The Town Hall Debate Thread...for comment

You and I saw the same debate then. Unlike some of my Liberal sides myopic or drug induced, euphoric crowd.

 

ARE you??? What was he talking about when he started his speech? THE FIRST 9/11. His mention of the word "terror" was in reference to that. BUT, if this is what you all want to claim....then it brings into question....why was it then that he sent Rice out to 5 Sunday political shows to say it was defintely a result of a mob over the video? Also brings into question why the president then 10 days later went before the United Nations and blamed the video several times?

IF that is the case Dems and the Obama administration are now trying to make......then they have a WHOLE LOT more explaining to do as to why they then tried to LIE to the American people and to the World about the cause of what happened.

 

Everyone needs to dig further into those polls. Romney won the CNN poll on the economy, on healthcare, and jobs. And he won with way over 50% on each one. The overall that Obama won sounded a bit like a sympathy vote to me.....and they were both in the 40's. That says to me many people saw the overall debate as kind of a draw, simply giving Obama credit for doing better than the lst debate. But again......dig deeper. That's where the really important stuff is.

 

Really? Seems Romney didn't answer most questions. He'd be asked a question, spend 90% of the time talking about Obama, then barely talk about what he would do, and when he did it was something vague like "I have a plan" to fix (fill in the blank). Lots of plans with no details.

When asked about the tax deductions, he completely dodged her question and for the middle class he throws out the claim that he will allow them to deduct up to some number. He says "let's pick a number, lets say its $25,000". Pick a number??? It's your plan...the plan where you claim the math all works out, yet you don't even know the number??? What is the number???

And his claim that he'd help the middle class by not taxing interest income and capital gains? Most middle class people aren't living off interest/capital gains...most don't have any of that type of income. This is how out of touch he is.

 

Its right there in the transcripts you posted. I put it in bold just in your quote, and in Romney's claim below from the debate. Here is Romney's claim from the debate:

ROMNEY: I think (it's) interesting the president just said something which -- which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.

 

Romney says wants to lower the tax on the middle class but will NOT change the 60% the rich pay...

so what is he gonna do then take from some in the middle class and give to others in the middle class?

you can't keep the rich paying exactly the same percent of total tax collected, while saying your lowering the tax on the middle class

I hope i am being clear, cause that is just not mathematically possible

if the rich are still paying 60%, then that means the working class is still paying 40%, simple as that


.

 

I bet he plans on getting rid of the Earned Income Tax Credit. That would not be considered raising taxes but getting rid of a loophole or deduction. He can't say what he's going to do because it'll cost him more of the poor vote.

 

sure your right, to them letting a tax cut end is not raising taxes when it's the middle class, but try to let the temporary Bush tax cuts for the rich end and all of a sudden that IS raising taxes to them

 

A CBS snap poll among undecided voters has given a slight advantage to President Obama in this debate, 37 percent to 30 percent:http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50133279n&tag=api

And a CNN snap poll of "voters" (with no identifying modifier placed befor the noun) was not especially kind to Gov. Romney: It showed President Obama as the winner, 46 percent to 39 percent: CNN Poll: Nearly half say Obama won showdown – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

On the other hand, a focus group in the battleground state of Nevada, conducted by Frank Luntz, produced a startlingly different result:

Again, the link: Luntz Focus Group Of Mostly Former Obama Voters Switch To Romney | RealClearPolitics

In the end, I would really place much more emphasis upon the undecided voters; especially undecided voters who had previously supported then-Sen. Obama. (The one downside, of course, is that this is from a quite small sample.)

 

Ive just watched Frank Luntzs trickery on Fox. Do you actually believe this crap?

His 'previous Obama' supporters, were all sitting in the back. The comments you quoted from the group were all from the front row, mostly Romney supporters.

This simple trickery is the sort of thing Americans, ie you, fall for all the time.....am I right?

 

He clearly lost the first debate and his numbers plummented. He HAD to win last night and do so decisively, he did not even with the moderators assistance.

No he is not.

You must have missed the Lutz group last night, another huge shift towards Romney. Romney did well inspite of a moderator doing her best to give the edge to Obama. The question about how Romney saw himself different from Bush????? Are you kidding? Talk about a setup. Where was the then the question to Obama about how he was different from Jimmy Carter?

And not one question on Obamacare.............his signiture accomplishment and she asked him NOTHING about it.

 

The comments came from all over the group, several of those who are now supporting Romeny were in the back including the most articulate of them all the gentleman in the upper right corner.

 

Get this. The media pretty much agrees, as do most of us here, that Obama took last night's debate.

But on FOX's website, their "unscientific" poll shows Mitt took it by over 85%. Is that funny or what?

Just goes to show ya about those kinda people. They hear and see what they want to hear and see. Too funny.

 

no, the fox thing is the joke

 

So are the sheeple who get their feed from FOX. A mind is such a terrible thing to waste.

 

The media who's reporters were cheering Obama in the press room during the debate?

The media is all over the place.

It is a voluntary poll one must find on their website to participate. Since most Democrats and liberals would not go there of course the numbers are going to be in Romney's favor. If you did the same thing on MSNBC it would most likely give the same results in Obama's favor.

Obama needed to win BIG TIME last night, he didn't. And his main points are now being refuted in all the media.

 

The snap polls seem to be calling it a tie but the focus groups all give it to Romney so all told a good day for ending the regime.

 

Nothing new from Obama. More of the same. I wish he would get some facts straight. It is impossible to give a 5 trillion dollar tax cut to the rich. It's not mathematically possible. We have not created 5.2 million jobs. We have a net job loss since he took office. He did not call Libya a terrorist attack as both he and Crowley (obviously sided with Obama) had said. It took two weeks to admit it, and there are still some in the Administration talking about the (*)(*)(*)(*) video. Obama will continue his lies until the election. Most folks don't fact check him. Wake up People!

 

Really? Were you hoping everyone would be too lazy or stupid to read that far or what?

 

Please show me where Obama specifically called the attack on Benghazi terrorism. What I see there is a blanket statement by Obama saying that no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of the nation, that is correct... now on to Benghazi please....

 

It's that part that is big, bold, and underlined.

It's pretty obvious what's being referred to... unless you're a partisan hack I suppose.

 

Careful. they're going to start calling you a liberal soon. That's what they do to all moderate conservatives.

 

Then look up the lefts MSNBC group...same result

 

Candy Crowley misled the public when she intervened on Obama's behalf during the following exchange and she later admitted that she made a factual mistake and Romney was right about Obama's initial refusal to call it an act of terror. She also asked Romney tough follow-up questions to discredit him and her moderation was one-sided.

ROMNEY: I think (it's) interesting the president just said something which -- which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.

OBAMA: That's what I said.

ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you're saying?

OBAMA: Please proceed governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It -- it -- it -- he did in fact, sir ... call it an act of terror.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/16/fact-check-did-obama-really-call-consulate-attack-in-libya-act-terror/

 

Your initial statement misled Crowley's correction. She wasn't saying Romney was right that Obama never said "act of terror"...because he did say it in that Sept 12 speech. After the debate, she was saying that Romney's broader point was right that it took two weeks for officials to say more definitively that the attack was more than an out-of-control protest. Here is her exact quote from the debate, since you ended it short to make it look like she was on Obama's side:

CROWLEY: "He -- he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that."


Now, regarding this idea that Obama saying "acts of terror" wasn't referring to this Benghazi attack is ridiculous. If Obama didn't want this associated with terrorism, then why would he use that phrase in a speech discussing that attack? Obama uses the word terrorism. He believes it exists. This notion that he avoids the word is a cheap political scare tactic.