss poor performance on Romney's level of preparedness. Uh, isn't that what we should have expected from BOTH candidates?

Then we were told Romney was a big fat liar and Obama simply didn't know how to respond to all the lies. Okay, number one, the debate started with Obama attempting to lie about Romney's plan for economic recover twice. Romney started, laid out the same five point plan that Obama's media lap dogs have chosen to ignore in the past as they inexplicably claim Romney had no plan and right out of the gate Obama attempted to misrepresent the plan Romney had just laid out for him. Romney called him on it and repeated his plan. Again Obama attempted to twist the very words over 67 million viewers had just heard cited. Romney respectfully told Obama that were he ever asked to support the plan Obama had just claimed was Romney's own plan, he would NEVER support it and once again Romney was forced to repeat the plan for the tragically stupid of Obama was clearly the king.

Okay, and secondly, if Romney had in fact spent the night lying, why didn't Obama call him to the floor on his bullshit? Too nice? Not a big fan of confrontation? Yeah right.

And my personal favorite has to be Ed Schultz's typical race baiting bullshit when he stated that Obama was afraid to be seen as an angry black man. I'm not even black and I'd most certainly be considered by some an angry black man over being seen as an absolute moron.

Wanna know the real reason Obama lost? Because he's a loser and his failed policies are proof if the debate wasn't enough to convince you. Obama's a great reader of other people's words. He's great at feigning accents and cadences in order to attempt to sound more like whatever special interest group he's addressing. But when expected to address the nation as a whole in a forum in which his typical divide and conquer tactics would surly crash and burn and in his own words, he's got nothing.

All the pundits are talking about how the next debate will see a much different approach by the boy king and I'm sure they're right. The only problem for Obama is that his record is truly indefensible. His only options are to latch onto the bullshit sound bites, attempt to play the race card, class warfare or go full on attack dog. None of these options are going to leave him looking very good in the eyes of a public who has already seen one debate in which one of the candidates has used his time to lay out constructive solutions to the problems the nation currently faces. Not to mention that all of these options create a high risk of Obama saying something totally stupid due to the fact that he's an absolute wild man when shooting from the hip as we've all seen in the past.

There's a lot of talk about how scared Romney should be in their next meeting but I don't buy it for a minute. Obama's failings on foreign affairs are at least as monumental and prevalent as those in his approach to domestic issues. Romney need only study the facts of Obama's dealings in the Middle East, his promises of "more flexibility" to the Russians, the facts currently coming to light regard to Obama's State Departments failures to provide the security US staff in Libya were requesting prior to four of them being murdered, Obama's initial attempt to bring terrorists killers to the US to be tried as US criminals with constitutional rights, Obama's stunning treatment of Israel and our other allies over the past four years and simply sit back and allow Obama to shoot himself in the head again.

Captain Obvious
10-07-2012, 04:26 AM
Outstanding!

The "Romney lying" point is money but at the end of the day it's all about Obama's performance as POTUS. There really isn't a lot for him to work with in a debate, he can only defend at this point.

Killing OBL only gets you about 5 minutes talking time in a debate.

patrickt
10-07-2012, 04:45 AM
It's tough to demagogue without an audience. President Obama is good at whipping up a partisan crowd and working them. I'm assuming the Town Hall debate will be packed with SEIU members with talking points.

Calypso Jones
10-07-2012, 09:22 AM
I'm glad you posted that topic. I was looking for a place to put this...by Dick Morris.

http://www.rightwingnews.com/column-2/how-the-media-is-trying-to-spin-the-debate/

How the media is trying to spin the debate. I found particularly interesting the last 2 paragraphs.

Calypso Jones
10-07-2012, 09:26 AM
Outstanding!

The "Romney lying" point is money but at the end of the day it's all about Obama's performance as POTUS. There really isn't a lot for him to work with in a debate, he can only defend at this point.

Killing OBL only gets you about 5 minutes talking time in a debate.

his killing obl is probably the impetus for the muslim mayhem that killed a US ambassador and 3 others. So, really. he should keep his lying mouth shut so that we don't remember dead ambassadors.

Besides. We never saw the body. And Dems act as if OBL shot the guy hiimself in person. Far from it. It was all Presidebt Ears could do to give the order. Then we have a breach in Seal security and a bunch of dead Seals. Curious that.

Akula
10-07-2012, 09:49 AM
I watched the debate very closely again last night.
The only thing I vehemently disagree with romney on is support of israel and increasing military spending.
I know politicians HAVE to say some things to appease...or at least not alienate.."certain" segments and "special interests" in our country.

but romney presented more clear, valid points and ideas than obama.
obama is all about vague, meaningless platitudes and inventing random numbers to "validate" what he says.

One of the best parts was romney yanking obama back into line when he claimed he wanted to hire more teachers and romney was against education...Romney pointed out that Mass. was ranked #1 in education..and he said the 90 BILLION obama gave away to those fake "green energy" companies would have paid for 2 million more teachers..obama looked pissed off..LMAO...


Obama had attacked $4 billion a year in "corporate welfare" for the oil industry.

(His proposed 2013 budget called for removing a handful of "tax provisions that preferentially benefit fossil fuel production." PolitiFact Ohio reported (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2012/may/04/bill-johnson/bill-johnson-says-subsidies-oil-companies-barack-o/) that the nonpartisan taxpayer watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates the U.S. tax code currently contains about $5 billion in yearly tax breaks that are exclusive to the oil and gas industry.)

Romney fired back:
First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. … And in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that's about 50 years' worth of what oil and gas receives. And you say Exxon and Mobil. Actually, this $2.8 billion goes largely to small companies, to drilling operators and so forth.

So, Romney contrasted a "tax break" of a few billion for oil companies with "breaks" worth tens of billions for "green energy." Later in the debate, he got more specific:
But don't forget, you put $90 billion, like 50 years' worth of breaks, into solar and wind, to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I mean, I had a friend who said you don't just pick the winners and losers, you pick the losers, all right? So this is not the kind of policy you want to have if you want to get America energy secure.
Finally, Romney drove home the number, repeating it three more times, and linking it to companies who have "gone out of business."
You put $90 billion into green jobs. And I -- look, I'm all in favor of green energy. $90 billion, that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion.

And these businesses, many of them have gone out of business, I think about half of them, of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.



obama is funny when he gets backed into a corner and pissed off. He isn't used to people confronting him after 4 years of the MSM covering for him.
He had nowhere to hide on that stage and no one to cover for him and no way to change the subject. It was amusing to see him in a situation where arrogance and deflection didn't work.

Libhater
10-07-2012, 02:30 PM
I watched the debate very closely again last night.
The only thing I vehemently disagree with romney on is support of israel and increasing military spending.
I know politicians HAVE to say some things to appease...or at least not alienate.."certain" segments and "special interests" in our country.

but romney presented more clear, valid points and ideas than obama.
obama is all about vague, meaningless platitudes and inventing random numbers to "validate" what he says.

One of the best parts was romney yanking obama back into line when he claimed he wanted to hire more teachers and romney was against education...Romney pointed out that Mass. was ranked #1 in education..and he said the 90 BILLION obama gave away to those fake "green energy" companies would have paid for 2 million more teachers..obama looked pissed off..LMAO...


Obama had attacked $4 billion a year in "corporate welfare" for the oil industry.

(His proposed 2013 budget called for removing a handful of "tax provisions that preferentially benefit fossil fuel production." PolitiFact Ohio reported (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2012/may/04/bill-johnson/bill-johnson-says-subsidies-oil-companies-barack-o/) that the nonpartisan taxpayer watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates the U.S. tax code currently contains about $5 billion in yearly tax breaks that are exclusive to the oil and gas industry.)

Romney fired back:
First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. … And in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that's about 50 years' worth of what oil and gas receives. And you say Exxon and Mobil. Actually, this $2.8 billion goes largely to small companies, to drilling operators and so forth.

So, Romney contrasted a "tax break" of a few billion for oil companies with "breaks" worth tens of billions for "green energy." Later in the debate, he got more specific:
But don't forget, you put $90 billion, like 50 years' worth of breaks, into solar and wind, to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I mean, I had a friend who said you don't just pick the winners and losers, you pick the losers, all right? So this is not the kind of policy you want to have if you want to get America energy secure.
Finally, Romney drove home the number, repeating it three more times, and linking it to companies who have "gone out of business."
You put $90 billion into green jobs. And I -- look, I'm all in favor of green energy. $90 billion, that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion.

And these businesses, many of them have gone out of business, I think about half of them, of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.



obama is funny when he gets backed into a corner and pissed off. He isn't used to people confronting him after 4 years of the MSM covering for him.
He had nowhere to hide on that stage and no one to cover for him and no way to change the subject. It was amusing to see him in a situation where arrogance and deflection didn't work.

I agree with everything you just said except for the part about supporting Israel and military spending. Look, normally I don't support anything Israel or the Zionists do, but like it or not Israel is our greatest ally over in the troubled Mideast. So for that fact, and the fact that every other raghead nation in the area has Israel in their crosshairs (especially an Iran on the verge of having nukes) then it behooves us to be strong with Israel while they're facing a determined Islamic Jihad Crusades of sorts. And for America to back our ally in the Mideast, we'll need to beef up our military expenditures twofold. Remember that the Iranian peapsqueak included the Western world in his speech of nation's he wants to destroy. So America needs to join Israel in a fight against the raghead (Sharia Law) world.

Peter1469
10-07-2012, 02:45 PM
I agree with everything you just said except for the part about supporting Israel and military spending. Look, normally I don't support anything Israel or the Zionists do, but like it or not Israel is our greatest ally over in the troubled Mideast. So for that fact, and the fact that every other raghead nation in the area has Israel in their crosshairs (especially an Iran on the verge of having nukes) then it behooves us to be strong with Israel while they're facing a determined Islamic Jihad Crusades of sorts. And for America to back our ally in the Mideast, we'll need to beef up our military expenditures twofold. Remember that the Iranian peapsqueak included the Western world in his speech of nation's he wants to destroy. So America needs to join Israel in a fight against the raghead (Sharia Law) world.

Why has Israel and the US never entered into an alliance?

Akula
10-07-2012, 02:47 PM
I agree with everything you just said except for the part about supporting Israel and military spending. Look, normally I don't support anything Israel or the Zionists do, but like it or not Israel is our greatest ally over in the troubled Mideast. So for that fact, and the fact that every other raghead nation in the area has Israel in their crosshairs (especially an Iran on the verge of having nukes) then it behooves us to be strong with Israel while they're facing a determined Islamic Jihad Crusades of sorts. And for America to back our ally in the Mideast, we'll need to beef up our military expenditures twofold. Remember that the Iranian peapsqueak included the Western world in his speech of nation's he wants to destroy. So America needs to join Israel in a fight against the raghead (Sharia Law) world.

What is the importance of israel to us exactly?..other than the fact that our government has been solidly infiltrated by zionists who use the u.s. to fight their battles in the M.E. by proxy.
Israel has spied on us, killed our troops on purpose, and manipulated u.s. foreign policy for as long as they've existed.
They are NO "friend" of ours any more than iran..In fact our blind support of israel and backing them militarily and giving/selling them arms to kill arabs with is a large part of our problem over there.

Israel is a closed society that doesn't want anything to do with white christians..or negroes or mexicans for that matter...They build a wall across their border but zionist politicians here don't want to protect OUR border..israel puts illegal immigrants in concentration camps..(!) and then deports them..
The jews hate us and to them we're "unclean" goyim..
the muzzies hate us and to them we're "infidels"..to hell with both of them.
What is it that is so important to u.s interests about israel..really?
The only "democracy" in the area?...so what? we went to war to protect kuwait, an emirate that doesn't even have equal rights for women..let's not pretend we have the moral high ground regarding the M.E....our foreign policy is exactly why people all over the world hate us...
Time to let them settle their problems among themselves...Let them all sink or swim on their own.

Libhater
10-07-2012, 05:03 PM
What is the importance of israel to us exactly?..other than the fact that our government has been solidly infiltrated by zionists who use the u.s. to fight their battles in the M.E. by proxy.
Israel has spied on us, killed our troops on purpose, and manipulated u.s. foreign policy for as long as they've existed.
They are NO "friend" of ours any more than iran..In fact our blind support of israel and backing them militarily and giving/selling them arms to kill arabs with is a large part of our problem over there.

Israel is a closed society that doesn't want anything to do with white christians..or negroes or mexicans for that matter...They build a wall across their border but zionist politicians here don't want to protect OUR border..israel puts illegal immigrants in concentration camps..(!) and then deports them..
The jews hate us and to them we're "unclean" goyim..
the muzzies hate us and to them we're "infidels"..to hell with both of them.
What is it that is so important to u.s interests about israel..really?
The only "democracy" in the area?...so what? we went to war to protect kuwait, an emirate that doesn't even have equal rights for women..let's not pretend we have the moral high ground regarding the M.E....our foreign policy is exactly why people all over the world hate us...
Time to let them settle their problems among themselves...Let them all sink or swim on their own.

Again, I agree with all of your points concerning Israel (which is made up of semite peoples), however, I'm looking at the bigger picture here. Without Israel keeping the raghead nations in check, then what would stop all of these muslim nations from banding together to attack America? I realize that all of these semite peoples are cutthroats to the highest degree, but giving them carte blanche to run havoc over the region minus the might of Israel by joining forces doesn't bode well for the world in general. Watching at least 20 different nations of ragheads burning the American flag should give all of us concern of their desire to keep their Jihad running at full throttle. So I don't take the liberal/pacifist role of apathetic surrender when it comes to staying strong against the evil dictatorships of these foreign nations. Reagan had the right idea of peace through strength, and for his leadership we saw the collapse of the former Soviet Union with the burial of communism. We'll need to be taking Romney's lead in the upcoming months to stop Iran in its tracks.

Deadwood
10-07-2012, 05:14 PM
his killing obl is probably the impetus for the muslim mayhem that killed a US ambassador and 3 others. So, really. he should keep his lying mouth shut so that we don't remember dead ambassadors.

Besides. We never saw the body. And Dems act as if OBL shot the guy hiimself in person. Far from it. It was all Presidebt Ears could do to give the order. Then we have a breach in Seal security and a bunch of dead Seals. Curious that.

I have often wondered about that.


I recall the one time chief of ops in Afghanistan saying he had a very good idea where OSL was, but no one asked him why they weren't going after him. I have often wondered whether the intel community knew they had him isolated and rendered ineffective and purposely decided NOT to kill him so they wouldn't touch off retaliations. At the time there were still some "cards" [remember the deck of cards and who was on it] outstanding.
If, and I concede it is mere speculation, that was the case, then the assassination takes on a whole knew perspective.

I recall raising, in a different forum, what was the benefit at the time other than a ego boost for the country and/or Obama. I questioned whether it might not have been better, that once located, to keep him in play and see to whom and how he was communicating. I got my head handed to me by right and left alike, but in hind sight I wonder if it isn't worth another look....

Peter1469
10-07-2012, 05:25 PM
Modern warfare is not something the Islamists have an ability to do. They cannot invade America. Sure they can engage in terror activity, but it wouldn't take long before Americans started shooting all strange things, thus ending the threat.