By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Who won the debate? Romney or Obama?

 

Who won the debate?

President Barack Obama 220 34.65%
 
Governor Mitt Romney 265 41.73%
 
Nobody 141 22.20%
 
Total:626
theprof00 on 04 October 2012
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Or like, when Obama says "there is a credit you can take for moving jobs overseas", and Romney counters "i've been in business 30 years (or whatever) and I have no idea what you're talkign about". Obama shoud've countered,
"don't you mean you've been shipping jobs overseas for thirty years? It's called the foreign tax credit, and the problem isn't with the workers who are actually going overseas. Their credit can stay, but the companies who are getting rich of those workers backs, those people's hard work comes back to an American and sold. You ship out jobs, save a bundle on paying them, and get zero tax burdern"

Sure... if Obama wanted to lie... that's not how the foreign tax credit works.

The foreign tax credit only gives you credit for taxes you've already paid in another country.

A lot of these things Obama "should of pounced on" aren't actually factually true and just campaign spin.

My mistake, I'm talking more about exemptions and writeoffs for investing in other countries, import duty exemptions, and the like.

@bolded, like what?



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 04 October 2012
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Or how about when Romney says like 'those 3% of small business employ 50% of the workforce'.
THOSE AREN'T SMALL BUSINESSES. They make hundreds of millions. You can't stand on one side of the fence and say "i'm for the little guy", and then say "those fucking massive giant companies are little guys too". But that shouldn't come to any problem for Romney because he thinks people who make 250k are middle class.

Obama was the one who reffered to them as small buisnesses in the first place.

And he should have clarified how they are not small businesses. He says donald trump fits into that small business category. Why didn't he expound?

Because they are small buisnesses, what he meant by Donald Trump was that Donald Trump would get to keep a tax cut along with the small buisnesses in Romney's plan.

The 3% of small buisnesses and Donald Trump and people like him were two seperate points.

He was saying (albeit poorly)  "i'm only raising taxes on 3% of small buisnesses, to get at taxes from people like Donald Trump.  Who clearly must be a small buisness under your definition since all your talking about with this tax raise is the small buisnesses."



richardhutnik on 04 October 2012
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Or how about when Romney says like 'those 3% of small business employ 50% of the workforce'.
THOSE AREN'T SMALL BUSINESSES. They make hundreds of millions. You can't stand on one side of the fence and say "i'm for the little guy", and then say "those fucking massive giant companies are little guys too". But that shouldn't come to any problem for Romney because he thinks people who make 250k are middle class.

Obama was the one who reffered to them as small buisnesses in the first place.

And he should have clarified how they are not small businesses. He says donald trump fits into that small business category. Why didn't he expound?

To show how subjectively pointless opinions of the debate are, there is someone who said that Obama beat that issue like a dead horse.



MrBubbles on 04 October 2012

romney definitely won the debate. soundly.


the problem is...this is just more games from obama...even more than what it normally is(which is pretty much all shit anyways). obama intentionally performed poorly...so that he can seem to perform better in the next debates.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

richardhutnik on 04 October 2012
MrBubbles said:
romney definitely won the debate. soundly.


the problem is...this is just more games from obama...even more than what it normally is(which is pretty much all shit anyways). obama intentionally performed poorly...so that he can seem to perform better in the next debates.

Or playing very passive with things, as to not make any mistakes.  That usually doesn't win one a debate. And the point is to win the election, with the debates being part of it.



Around the Network
theprof00 on 04 October 2012
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Or how about when Romney says like 'those 3% of small business employ 50% of the workforce'.
THOSE AREN'T SMALL BUSINESSES. They make hundreds of millions. You can't stand on one side of the fence and say "i'm for the little guy", and then say "those fucking massive giant companies are little guys too". But that shouldn't come to any problem for Romney because he thinks people who make 250k are middle class.

Obama was the one who reffered to them as small buisnesses in the first place.

And he should have clarified how they are not small businesses. He says donald trump fits into that small business category. Why didn't he expound?

Because they are small buisnesses, what he meant by Donald Trump was that Donald Trump would get to keep a tax cut along with the small buisnesses in Romney's plan.

The 3% of small buisnesses and Donald Trump and people like him were two seperate points.

He was saying (albeit poorly)  "i'm only raising taxes on 3% of small buisnesses, to get at taxes from people like Donald Trump.  Who clearly must be a small buisness under your definition since all your talking about with this tax raise is the small buisnesses."

So you just said that 'these things he should've jumped on are just campaign spin', yet you acknowledge that even here there was something he should've clarified, which is what I've been saying.



gergroy on 04 October 2012
richardhutnik said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
Media consensus seems to be that Romney won, so now we're going to get subjected to a week (or however long it is until debate #2) of constant media analysis over whether this is a game-changer or not.

I will be interested to see if it has any impact on the polls. Everyone talks about Kennedy-Nixon, but honestly Kennedy-Nixon (the entire election) was one of those "too close to call" things that could have gone either way on election day, statistically.

I just read that apparently at the end of the debate Obama said "Good job, you probably won." 

Either way, this could be surprisingly deadly for Romney.

I mean, if he doesn't get a bump from this at all?  Or even just a small one.

THAT becomes the story... and he's toast.

I wouldn't be shocked if the popular vote is closer then the polls say though.  If your familiar with how poll modeling works.  State wise Obama should still take it pretty easy though.  The Electoral Map is just too heavily tilted towards democrats.

Expectation management is part of it, and what you said could be a possibility. I am not sure, in the day of the Internet, where all you have to do is google to get info, if the debates really do much.  So not sure why there would be much of a game changer out of it.  So, what can be said is true. The goal is to win elections, and debates, at best, have some sort of unindentifiable possible impact on the election that isn't quanitifiable.  The debates aren't sporting events, which produce won-loss records.

In 2004, GW Bush was pretty bad in a number of debates, and people though Kerry won.  It didn't have an impact on the end result.  Kerry still lost.

I don't know if that is quite fair.  Historically, debates have been shown to have an impact on public opinion, from minimal to huge.  I mean, just look at how the debates affected the republican primaries this year.  They had a huge impact on the primary process and were essential to the rise and fall of several candidates.  

Whether or not this debate will have an impact is yet to be seen, but the possibility of debates having a large impact is there.  Even in this age of internet access.  



Mr Khan on 04 October 2012
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Or how about when Romney says like 'those 3% of small business employ 50% of the workforce'.
THOSE AREN'T SMALL BUSINESSES. They make hundreds of millions. You can't stand on one side of the fence and say "i'm for the little guy", and then say "those fucking massive giant companies are little guys too". But that shouldn't come to any problem for Romney because he thinks people who make 250k are middle class.

Obama was the one who reffered to them as small buisnesses in the first place.

That was one thing my candidate was talking about in one of her TV interviews. She said we talk about helping small businesses, but then small businesses are considered to be anyone with 500 employees or under, or something, which is actually pretty damn big, and she said we need a new class between those and "real" small businesses (that is, when we think of small businesses you think of main street diners and comic book stores and little general stores, not the insurance underwriting firm with 300 employees in five branch offices or something)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

kaneada on 04 October 2012
gergroy said:
kaneada said:

The breakdown as I see it:

Romney was nervous the entire time constantly trying to over defend his points...not that he any real good ones...just recycling the Republican Bravado that has been more than debunked by fact checkers.

Obama hammering on that 5 trillion dollar tax cut borders on rediculous...While I agree that Romney needs to define the loop holes and the deductions he claims will cover the cost of this, it just made Obama sound like a broken record...Overall I do think that Obama's tax plan will be more effective in the long run at this point...I personally I want to see Romney's plan on paper and see how he can possibly make up the difference 5 trillion + 2 trillion in military spending using loop holes and deductions alone...

Overall both performed horribly...Romney being too defensive and Obama was clearly overconfident.

interesting, it seemed to me that Obama was on the defense most of the time.  Comparing Romney's performance to his primary debates, I think Romney may have had the best debate of his life.  

In the end though, I think they performed about the same, but I have to give kudo's to Romney for huge improvements.  


How could he possibly be on the defensive when Obama looked like a heroin addict nodding off the entire time?

My reasons behind stating Romney was being defensive is simply his bulying of the moderator the entire time.



-- Nothing is nicer than seeing your PS3 on an HDTV through an HDMI cable for the first time.

HappySqurriel on 04 October 2012
fordy said:
HappySqurriel said:
fordy said:
I notice a lot on here making a big deal of a non-issue. When Obama was not looking at Romney when Romney spoke, didn't any of you notice the pen moving? He was taking notes on what to respond with. And who's the candidate getting unfairly treated, again?

The one thing that stood out in my mind was "Boy Romney sounds like a self entitled spoiled brat whenever he had to get the last say.." Other than that, a rather dull debate.


The last world thing was one of the more interesting dynamics ...

When Obama thought he was going to have the last word he seemed to attack Romney with talking points of questionable accuracy, and Romney seemed to be willing to fight the moderator to get the time he needed to respond to those claims.

This is one of the reasons I think Obama (seemed to) perform so poorly. I could be wrong but I suspect that he was planning on "playing defence" through each of the segments and then going on the offensive at the end of each segment (assuming the moderator would stick to a strict schedule); when Romney was able to "get in the last word" and respond to Obama's "attacks" he disarmed them and seemed to "win" each segment.


I saw the complete opposite. Rmoney got the last word in with points of questionable accuracy, and there was no chance for response to those claims. You cannot say one side was doing it and not the other.


I never suggested that Romney's last responses were full of entirely fair and accurate data, just that the dynamic of how the segments were ending was potentially one of the reasons Obama "lost" the debate.

Most of the attacks I noticed from Obama came in his opening and closing statements of each of the segments; and when Romney forced the moderator to get the last word he seemed to use that time to produce a list of how Obama's previous statement misrepresented his views. Had Romney not done that the dynamic of the debate would have been drastically different as many of Obama's claims would have had more teeth.

Another aspect of this is that, even with Romney forcing additional speaking time in most segments, Romney still talked for 4 minutes and 26 seconds less than Barack Obama. Romney was bullying the moderator for the last world while Obama was bullying the moderator for more time.