Support NeoGAF

[Steelrain]

So Veep debate is going to be a disaster, and falls right into Mitt's plan:

Obama "lost" because he wasn't as aggressive and didn't call Mitt out on his bullshit. So what's the obvious over-correction? Come out swinging in the next debate... but that falls on Biden. Can you imagine Biden in full-on unfiltered attack mode?

So Team Obama is left with two options 1) repeat the first debate, and keep Biden on a leash, reinforcing the narrative from tonight or 2) let Biden roam free, risking dozens of potentially gigantic gaffes.

blarargh

Ryan also has to go out there and explain why he and his running mate decided to ditch their previous policy 5 weeks before the election and make it seem like it was not a purely political move. Good luck to him.

no because I'm not a biased bitch

lol you might be another b-word though.

 

[Particle Physicist]

So I'm watching the Erin Burnett thing... 15 said Romney was the winner, 5 said Obama was the winner and then 8 switched from Romney to Obama and 8 switched from Obama to Romney? The fuck?

So 3 people were like, man, Romney really won that debate, I better vote Obama.

Huh?

Spoiler

I know it's not necessarily the same people, I'm just saying... shit is weird as fuck

Winning a debate doesn't mean you won on substance, in fact, many professional debaters win debates by basically speed talking and cramming so much shit into their allotted time that it makes it difficult for the opponent to respond (not even kidding, look up some videos). I think Romney won the debate, but he also infuriated me with how little he went into detail, especially when directly asked. He completely avoided doing so. So you can win the debate, but not necessarily win the votes.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Progressives who vote for a republican because their candidates aren't liberal enough baffle me.

"I don't get exactly what I want so I'm going to vote for someone who is against everything I believe in" smart plan!

 

[el retorno]

Wow. CNN is showing a repeat of the debate. Obama has the women vote. The always are lower than the men for romney and higher for Obama.

 

[IJoel]

You could taste Obama's exhaustion when he realized (sometime around the 25 minute mark) that Romney's plan was to simply pretend all of the things he said or are in his platform don't exist.

Like, how do you prepare for that. Do you sit there and have a contingency plan for if your opponent is simply making things up as he goes?

Also, if I were Obama, I would have worked PBS or Sesame Street into every answer. Mitt gave Obama WEAK SPOT for MASSIVE DAMAGE within 20 seconds of opening his mouth, and Obama never capitalized. Seriously, that comment could be worked into every topic they discussed tonight, it was instantly a social media favorite, and... nothing.

I agree with this so much. Not only that, but the fact that Romney hasn't given any details for his planned policies, meant that he could make up stuff on the spot. Any big benefits from Obama's policies that were mentioned, Romney would say he'd incorporate (of course without indicating how he'd pay for it).

On the other hand, I think Obama wasn't as smooth in his delivery as he could've been.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

Don't be affected by these guys. Undecided means you know both candidates are full of shit and the debates actually mean nothing in terms of what they will actually do as president.

Come on, you know that's not true.

At the very least, THE VERY FUCKING LEAST, the President picks Supreme Court Justices and has veto power, or the threat thereof. The latter is important in keeping the opposition party in check. So if you (rightfully) believe that the PotUS has little real power, you still have to consider that a Democrat President is a rubber stamp for Democrat bills, and vice versa.

 

[pargonta]

no because I'm not a biased bitch

sounds good, lol.

edit: uh, whoops. i hope i didn't do that.
i actually did want to hear what the reasoning was. sorry bud.

 

[Owzers]

I did like Obama calling Romney out on not giving details on what he was going to replace things with.

If nothing else, the superPACs are going to have a field day.

Vouchers. Portman from Ohio saying the voucher talk was a good thing for Romney since it informed people on it. Sure. Surrrrrrrrrre.

 

[teh_pwn]

He was too busy stuttering. Seriously, his performance tonight was sub-par.

Debate Obama has always done this. He only speaks quickly and fluently during speeches. He's a smart guy, but not a genius...so thinking while he talks can make things choppy.

 

[Kunan]

Romney looked more comfortable, but just colorfully said nothing about his plans to backup his cuts as usual. Also, as is natural with him, he flip-flopped on everything he's said in his campaign.

 

[flippymittens]

Progressives who vote for a republican because their candidates aren't liberal enough baffle me.

"I don't get exactly what I want so I'm going to vote for someone who is against everything I believe in" smart plan!

Well it is mainly because under a Republican progressive beliefs would be spread. I mean it is scary that so many Democrats support drone strikes and keeping gitmo open.

Under a hypothetical President Romney, progressives would be able to mobilize and spread their beliefs more effectively.

 

[Piano]

Damn, I was at work. But it sounds like Romney may have actually breathed life into his campaign with this one?
That's the word on a few news websitez.

 

[RDreamer]

President Obama is detrimental to progressives imo.

You're a progressive and yet you think hopefully Mitt can have a better debate next time, too? You think Obama's a detriment to progressives? As much as I agree with some of the things you bring up, this is silly as hell.

You know what a detriment to progressives is?

The repeal of Obamacare, pushing millions into not having health care.
The continuing regression of the tax code that will happen under Romney.
Selection of right win supreme court judges, ones that very well might want to overturn Roe v Wade, and even if such an extreme case doesn't happen, we will have a more right wing court for years into the future, then
The voucherization of medicare
Less investment into green energy
and on and on

And last, but almost biggest in my mind: the biggest detriment to progressives is the fact that if Romney wins this it means that the strategy of obstructionism that the Republicans put on the very day Obama won office is a winning strategy. You've just supported obstructionism, congrats.

 

[Averon]

So Veep debate is going to be a disaster, and falls right into Mitt's plan:

Obama "lost" because he wasn't as aggressive and didn't call Mitt out on his bullshit. So what's the obvious over-correction? Come out swinging in the next debate... but that falls on Biden. Can you imagine Biden in full-on unfiltered attack mode?

So Team Obama is left with two options 1) repeat the first debate, and keep Biden on a leash, reinforcing the narrative from tonight or 2) let Biden roam free, risking dozens of potentially gigantic gaffes.

blarargh

No one cares about the VP debate.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Media: we want an honest substantive debate on the issues.

After the debate:

Obama was too wonkish.

 

[deviljho]

Damn, I was at work. But it sounds like Romney may have actually breathed life into his campaign with this one?
That's the word on a few news websitez.

Correct. Wait and see how it plays out.

 

[HylianTom]

Well it is mainly because under a Republican progressive beliefs would be spread. I mean it is scary that so many Democrats support drone strikes and keeping gitmo open.

Under a hypothetical President Romney, progressives would be able to mobilize and spread their beliefs more effectively.

Yes, and then the Republican's court nominees will knock-down the few progressive policies that are adopted. Smart.

 

[Juice]

Progressives who vote for a republican because their candidates aren't liberal enough baffle me.

"I don't get exactly what I want so I'm going to vote for someone who is against everything I believe in" smart plan!

Does this actually happen? I think more often they just don't vote and de-enthuse the people around them

 

[onipex]

Romney had more energy so he won on that alone. Obama looked like he just wanted to get it over with so he could spend the rest of the night with his wife.

I don't know what kind of bump Romney will get from this win , because to me he came off as trying to appeal to the right instead of the center. Also anyone that is paying attention knows that he did a few flip flops tonight. I'm still not sure what his real plan is.

 

[Karl2177]

Winners of the debate? No one. Obama stuttered and paused. Romney flip-flopped on his position. Lehrer backed off when either went over time. The American people learned little to nothing of either's plans and goals. It wasn't on foreign policies, so non-American people didn't gain much from it. And to top it off Oscar the Grouch got even grouchier.

 

[flippymittens]

You're a progressive and yet you think hopefully Mitt can have a better debate next time, too? You think Obama's a detriment to progressives? As much as I agree with some of the things you bring up, this is silly as hell.

You know what a detriment to progressives is?

The repeal of Obamacare, pushing millions into not having health care.
The continuing regression of the tax code that will happen under Romney.
Selection of right win supreme court judges, ones that very well might want to overturn Roe v Wade, and even if such an extreme case doesn't happen, we will have a more right wing court for years into the future, then
The voucherization of medicare
Less investment into green energy
and on and on

And last, but almost biggest in my mind: the biggest detriment to progressives is the fact that if Romney wins this it means that the strategy of obstructionism that the Republicans put on the very day Obama won office is a winning strategy. You've just supported obstructionism, congrats.

President Obama controls the military, you can not blame his crypto-fascist foreign policy on the Republicans.
The very fact that President Obama can take some of the actions he has taken as a constitutional law professor is frightening.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Well it is mainly because under a Republican progressive beliefs would be spread. I mean it is scary that so many Democrats support drone strikes and keeping gitmo open.

Under a hypothetical President Romney, progressives would be able to mobilize and spread their beliefs more effectively.

While we invade Iran , appoint judges that might overturn roe v wade, and repeal the closest thing we've had to universal healthcare. Sorry it doesn't make sense.

 

[deviljho]

Calm down hyperactive news media, Obama was just trying to conserve his ammo because this is RE6. Mitt toggles that shit to infinite. No greater survival horror than a Romney presidency.

 

[Mariolee]

I'm sure there are some, but that's morning after stuff for the best fact-checked/informative sources. Just be patient, you'll get a better angle on this soon.

I have to warn you, though, clear ideas are rare in these debates. Part of your confusion is simply due to the emphasis on TV tactics from the candidates, neither did a good job of making clear points, and Romney mostly rebutted Obama's take on his plans instead of outlining them himself.

I see. I'll get some shuteye then, hope for better reports in the morning!

 

[Particle Physicist]

Because I am far more progressive than President Obama. Under President Obama many of Bush's policies have gone rather unchallenged. Under President Obama more Americans are approving of gitmo, drone strikes, war on "terror" etc.

That still doesn't make sense, Romney is far from progressive, in fact he is the complete opposite of what you just detailed. He wants to continue Bush's policies, and even in the debate tonight, he stated that he wanted to build our military even more.

 

[el retorno]

Calm down hyperactive news media, Obama was just trying to conserve his ammo, because this is RE6. Mitt toggles that shit to infinite.

I love GAF

 

[Snowden's Secret]

No one cares about the VP debate.

Romney's campaign does. They are fishing for a soundbite out of Biden.

How many times did Romney say "buried" in the first 15 minutes?

 

[Duffyside]

You can make a similar argument for raising the taxes of top earners to try and fix the deficit.

And I'm not surprised he doesn't want to see that money go away. He makes lots of money off PBS. Over 100 programs and counting.

Very good points both. I've lost a ton of respect for Neil Degrasse Tyson this last year. What I'm ashamed of is that I had much to begin with, as I didn't have any reason to other than word of mouth.

 

[Juice]

Well it is mainly because under a Republican progressive beliefs would be spread. I mean it is scary that so many Democrats support drone strikes and keeping gitmo open.

Under a hypothetical President Romney, progressives would be able to mobilize and spread their beliefs more effectively.

LOL, this is grade A delusion. Who cares about the battle of the coffee shops? Obama through simply empowering federal agencies to do their jobs has done far more for progressives than four more years of bitching could ever do.

You really think all that time of liberals complaining about GW was more constructive? That's nuts.

 

[RDreamer]

President Obama controls the military, you can not blame his crypto-fascist foreign policy on the Republicans.
The very fact that President Obama can take some of the actions he has taken as a constitutional law professor is frightening.

I didn't blame his foreign policy on the Republicans. If you want any blame there it's on the American electorate which is still mostly in love with this hard-assed idiocy. But yes, I told you I agree with some of your progressive critiques of his foreign policy. Now will you adress the countless other ways a Romney presidency would roll back the clock on mountains of stuff you should like and want to keep progress on?

 

[Juice]

Very good points both. I've lost a ton of respect for Neil Degrasse Tyson this last year. What I'm ashamed of is that I had much to begin with, as I didn't have any reason to other than word of mouth.

What did NDT do to lose respect?

 

[flippymittens]

Yes, and then the Republican's court nominees will knock-down the few progressive policies that are adopted. Smart.

You do know that the current senate would never appoint a conservative judge, right?

 

[-PXG-]

The expectations for Romney were so low, that when he managed no to fuck anything up, it made him look like the winner. I'm honestly surprised he didn't do anything stupid. Then again he didn't go into any detail at all.

Obama went into great detail but almost too much. I wanted to see more aggression and calling Romney and Congress out for their bullshit. Obama's too eloquent for that though...which pisses me off.

 

[C4Lukins]

Progressives who vote for a republican because their candidates aren't liberal enough baffle me.

"I don't get exactly what I want so I'm going to vote for someone who is against everything I believe in" smart plan!

Very few people probably do this. They either vote for a Naderesque candidate the Democrat candidate or they do not vote at all. I cannot recall seeing a single argument from a super progressive left winger where they suddenly do a complete 180 to voting for the Republican. I am sure there are a few of those people in the world, but that is not even a popular enough scenario to even be acknowledged.

 

[SteveWinwood]

What did NDT do to lose respect?

Made money I guess?

 

[Rocket Scientist]

Wow, Obama lost? Fucking shit.

 

[Trakdown]

The expectations for Romney were so low, that when he managed no to fuck anything up, it made him look like the winner. I'm honestly surprised he didn't do anything stupid. Then again he didn't go into any detail at all.

Yeah, given the month his campaign just had...wasn't exactly hard to look like a new candidate. Clint Eastwood wasn't scolding furniture and Romney wasn't getting his Antoinette on.

 

[Puddles]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

 

[Doc Holliday]

Very few people probably do this. They either vote for a Naderesque candidate the Democrat candidate or they do not vote at all. I cannot recall seeing a single argument from a super progressive left winger where they suddenly do a complete 180 to voting for the Republican. I am sure there are a few of those people in the world, but that is not even a popular enough scenario to even be acknowledged.

I was responding to mittens who says he's leaning towards Romney and is a progressive.

 

[HylianTom]

You do know that the current senate would never appoint a conservative judge, right?

In my lifetime, I've seen too many Democratically-controlled Senates defer to Republican presidents when it comes to court nominees. The best way to safeguard the court from anti-progressive thinking is to not play the odds with a Republican president choosing the nominees.

You are essentially voting to kill-off that which you claim to support.

 

[East Lake]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

It's not whatever Obama thought it was. Anyplan.

 

[Loudninja]

Wow, Obama lost? Fucking shit.

Didn't post this already lol
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=42835954&postcount=4245

 

[Particle Physicist]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

Nope, but he is also cutting taxes at the same time, and he will reduce the deficit by cutting programs, but those programs will not affect the middle class, and he wont tell you exactly what he will cut, but, um, he will close loopholes and that will make it alright.

 

[flippymittens]

That still doesn't make sense, Romney is far from progressive, in fact he is the complete opposite of what you just detailed. He wants to continue Bush's policies, and even in the debate tonight, he stated that he wanted to build our military even more.

LOL, this is grade A delusion. Who cares about the battle of the coffee shops? Obama through simply empowering federal agencies to do their jobs has done far more for progressives than four more years of bitching could ever do.

You really think all that time of liberals complaining about GW was more constructive? That's nuts.

No, he did not do much for progressives other than make us look like hypocritical buffoons. My biggest regret is not burning a flag or drawing images depicting his policies (I suck at art is why)...
Where are all the anti-war protests? It is as hypocritical as the Tea Party being absent under Bush (even more so one could argue).
I feel like **** for believing what I believe because our party has goose stepped into the lionization of the bloodshed. We have men and women dying for what amounts to be quite possibly the biggest nothing in history. A war on "terror", is the most ridiculous fight one can engage in... It is a poor excuse for acting as policemen of the world in my view.

 

[devilhawk]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

As of tonight he is not. Tomorrow I can't say.

 

[Owzers]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

first he was at a 20% tax rate decrease across the board, paid for by loop holes. People called him out on that saying the loop hole closures, which he wouldn't specify, wouldn't make up that gap even if he did. To combat this, DURING THE DEBATE, he decided to have an even less detailed "plan" and it is now just " we will decrease taxes at some rate and close some loop holes to cover it, whatever the rate ends up being"

It's crazy. Next debate his tax plan will be " I have a tax plan."

 

[Doc Holliday]

I'm really confused about Mitt Romney's tax plan right now.

What is it? Apparently it isn't what Obama (and I) thought it was. He isn't slashing tax rates for the wealthy?

It's weird cause he says he's not cutting taxes but he is lowering the rates. Isn't that the same thing?

 

[Zabka]

He was too busy stuttering. Seriously, his performance tonight was sub-par.

I don't see what that has to do with undecided voters having an allergic reaction to negativity.

 

[C4Lukins]

I was responding to mittens who says he's leaning towards Romney and is a progressive.

I see. Well everyone thinks they are progressive at the end of the day. It is a term associated with positive change. I have never seen someone run on regression before. It is sort of a loaded term.

 

[Bowdz]

Nope, but he is also cutting taxes at the same time, and he will reduce the deficit by cutting programs, but those programs will not affect the middle class, and he wont tell you exactly what he will cut, but, um, he will close loopholes and that will make it alright.

Don't forget he will increase military spending.