Presidental Debate One

speech giving IS a tiring act. Debating more so. Dealing with an ungodly ignorant opponent in the debate? yea, I'd be tired as all fawk too.

Pffft does this look like maple syrup land to you?

Yes, I think Obama got his point across but unless you were listening to every sentnce Obama uttered (which I wasn't all the time) you didn't take a lot of main point (catch phrases) away.

While, Romney was able to continuely repeat his points over and over again, which means people will remember them (716 billion loss to medicare, 12 billion jobs, etc). He never said how this would be accomplished, but meh.

Obama was in a debate and Romeny was doing a presentation/speech.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

I believe that Obama is a truly terrific speaker when he has either a teleprompter, or a pre-written speech in front of him. He does an excellent job of generating the feeling that he relates to a majority of the American people, but when you put him in a live debate, with little to no time to think about his answers, he stumbles, and then proceeds to take time and "uhh" his way through his speech.

I'll say that I think Romney "won" the debate, because even though he seems to flip-flop at every turn, he kept calm, collected and poised throughout. He showed an air of confidence that Obama didnt.

yeah, it got a 6.4 for a reason.

so every religion in history, yeah.

What are you talking about? obama has had 4 years to prepare. Maybe he should of cut his tee time by half or more.

Exactly. The world would be a 6.4 without lying.

Edit... Sorry. I mean to say television would be a 6.4 without lying.

I feel that Obama won the debate. He pointed out succinctly that Romney has no specific plan, just a lot of generalities. Romney started to panic early on because he realized he was actually going to have to think, something his Koch masters don't approve of.

Obama may have paused a lot, but I'd rather have a President who actually DOES think than one who just repeats talking points by rote.

Repeating facts could backfire also, cause people who are actually proactive in their government go and look those statistics up. Using random statistics consistently can get you in randomly consistent trouble later.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/EJMontini/172635

Wait a minute. Doesn't that assume that critical thinkers weren't already decided on NOT voting for Romney?

I agree.

Edit: but that requires people to go look stuff up.

It prolly does~ It also helps that there are critical thinker's to whip out this information in conversations~

edited: stupid fingers

The idea that he had "4 years to prepare" is kind of a half assed comment. Sure he may have seen which topics were going to be talked about tonight, but you still need to be on your toes and think on the fly when your in an actual debate. He had to adapt to anything Mitt spoke of and form his own responses with just a few moments of time. Not sure if you've ever been in a debate before, but you'll never win with pre-made responses that lack thought.

Don't tell me you don't have occasional pauses between sentences when speaking.

If you don't...well, more power to you there, lol

This debate goes to Romney.

He averted the disastrous results that would have come from a poor showing in this debate and came off more polished than the President with his statements... except most of them were flip-flops again like on Medicare, Education and Economic Policy.

If you have no *** clue what the facts are Romney looked better, the Republicans will forgive his flop because they'll do anything to win and the Democrats will beat the piss out of Obama because candidates on the left tend to be held to some high standards but I think people should consider the economy and debt are the Presidents weak points and he did effectively entrap Romney in the Medicare debate.

Things like women's rights didn't get an opening and I have a suspicion the 47% commentary is being saved for a more favorable debate platform.

So in other words, pretty much everything they talked about lol.

Even though he spoke better, I still don't know any of Romney's policy plans.

Vote for me, I'll figure it out later.

Romney's plan is to hope enough people are tired of Obama simply to vote for anyone... a potato, an apple with kitty ears or Mitt Romney.

I'm not in charge of being the voice of 320 million people, In the next debate uhhbama will try to refrain from saying "uhh" and after enough times of him not being able to use his coping tool his mind will break. I think it will happen within the first 15min. of the debate.

Holly ***,
I can not believe someone actually implied that we should be so fortunate that uhhbama even agreed to debate... wtf year is this 1943 in germany, did you think you elected a king or dictator?

Vote for me, I vaguely know how a country works. I also ran a business and somehow magically made my state awesome.

What you fail to realize is that Obama doesn't have to do anything in the debates. He is the incumbent. In order to defeat the incumbent, a candidate has to not point out all the negatives (which is always easy), but instead, tell the people what he plans to do about it. He has yet to do this, he has two debates left to try.

Oh no, Politics on the FFXI forums!

Lakshmi.Deces said: »
I'm not in charge of being the voice of 320 million people, In the next debate uhhbama will try to refrain from saying "uhh" and after enough times of him not being able to use his coping tool his mind will break. I think it will happen within the first 15min. of the debate.
I can not believe someone actually implied that we should be so fortunate that uhhbama even agreed to debate... wtf year is this 1943 in germany, did you think you elected a king or dictator?

not sure where you're going with that, so i'll take a stab in the dark and say; Adolf Hitler was a tremendous public speaker?

I would say that Romney repeated phrases (even when it was off topic) he wanted people to remember but that, to me, is not a debate. That is a presentation or speech.

I'm not sure about polished, maybe heavily prepared/coached.

However, I think both need a stronger mediator to control the debate better.

Edit: saw your edit, yeah if you had no idea about the statistics (hello, where did that MA #1 school stat come from?) then he sounds seriously on the ball. Able to pull magic numbers out of a hat.

So he was, just was not a good place. I think we both agree about that.

Some fact checks I saw, Obama's claim about Romney's 5 trillion tax cut was spot on, despite Romney's comments denying it. Obama's 4 trillion spending cut was overstated because some of the proposed cuts were already financed on debt.