Did Obama intentionally lose?

[Verax]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

 

[Higgins86]

Too be honest this was a debate where Romney had to come after him but yet I felt he spent most of his time defending his own policies rather than attacking Obamas! Not really sure why everyone thinks this is a big win for Romney, I thought it was a stale debate!

 

[Bronson]

Dem Debate Meltdown: Stumbling Obama Surrogate Speaks Of 'President Romney' | NewsBusters.org

 

[Verax]

Too be honest this was a debate where Romney had to come after him but yet I felt he spent most of his time defending his own policies rather than attacking Obamas! Not really sure why everyone thinks this is a big win for Romney, I thought it was a stale debate!

Well, I suppose it isn't so much that Obama lost or Romney won big, its more of Obama's attitude, his demeanor. He seemed passive and when he was listening to Romney speak he held his head down and at times nodded in agreement as though he was being set straight... it was really weird IMO. When he was talking he wasn't fluid and at all passionate most of the time.

 

[PirateMk1]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

Do what? He was playing? I dont know about that. Maybe, ya never know these days.

 

[Grim17]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

I think we saw Obama for what he has always been. A not very experienced politician who won in 2008 not on policy, but on "hope & change."

The most glaring thing that stood out for me tonight, was how Romney absolutely knew the answers to everything concerning the economy. You could see that what he was saying wasn't political speak, but words based on his years of business experience, while Obama seemed to still be selling a pipe dream.

That is of course exaggerated, but I clearly remember a point in the debate when Romney was talking about jobs and I was looking at Obama's reaction, and got this sinking feeling in my stomach. That feeling was something that came out of nowhere and I hadn't expected at all... I all of the sudden felt sorry for Obama. Romney was taking Obama to school on how economics works, and I could see it in the presidents face, that he had no answer. All he had was the same "hope & change" that he offered 4 years ago.

 

[Verax]

Dem Debate Meltdown: Stumbling Obama Surrogate Speaks Of 'President Romney' | NewsBusters.org

I really don't care what they think, I'm asking people on this forum how they saw it.

 

[Monserrat]

I think he seemed calm cool and collected. Romney came off as loud and obnoxious to me. As someone who spends a lot of time quietly analyzing situations I can relate to Obama's performance...maybe that's why I'm one of the few people who leaned more towards Obama after the debate.

 

[Grim17]

I think he seemed calm cool and collected. Romney came off as loud and obnoxious to me. As someone who spends a lot of time quietly analyzing situations I can relate to Obama's performance...maybe that's why I'm one of the few people who leaned more towards Obama after the debate.

Honestly, I don't understand that at all. I saw nothing from Romney that in any way struck me as loud or obnoxious. I thought both of them came off as cool, reasonable, intelligent men. I didn't even see that classic Obama arrogance I was expecting.

 

[PW4000]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

What do I think?

I think the collective lack of education on how our government works at the Federal level and how our economy works on a National level, causes people to not understand what "winning" a "debate" truly means.

The proof of that statement is clearly shown in the fact that Romney, could stand behind a podium and spew lie after lie about his own campaign statements, while having a majority of the country actually believing that he 'won' the debate. He ran away from his own campaign statements on almost every single issue that the President called him on. Romney, has now changed his positions so many times, that I have lost track of them all - yet, the majority of people are so completely clueless about his actual stance on the issues, that they confused his animated prose with actually telling the truth about his own policy statements!

He flip-flopped his position on Social Security and Health Care, yet never paid the price for doing it. In fact, people seem to actually have awarded him for doing it! It mind-blowing that this man can say one thing in front of one group of people, and then change his own policy statements multiple times in broad daylight, and The People never seem to hold him accountable for doing it. He's been talking about privatizing Social Security for eons, only to alter his position depending on which group of people he happens to be standing in front of at the time he makes his statements. He flat out lied in Prime Time tonight, on the matter of Repealing Obamacare and he blew right straight through the statement made by the President, that he was going to Repeal Obamacare, and somehow ended up his statement claiming that the Massachusetts model was the right model for the country!

He then looked the camera in the lens and flat out lied to the American People by saying that he was not going to raise taxes on either the Middle Class, or the Wealthy, while at the very same time putting forth a "revenue neutral" balanced budget that included no cuts in Medicare! When President Obama, pointed out the fact that there was no study in existence that concluded Romney's plan was even remotely possible without either drastic cuts in Medicare and other social programs, or raising taxes somewhere along the way, Romney, simply blew right past that and pivoted to lowering the effective tax rate on corporations as a method for increasing jobs in the economy.

This guy flipped and flopped his way through the entire night, did so passionately and with a high degree of verbal expression and somehow, despite that he was contradicting nearly every single campaign trail statement that he's ever made on Social Security, Healthcare and Taxes, seemed to garner enough people who felt that doing so, was enough to win the debate.

How can someone win a debate, when all they've done is contradict virtually everything they've said in the past?

 

[Monserrat]

Honestly, I don't understand that at all. I saw nothing from Romney that in any way struck me as loud or obnoxious. I thought both of them came off as cool, reasonable, intelligent men. I didn't even see that classic Obama arrogance I was expecting.

Really? The entire debate he was talking over the moderator and interrupting Obama. At one point he told Lehrer he wasn't going to answer his question because he was going to first talk about something else. That's not how you comport yourself in a presidential debate (or any structured debate for that matter). It was horrendous, the answers for the most part were non-specific (from both candidates) and the only redeeming quality of the debate was the fact that in a poorly moderated forum Obama was able to keep his cool by remaining calm, composed and by thinking first before just talking over everyone else.

They were suppose to be discussing domestic issues, they barely tipped the surface because Romney kept rambling on and on and on and Lehrer had no control over it.

 

[PW4000]

I think he seemed calm cool and collected. Romney came off as loud and obnoxious to me. As someone who spends a lot of time quietly analyzing situations I can relate to Obama's performance...maybe that's why I'm one of the few people who leaned more towards Obama after the debate.

I wonder how many people actually understood what the night was all about. You may be leaning more towards Obama, but the majority of people polled by these "news organizations" (flash polling) seem to be either utterly confused people, or they simply do not understand what a Presidential Debate actually means. You got it - but the majority in America seem to not get it.

If you take the flash poll numbers for granted, then something is clearly wrong with the people having been polled. If they watched the same debate that you watched tonight, then how can these same people that seem to believe Romney won the debate, reconcile his flip-flopping statements on Social Security? Or, better yet, his flip-flopping on Healthcare, or his outright fraudulent statements about Taxes and a Revenue Neutral Budgets?

I mean, my jaw hit the floor when he admitted in prime time, that he was not going to raise taxes on anybody - not the middle class - not the wealthy. Yet, he was at he very same time, going to maintain Medicare payments on behalf of Medicare recipients -AND- reduce government spending! LOL! Where does he get the money to do this? How does he pull that rabbit out of the hat? He never once gave any clue about where he would cut spending, whatsoever! Yet, somehow, this empty statement racked-up huge support from those people having been polled? It makes no sense. Either these people don't have a clue about what "revenue neutral" means, or these people are fictitious and these polls are bogus.

Another example is this - Romney, gave nothing in terms of a substantive answer to the question of what he would do specifically to replace Obamacare. He simply stated that the "Massachusetts model was the right model for the country." Well, what the heck is the "Massachusetts model" if not the Obamacare Model?

He then talked about Simpson/Bowles. This man stood in front of America on debate night and said that the President "should have taken" Simpson/Bowles. Yet, Romney, has been out on the campaign trail telling people that he though Simpson/Bowles was "bad policy." I mean, seriously. How many times and on how many issues will Romney, get a pass on saying one thing at one moment, only to contradict himself at a later time.

This is all Romney, did tonight - contradict previous statements he's made at different times during his campaign. How the heck can you debate a guy like that! When you nail him on something that he's been saying for months, he simply says: "No. I never said that." And, then he moves on to the next installment of the very same thing that he's been saying all along.

The ONLY way to effectively debate against a guy like that, is to show him making one position statement and then flipping into another position statement at different times. Otherwise, he gets away with simply saying: "No. I never said that."

 

[Loki97]

Really? The entire debate he was talking over the moderator and interrupting Obama. At one point he told Lehrer he wasn't going to answer his question because he was going to first talk about something else. That's not how you comport yourself in a presidential debate (or any structured debate for that matter). It was horrendous, the answers for the most part were non-specific (from both candidates) and the only redeeming quality of the debate was the fact that in a poorly moderated forum Obama was able to keep his cool by remaining calm, composed and by thinking first before just talking over everyone else.

They were suppose to be discussing domestic issues, they barely tipped the surface because Romney kept rambling on and on and on and Lehrer had no control over it.

I don't even know why they have a "format" when the moderator can't make them stick to it even through the first segment. I agree that Romney came off as thinking the rules didn't apply to him. You can certainly see his corporate background has led him to believe he is top dog at all times. He also seemed to be arrogantly smirking much of the time Obama was speaking. I really don't see this widespread opinion that it was much more than a draw. I think Obama was in too defensive a posture but it's hard to go on offense when the opponent either won't say what his alternative is or blatantly lies about his previous statements. I seriously doubt this is going to influence anyone who hasn't already chosen their candidate. Maybe the networks are touting Romneys performance so people will still tune in for the other debates.

 

[PW4000]

More Romney Lies:


Clearly, the question about Mitt Romney, is not whether or not you like him; how much money he might have made on a 2011 tax return; how much he gave to charity that same year; whether or not you like his smile or don't like his smile; the essential question about Mitt Romney, is whether or not he's telling the truth whenever he opens his mouth.

He did the same thing in the debate tonight and he's actually being rewarded for it. So, in essence, the American People gave the debate to the guy who alters his position ever 10.5 minutes on just about every subject where he made a previous statement to the contrary.

 

[Turin]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

Actually he did not lose. If the contest was about who was most authoritarian, smirky and short on facts yet big on bravado ... Romeny won hands down.

Obama is not a fool. I suspect he intentionally let Romney go rampant with obvious deception to circle around as Romeny is the blowhard who will say anything to win and even lie.

Seriously .... the 700+ billion cut from medicare was the exact number that was taken from bottom line profiteering to protect citizens like me to continue covering their families with private insurance. Romney is not senile and he knows that number is not shaved from medicare as he smirked and bellowed out in the debate ... I suspect Obama was giving Romney rope to hang himself.

Not one economist or says Romney has any chance of cutting the deficit and giving the tax breaks he promises.

Fact check is blowing up right at this moment with Romney's deceptions spewed during the debate.

yes ... if there was not a nagging detail like facts and truth Romney won ... or possibly supplied the October surprise on himself that will hang him.

I agree Romney came off more smirky and full of hot air so in that sense he did win. He is still a loser. Americans are not that stupid and factcheck and Obama will have a field day with Romney's stats and facts. I was able to call BS on most of them. I am sure I missed a few.

I do not think Obama got a spa day like Romney and botox fillers and hair color touch up ... or had the lack of character to go spewing **** to the American people.

Romney set the stage for himself as the guy who will say or do anything to win and not consider reality of "We the People".

I believe Obama was correct to speak to the American people and not waste his two minutes correcting baseless assertions and deceptive numbers spewed by Mitt.

 

[marsden]

I'm still a bit baffled by tonight's debate. The two most likely scenarios I've concluded is that he was playing it soft and conservative saving the fire for later debates but maybe went too far, or he is in a bad place mentally and just flopped it big time. He seemed exhausted, muted, almost depressed.

What do you guys think?

I think B.O. came to the realization the big lies he tells on the stump that get big ovations not only weren't going to work when Romney is right there to dispute them, but those lies were going to disappear for everyone in his campaign because they've been dispelled before the eyes of the public and the fawning media that has always been in the tank for him.

He saw a vision of the future and that vision showed him moving out of the White House shortly after November 6th.

This made him very depressed.

 

[PW4000]

This is the problem I have with Mitt Romney:

"The bail-outs were a mistake."
[video=youtube;WTLWI3wGvJ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=WTLWI3wGvJ4&NR=1[/video]


"I don't call it a bail-out, I call it a rescue plan."

------------------------


These two videos are symbolic of Mitt Romney, as a Political Creature who will say anything to get votes. You can go down the list of Romney'isms and find a myriad number of contradictions in what Romney, says one day in front of one camera, and then says on another day, in front of a completely different camera.

On Fox News (his right wing base), he says that the bail-outs were a mistake. On CNN (more independents), he says that bail-outs were a rescue plan. The debate tonight was absolutely no different. He pulled the same stunts with Social Security, Healthcare and Taxes. Yet, the country rewarded him tonight by declaring him the "winner" of the debates.

It is unreal, that somebody can be this intentionally evasive, this openly deceptive and present this much contradiction in broad daylight and STILL get rewarded by the American People.

 

[PW4000]

He saw a vision of the future and that vision showed him moving out of the White House shortly after November 6th.

Did that vision also include Mitt Romney's countless number of contradictory statements in broad daylight? Such as: "The bail-outs were a mistake" - to CNN. Followed by: "I don't call it a bail-out, I call it a rescue plan" - to Fox News?

How does Romney, continually get away with this kind of lying through his teeth and at what point will all of his contradictions catch-up with him?

 

[Panopticon]

he gets away with it because to a lot of americans, a lying white guy beats any black guy any day of the week

 

[PW4000]

And, just like clockwork, Mitt Romney, once again parses his words by basically adopting a dual-party message. This time, he changes his tune to conclude that the "bail-outs" were "ok," and that his call for having GM go into "bankruptcy" was also "ok":




Ok, so this guy flips around and changes his tune whenever you stick a new camera and a new microphone in his face - yet - he somehow "won" the debates? I don't get it. How could any American not be aware of this man's tactics by now? How is it possible that people still don't understand that Mitt, will basically say anything to get elected, even when what he says contradicts his own prior statements?

Folks, this is not just one or two contradictory statements. This is several YEARS of contradictory statements coming from Mitt. He does this kind of thing with regularity and it almost seems pathological at this point. And, the scariest (craziest) part of all, is that when you catch him telling a lie, or being recursive in his statements (changing his story), that he doesn't even have the basic decency to accept his prior statement as being in error. That's pathological. Anyway you slice it - that's a classic pathological profile.

 

[clownboy]

What do I think?

I think the collective lack of education on how our government works at the Federal level and how our economy works on a National level, causes people to not understand what "winning" a "debate" truly means.
...

How can someone win a debate, when all they've done is contradict virtually everything they've said in the past?

If the majority of the people watching and hearing about the debate believe he won - then he won. That's how it works. No matter your perceived conceptions about flip flops or inaccuracies.

Both are playing to the same audience, a national audience. Romney out-performed Obama in this debate. We'll see what's to come.

And no, I don't think Obama "lost" intentionally. I think he and his people drank their own koolaid and he was expecting a presidential cake walk.

 

[marsden]

Obama will have to go to Kenya and explain to his half brother why he couldn't help him move from his mud hut. When Dinesh D'Souza got a call from George Obama asking for money to help get his son medical care he asked Obama if there wasn't anyone else he ould ask. He said, "no."

So, you tell us how great a guy Obama is.

 

[Panopticon]

Ill rely on your racism instead, Im sure thats reliable

 

[Sarcogito]

How can someone win a debate, when all they've done is contradict virtually everything they've said in the past?

We aren't talking about your high school or college debate club with experienced judges. We are talking about voters. If the majority of voters think you won the debate, you won the debate. It doesn't matter what their reasons are.

 

[marsden]

No racism. He is incompetent and he breaks the law when he feels like it. There are so many reasons to want him gone that you will think it is racism because you aren't being told the truth by the Lame Stream Media.