Obama v Romney 1st debate - who won ?

I sat and watched the first debate a couple of nights ago having missed it live choosing to attend a Jungian lecture on fairy tales instead. I knew that I would score Obama higher than independents as I support his policies from Wall Street regulations through Health Care. I have been impressed that he has taken personal responsibility for the conduct of the various clandestine military operations the US is conducting. I believe the 90 billion that his administration has given in tax cuts to green energy development is the right move.

Watching him, knowing that he was widely derided for his performance, I saw a careful man, firm in his convictions and obviously carrying the full burden of his office.

Mr Romney came off as confident sales manager. I watched him in the republican debates and recall what he said on those stages. I believe that he would bring all his attention to the job if he got it. But he really will say anything to get elected. He obviously wants the job but does not come across as genuine when he says he wants to make our lives better. It is very difficult to discern his real motivation.
 
Stu said:
I believe the 90 billion that his administration has given in tax cuts to green energy development is the right move.
Click to expand...

Saying no the oil pipeline from Canada was an extremely ballsy move-- I wish that we had that kind of leadership.
 
There should be a Romney Obama ticket. Second seat for Joe and his protégé Paul.

Paul just looked over at Joe as he delivered each blow.
Smack me again daddy. Love me the way you do.

With a cool swift hand, Joe taught his little child to pay attention.
Be seen, not heard. Now shut up and get out of here.

Respect.

It’s all about respect.
Respect your elders.
We can change the world you know; together we can. Hope and Change.

And with my hand in yours, we will march as brothers.
We are brothers.
United by our cause.
To boldly go where no one has gone before.

Now here, hold this.
I have to pee.
 
Biden came off to me as an abusive grandfather who felt he could lash out at will at his far brighter grandson. Biden couldn't compete on an intellectual basis with Ryan so he went into angry Alzheimer's mode. I thought it was ugly. It seems that many Democrats thought Obama lost to Romney because Romney was more abusive. So they sent Biden out to be as abusive as possible. But Romney won on the sophistication of his ideas. It's true that many leftists aren't open to the idea that their ideas are tired, and have never worked, and only want to hear them repeated again and again. They can move to North Korea. For the rest of us, the idea of a free market is still important, as is the free exchange of ideas, and free blueberries.
 
At least Biden didn't shoot anyone. Lets not forget the last vp.
 
problemz said:
Biden came off to me as an abusive grandfather who felt he could lash out at will at his far brighter grandson. Biden couldn't compete on an intellectual basis with Ryan so he went into angry Alzheimer's mode. I thought it was ugly. It seems that many Democrats thought Obama lost to Romney because Romney was more abusive. So they sent Biden out to be as abusive as possible. But Romney won on the sophistication of his ideas. It's true that many leftists aren't open to the idea that their ideas are tired, and have never worked, and only want to hear them repeated again and again. They can move to North Korea. For the rest of us, the idea of a free market is still important, as is the free exchange of ideas, and free blueberries.
Click to expand...

It's sad. At some point everyone agrees.
We all think murder is bad. I'm making an assumption, but feel good about it.
Yet somehow we are far away from that now.
 
The GOP is running on the idea that only they can reduce the deficit. Romney claims that by lowering the tax rates he will bring in more revenue because more people are working. What if he lowers the rates but unemployment remains anemic? What would a Republican government do in that case?

I think it is pointless to be angry about The VP. Mr Ryan got his points across quite well.

I am sick to my stomach that the house republicans did not make a deficit reduction agreement with dems. It seems they are playing the prisoners delema game and taking the "always say no" position.

Romney is right about being able to work across party lines because the Dems will work with the GOP where the GOP never would.
 
I would really appreciate hearing a detailed plan, or at least a few graphs. Neither side has provided anything of the sort as far as I know. Econ 101 is left by the wayside as well.
 
Stu said:
The GOP is running on the idea that only they can reduce the deficit. Romney claims that by lowering the tax rates he will bring in more revenue because more people are working. What if he lowers the rates but unemployment remains anemic? What would a Republican government do in that case?

I think it is pointless to be angry about The VP. Mr Ryan got his points across quite well.

I am sick to my stomach that the house republicans did not make a deficit reduction agreement with dems. It seems they are playing the prisoners delema game and taking the "always say no" position.

Romney is right about being able to work across party lines because the Dems will work with the GOP where the GOP never would.
Click to expand...

Good points.
Funny thing is everyone forgets why Obama was voted in, in the first place.
Every not GW loving person hated the conservative movement at the time.
The conservatives today don't seem to have a clue why the left voted the way they did, and are using ideas the left hated then to promote Romney. Just not winning any new votes IMO.

There were failed policies for 8 years.
Regardless of how you feel about the last four, we need new ideas and Romney isn't it.
 
Stu said:
Romney is right about being able to work across party lines because the Dems will work with the GOP where the GOP never would.
Click to expand...

So it's OK to be a jackass since it allows you to communicate with other jackasses on their level? Why not vote all the jackasses out of office from the start and not worry about any of it?
 
problemz said:
Biden came off to me as an abusive grandfather who felt he could lash out at will at his far brighter grandson. Biden couldn't compete on an intellectual basis with Ryan so he went into angry Alzheimer's mode. I thought it was ugly. It seems that many Democrats thought Obama lost to Romney because Romney was more abusive. So they sent Biden out to be as abusive as possible. But Romney won on the sophistication of his ideas. It's true that many leftists aren't open to the idea that their ideas are tired, and have never worked, and only want to hear them repeated again and again. They can move to North Korea. For the rest of us, the idea of a free market is still important, as is the free exchange of ideas, and free blueberries.
Click to expand...

Says the guy who's party featured an old man suffering a psychotic breakdown, bitching to an empty chair... yep, that's real class for ya. So is changing every detail of your political stance with every speech you give, no matter who well recorded the opposite view has been - unless he now denies he was even governor of Massachusetts or ever involved with Bain.

No one knows exactly what a politician goes through when they're in office, so catching one in a lie is usual. Seeing two of them who aren't even in the office yet, lie at the rate these two have is shameful and only foreshadows what their term would look like (note the singular, not plural). Actually admitting to liking the guys who have the balls to stand in front of millions of people and burst out a chain of lies at the rate of a Tommy Gun, says anything anyone would ever need to know about you personally.

It's also funny that you think calling someone a "leftist" is a bad thing. Their practices have A) never been tried to their full potential and B) when they have been tried, work exceedingly well. Go and ask someone from Norway what they think of their government, for example. Those damn "Leftists" with their universal healthcare, public education systems, affordable tuition, alternative energy, scientific advancements, four day work weeks, job benefits and economies that allow them to tour the US for weeks on end and view us struggling citizens with the same wonder and curiosity we would the "Prehistoric Man" exhibit at the Museum of Natural History. The f** is wrong with them for wanting to destroy our way of life for theirs!?
 
I don't understand why people keep saying they want more regulation in the stock market. Nobody forces you to invest your money in these companies. If you don't trust a company and it's management then simply don't invest in it. If more people were diligent about their investments then the hedgy goons and CEO's wouldn't be able to rob people blind but people just throw their money in a 401k and have no idea who they are investing in. The people on Wall Street have no sympathy for the 99% because they know it's 100% their fault for not watching their money. Nobody watches your money like you. If you have money in the market you NEED to understand fundamental analysis. If you don't understand the fundamentals of a company then you're a fool for giving them your money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
chulo said:
I don't understand why people keep saying they want more regulation in the stock market. Nobody forces you to invest your money in these companies. If you don't trust a company and it's management then simply don't invest in it. If more people were diligent about their investments then the hedgy goons and CEO's wouldn't be able to rob people blind but people just throw their money in a 401k and have no idea who they are investing in. The people on Wall Street have no sympathy for the 99% because they know it's 100% their fault for not watching their money. Nobody watches your money like you. If you have money in the market you NEED to understand fundamental analysis. If you don't understand the fundamentals of a company then you're a fool for giving them your money.
Click to expand...

People are so stupid that they will regulate the stock market until it is no longer profitable. Luckily they will have scapegoats in the form of politicians who will get the blame until the next news sound byte happens. Then the people will accept it and forget about it because Honey Boo Boo is on.
 
UBERROGO said:
People are so stupid that they will regulate the stock market until it is no longer profitable. Luckily they will have scapegoats in the form of politicians who will get the blame until the next news sound byte happens. Then the people will accept it and forget about it because Honey Boo Boo is on.
Click to expand...

I see it like this. I'm not gonna sugar coat it. Obama wants to reward the people who made bad decisions and punish the people who made good decisions. But... and this is big butt... most of the people who made bad decisions don't have a good education so it's not all their fault, it's the systems fault too. So in a way he's not rewarding them, he's just having mercy on them which is pretty nice of him. The same thing with the stock market, people are taught to be intimidated by it and so they don't educate themselves about it. But at the same time they are expected to put their hard earned money into it and they do so without thinking.
 
chulo said:
I see it like this. I'm not gonna sugar coat it. Obama wants to reward the people who made bad decisions and punish the people who made good decisions.
Click to expand...

You don't have to be an idiot to convince yourself that something you desperately want to believe is true… and if you're going to put forward a lot of bailouts that will potentially signal zero accountability for the banks, you're going to need to make sure the wrong people don't run with it.
 
Apone said:
You don't have to be an idiot to convince yourself that something you desperately want to believe is true… and if you're going to put forward a lot of bailouts that will potentially signal zero accountability for the banks, you're going to need to make sure the wrong people don't run with it.
Click to expand...

Yes he did reward the banks too. But I was talking about the people who bought homes they couldn't afford. By letting them refinance cheaply, keeping interest rates low, QE1, QE2, "Operation twist", and a probably QE3. He is rewarding them too because he's inflating the debt away. He's also punishing the people who saved cash for years.
 
chulo said:
I don't understand why people keep saying they want more regulation in the stock market. Nobody forces you to invest your money in these companies. If you don't trust a company and it's management then simply don't invest in it. If more people were diligent about their investments then the hedgy goons and CEO's wouldn't be able to rob people blind but people just throw their money in a 401k and have no idea who they are investing in. The people on Wall Street have no sympathy for the 99% because they know it's 100% their fault for not watching their money. Nobody watches your money like you. If you have money in the market you NEED to understand fundamental analysis. If you don't understand the fundamentals of a company then you're a fool for giving them your money.
Click to expand...

Is agree, except people don't know to expect they are gambling. People are just trying to live their lives; do all the things they do right. Have kids, believe in god, give the homeless guy a dollar and feel good about it. Recycle.

They went to school for majors in marketing, social science, or poly sic. Maybe the are liberal arts and have no clue about the stock market.

BUT!! Social Security won't be there for you. It's 6.75 percent (I think) of your paycheck. You foam at the mouth thinking you could use the money. You know to feed your kid. And IT WON'T BE THERE FOR YOU!! So you slave at funding a 401k. You hear things about start young, you need to save for retirement. You have no idea why a company is better than another, so you follow what your job offers and you diversify, because every idiot talks about diversifying and how stupid you are if you don't. So you pick three funds and you think you are doing the things you do right.

Then someone like you comes along and blames them for trying their best.
But no you need to buy books and read all night about investing and how to pick winners. But really guy. I had a hunch and bought a bunch of apple. It's more than doubled. But I've made huge mistakes too. So you tell me. What's a good investment. Where's the next winner. Cause I want to take my .49 and that's all I have and I want to do the right things and save for retirement. You know?? But everyone seems like they are selling something and I can't afford to make mistakes. This is all I have. But social security WON'T BE THERE!! So I have to take care of my family. I need to invest. But in what. So I call my holding company, Schwab and talk to those idiots. I know the last time they fucked me hard, but they didn't mean it.
I'm sure the next investing idea they have is better. I mean I don't know more than they do. I gotta get back to work moving the small thing over by the big ones and have to pick my kids up after school, but I'll watch Cramer when I get home. I just like that guy. He'll help me. I follow his investments. I lost money the last time, but he can't be right all the time. I'm sure this time it will be a winner. I mean I could just not do anything, but you're not saving for retirement????

Just not looking like I can take care of myself. Just gonna have to work longer I guess. I hears they are laying people off. Jerry was 57. I heard he shot himself after. Man I hope thats not me. Bless the American Dream.
Dumb ass idiots. IMHO.




Just tell them it's a casino and you are gambling. Then if they still give you their money, then you can call them what you want. But if you let your broker place your order first before he places everyone else and you miss out, it not because that should be illegal, it's because you think you have friends in people that laugh at your stupid ass.
 
Stu said:
Romney is right about being able to work across party lines because the Dems will work with the GOP where the GOP never would.
Click to expand...

If it should come to pass that Romney is President, and the Dems control the Senate, I can see the Dems playing payback time and assuming the role of being the party of no.
 
There is a commonly held belief that the parties behave the same way. But given the nature of the Democratic party, which includes moderates and conservatives, a Democratic member of congress is less inclined to be an obstructionist because it makes it difficult to win elections. Whereas in the GOP promises of never compromising win elections.

That said the Dems in the senate will use every tick they can to protect Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare.
 
Stu said:
There is a commonly held belief that the parties behave the same way. But given the nature of the Democratic party, which includes moderates and conservatives, a Democratic member of congress is less inclined to be an obstructionist because it makes it difficult to win elections. Whereas in the GOP promises of never compromising win elections.
Click to expand...

There is truth in that.
The Republican party has pretty much been hijacked by the extreme ideologues, and is a mere shadow of it's former self.
Did you know that back in 1962 when JFK (a Democrat) wanted to lower the top marginal tax rate from 91% to 65% it was the Republicans that opposed it? Saying the country couldn't afford such a tax cut. And we weren't running huge deficits then.

Can you imagine. At one time some people paid a tax rate of 91%? And still managed to become stinking rich!
Hmmm.... methinks the wealthy doth protest too much.

I'm seriously beginning to think I will vote for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian party.

The 2 major parties. F'-em all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top