Support NeoGAF

[RDreamer]

Lol, wtf ad did I just watch.

It was attacking Baldwin for being "soooo liberal," "More liberal than Nancy Pelosi," "the most liberal person in congress," then "so liberal that she cut medicare!"

wat?

 

[reilo]

I know this is your 'schtick' but its much, much more then just Ohio and Virginia. If Obama wins either of those states Romney has to essentially win EVERY SINGLE "SWING STATE".

Nope. If Obama wins Ohio AND Virginia, and Romney wins:

Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, and North Carolina

The tally would be: 282 - 256 Obama

Romney NEEDS Ohio.

 

[786110]

How do you guys think the town hall will be?

 

[thefit]

It's pretty much the only thing that matters at this point as the that lead is almost insurmountable no matter how much Romney crushes Obama in the debates.

That's because its not about debates. These aren't debates between two new comers trying to convince you on new ideology that will govern us its about a successful president although not perfect needing 4 more years to continue to steer us in a direction that is working or hitting the breaks and going back to the gop way of doing things. People have made up their minds they remember the nasdac plummeting to the floor just as clearly as the twin towers on fire and no one, NO ONE, wants to go back to that.

 

[Paches]

Haha, the instant reaction from these "8 undecided" shows how stupid undecided voters are. What else is there to even discuss in terms of plans, Jesus.

 

[Officerrob]

These undecided voters on MSNBC are an embarrassment to the human race

 

[Trakdown]

That's being generous. I still think Obama tops 300EVs. My previous prediction was somewhere in the 320/330s, so maybe we'll see a slight tightening?

Well, Romney being in Kerry's place doesn't automatically mean Obama is in Bush's. Kerry absolutely destroyed Bush in the debates but still lost because...wait for it...Ohio. And Obama might have come off as passive in the debate tonight but Romney still doesn't have a stronger platform, and it's late in the game for that to not materialize.

But yeah, good win for Romney, for what it's worth.

 

[TheHeretic]

I think he landed a few punches "a few weeks before the election now his big bold new plan is... nevermind." That sort of thing. So, he did hit him on it. Yeah, he didn't go hard, sure, but he did attack.

I think it would have possibly been a mistake to go hard. He can't look angry, and he can't look like an asshole. He had to stay reserved in this debate, especially because Romney kept that tone. Had he come out attacking Romney ferociously after some of those comments he'd look awful.

Attacking doesn't mean looking angry or aggressive. Obama has an enormous electoral college advantage (as all democrats will moving forward) but everything is still to play for. You play to win, not to limp over the finish line. People are familiar with Obamas temperament at this point, he isn't introducing himself to the country and shouldn't be that passive on stage.

He needs to do damage in the next debate and he better not be talking to people who think the way many in this thread do.

 

[Paches]

These undecided voters on MSNBC are an embarrassment to the human race

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”


― George Carlin

 

[Stinkles]

Haha, the instant reaction from these "8 undecided" shows how stupid undecided voters are. What else is there to even discuss in terms of plans, Jesus.

I wonder what the producers think of the mouth breathers they put in those chairs. Like, literally they tell a researcher to go find them some people so fucking stupid that they can't tell chalk from cheese.

 

[Allard]

Nope. If Obama wins Ohio AND Virginia, and Romney wins:

Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, and North Carolina

The tally would be: 282 - 256 Obama

Romney NEEDS Ohio.

I said "either" =P. If Obama wins Virginia and Ohio its game over which is why despite Obama's performance I am going to sleep just fine tonight. He didn't mess up for the most part so he won't be the story. Romney came out ahead but nothing memorable, he needed a miracle in the debate to actually make this a competition, he got closer, but still no where close to winning (imo). On the flipside if Romney makes his donors think he still has a chance it removes the focus those people could use the money on the house and senate races lol.

 

[Red Blaster]

Attacking doesn't mean looking angry or aggressive. Obama has an enormous electoral college advantage (as all democrats will moving forward) but everything is still to play for. You play to win, not to limp over the finish line. People are familiar with Obamas temperament at this point, he isn't introducing himself to the country and shouldn't be that passive on stage.

He needs to do damage in the next debate and he better not be talking to people who think the way many in this thread do.

I think everyone here would like to see Obama tear Romney a new asshole

but what many are arguing is that it doesn't really matter in the end

 

[PhoenixDark]

Ok PD and Puddles.

Tell me, which states does Romney flip based on this debate to win the presidency?

[B]Colorado[/B]
Polling average	48.7	45.4	Obama +3.3

[B]Florida[/B]
Polling average	48.3	46.1	Obama +2.2

[B]Iowa[/B]
Polling average	48.5	44.3	Obama +4.2

[B]Nevada[/B]
Polling average	49.7	44.6	Obama +5.1

[B]Ohio[/B]
Polling average	49.5	43.9	Obama +5.6

[B]Virginia[/B]
Polling average	48.2	44.6	Obama +3.6

Note: those are ALL of the polling averages, and not the most recent ones which are even moreso +Obama.

Florida is within the margin of error, and Colorado is basically a toss up. Virginia is also close. I expect Ohio to tighten over the coming weeks. This is far from over.

For the first time of the year, Romney proved he could be president; I think it's clear every poll backs that statement up. Now that he has been legitimized I expect people to view him and Obama differently. This is no longer a debate between a president and some guy who says stupid stuff.

Obama doesn't like debating, just as he doesn't like politiking or twist arms, or wearing flag pins. The flag thing is a minor issue, but the others are less so. The point I'm making is that when Obama doesn't personally believe something is worthy of his time or effort, he doesn't put much time or effort into it. We had multiple stories about aides trying their hardest to get Obama to shorten his answers. He didn't fail at that tonight because he's dumb or didn't work hard enough - he failed because he inherently does not believe in the basic idea of debates (short focused answers, insta-spin, the lack of real discussion, the superficial nature of it, etc) - and therefore decided he wasn't going to play by those rules. And guess what, he failed miserably as every poll shows.

Here's the thing though: it's currently 12:35AM here in Michigan as I share my thoughts with my friends on poligaf; Obama is probably spending some unromantic time with his wife now, but before that he certainly was told that he lost the debate, and he knows it. I bet you if, by some magical design, Obama was transported back to 9PM he would turn in the exact same performance, even with the hindsight knowledge of how it would be perceived. He does not care. He has gotten away with this general disdain for "the system" thanks to weak opponents for years. But it's catching up with him, and I think he could lose the election due to his refusal to change. I guarantee he will give a very similar performance next time too.

 

[RDreamer]

Attacking doesn't mean looking angry or aggressive. Obama has an enormous electoral college advantage (as all democrats will moving forward) but everything is still to play for. You play to win, not to limp over the finish line. People are familiar with Obamas temperament at this point, he isn't introducing himself to the country and shouldn't be that passive on stage.

He needs to do damage in the next debate and he better not be talking to people who think the way many in this thread do.

Yeah, but this is a debate for the independents and undecideds. You and I may have wanted him to go attack dog, but those types don't look for that crap. They look for compassion and personality, etc.

Sure, I thought he could have called out a few more things. I'll give you that point. He wasn't perfect, obviously. I've said Mitt did a great job. But I do think he did respond to some of the things he needed to.

 

[Stinkles]

Florida is within the margin of error, and Colorado is basically a toss up. Virginia is also close. I expect Ohio to tighten over the coming weeks. This is far from over.

For the first time of the year, Romney proved he could be president; I think it's clear every poll backs that statement up. Now that he has been legitimized I expect people to view him and Obama differently. This is no longer a debate between a president and some guy who says stupid stuff.

Obama doesn't like debating, just as he doesn't like politiking or twist arms, or wearing flag pins. The flag thing is a minor issue, but the others are less so. The point I'm making is that when Obama doesn't personally believe something is worthy of his time or effort, he doesn't put much time or effort into it. We had multiple stories about aides trying their hardest to get Obama to shorten his answers. He didn't fail at that tonight because he's dumb or didn't work hard enough - he failed because he inherently does not believe in the basic idea of debates (short focused answers, insta-spin, the lack of real discussion, the superficial nature of it, etc) - and therefore decided he wasn't going to play by those rules. And guess what, he failed miserably as every poll shows.

Here's the thing though: it's currently 12:35AM here in Michigan as I share my thoughts with my friends on poligaf; Obama is probably spending some time with his wife now, but before that he certainly was told that he lost the debate, and he knows it. I bet you if, by some magical design, Obama was transported back to 9PM he would turn in the exact same performance, even with the hindsight knowledge of how it would be perceived. He does not care. He has gotten away with this general disdain for "the system" thanks to weak opponents for years. But it's catching up with him, and I think he could lose the election due to his refusal to change. I guarantee he will give a very similar performance next time too.

I thought his wife hated him or something? I can't keep up with your garbage.

 

[RustyNails]

Attacking doesn't mean looking angry or aggressive. Obama has an enormous electoral college advantage (as all democrats will moving forward) but everything is still to play for. You play to win, not to limp over the finish line. People are familiar with Obamas temperament at this point, he isn't introducing himself to the country and shouldn't be that passive on stage.

He needs to do damage in the next debate and he better not be talking to people who think the way many in this thread do.

Obama's been the President for the past 4 years...he doesn't need an introduction #iamnotthecandidate

Granted, Romney did not set his hair on fire like I expected him to, but he didn't throw a knockout either. At best, Romney might see couple of points bounce in national polls. But electoral math is pretty much impossible at this point.

 

[reilo]

PD just basically said Romney can flip four (4!) states in under 6 weeks.

Yup.

 

[johnsmith]

Good god, I need to remember to avoid this thread on debate nights. So many chicken littles. This needs to be posted on every page.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I thought his wife hated him or something? I can't keep up with your garbage.

It's their anniversary, of course they're going to do something. Whether it's meaningful on an emotional level for both parties is another question.

 

[RustyNails]

Florida is within the margin of error, and Colorado is basically a toss up. Virginia is also close. I expect Ohio to tighten over the coming weeks.

There is no margin of error in averages. Why am I even responding.

 

[TheHeretic]

I think everyone here would like to see Obama tear Romney a new asshole

but what many are arguing is that it doesn't really matter in the end

Again, we don't have to play in extreme's. Romney vs Mccain is a template on how you fight him - ignore the substance of what he says and just drive him he has no principles and no plan.

Whether it matters in the end is up for debate, but I think this could do a lot more for Romney than others allow.

 

[Souldriver]

I remember a while back someone in this thread suggested that perhaps Romney kept all his plans a secret till the debate so that Obama can't really prepare on criticising him on those, and that on the debates themselves Romney would suddenly come with completely new, out of left field ideas and policies and lies, leaving Obama flustered.


To a certain degree, this actually happened.

 

[PhoenixDark]

There is no margin of error in averages. Why am I even responding.

But there are margins of error in all the polls that are used to create that average

 

[RustyNails]

But there are margins of error in all the polls that are used to create that average

I'm going to bed PD.

 

[Forever]

PD is so close to going off the deep end and becoming an unskewer.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

So who won?

Which network is flipping out?

 

[thefit]

Good god, I need to remember to avoid this thread on debate nights. So many chicken littles. This needs to be posted on every page.

Ha funny u post that in that it originated in 2008 with all the chicken little shit that was happening here then too

 

[SmokeMaxX]

Attacking doesn't mean looking angry or aggressive. Obama has an enormous electoral college advantage (as all democrats will moving forward) but everything is still to play for. You play to win, not to limp over the finish line. People are familiar with Obamas temperament at this point, he isn't introducing himself to the country and shouldn't be that passive on stage.

He needs to do damage in the next debate and he better not be talking to people who think the way many in this thread do.

Exactly, you play to win. You don't risk saying something unpopular by going on the offensive. Mitt Romney can say whatever he wants to say. He's not going to land a knockout on Obama. It's just not possible unless Obama says something really stupid. People know exactly what they're getting with Obama- they've had four years of it. Things are looking up. Nothing Romney says can change that. If Obama says something stupid in a debate, he can very likely lose the election over it. If he doesn't, Romney can win 15 debates and the people voting for Obama will still most likely be voting for Obama. I don't care how many independents Romney gets- if Obama has 50% of the popular vote already... Romney's not going to get over 51%.

 

[Aaron Strife]

If Obama followed PD's advice we'd have President Clinton

PD is so close to going off the deep end and becoming an unskewer.

I see him jumping on that bandwagon when the post-debate polls come out and there's no real difference.

 

[Officerrob]

PD has troll Stockholm syndrome

 

[reilo]

There is no margin of error in averages. Why am I even responding.

/nods

The margin-of-error when all polls were aggregated/averaged out in 2008 was 0.27% and 0.31% in 2010.

Not surprisingly, 538 was the most accurate.

 

[el retorno]

Watching the undecided voters chart on CNN's replay. I don't think Obama lost many people. People will admit romney won but it doesn't seem like people are jumping ship.

 

[Puddles]

Watching this with half the Public Policy faculty at UCLA was pretty interesting.

When Romney started talking about energy, I looked over at one of the professors who teaches courses on energy policy; he was basically facepalming and shaking his head the entire time. When Romney got to the line about how the free market built the best healthcare system in the world, a professor who teaches on health policy laughed out loud. That is to say: if you study the nuances of actual policy, you can point out a hundred ridiculous flaws in Romney's debate performance. But none of that will matter to the typical American.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I'm going to bed PD.

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

 

[reilo]

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

Hillary lost.

Why are we asking what Hillary would have done? Should we ask what John Stockton would have done if he had to defend the NBA championship?

 

[metalslimer]

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

How long did it take to invoke magic Hilary.

 

[el retorno]

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

This is already getting old.

 

[Aaron Strife]

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

No one is saying Obama can't lose.

You're the one who's thoroughly convinced that he can't win.

Edit: Goddamn it, you overtook me in post count.

 

[Puddles]

I was really disappointed that Obama didn't take advantage of most of his opportunities to press Romney. By not challenging some of Romney's assertions, he basically conceded those points to him. A particularly egregious one was the idea that the free market built the greatest healthcare system in the world. On the other hand, Romney took every possible opportunity to challenge Obama's points. He didn't let a single attack go unanswered.

 

[Half and half]

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

I dunno man, Wikileaks whipped her ass pretty good.

 

[TheHeretic]

Exactly, you play to win. You don't risk saying something unpopular by going on the offensive. Mitt Romney can say whatever he wants to say. He's not going to land a knockout on Obama. It's just not possible unless Obama says something really stupid. People know exactly what they're getting with Obama- they've had four years of it. Things are looking up. Nothing Romney says can change that. If Obama says something stupid in a debate, he can very likely lose the election over it. If he doesn't, Romney can win 15 debates and the people voting for Obama will still most likely be voting for Obama. I don't care how many independents Romney gets- if Obama has 50% of the popular vote already... Romney's not going to get over 51%.

That isn't playing to win - its playing not to lose. Romney isn't going to drop any further, so he'll keep coming in swinging and humiliating a sitting president trying to brute force his was to victory. Three of these debates in a row delegitimise a sitting president and his standing no matter which way you slice it.

 

[Gotchaye]

I still don't think this is anything approaching a big deal.

Obama lost the debate. But debates have their impact on the campaign only after they get filtered through the media. So why did Obama lose the debate?

Not because Romney landed great hits.

Not because Obama said or did something phenomenally stupid.

Because Obama failed to call out Romney's lies and because he didn't make obvious attacks.

So how does the media talk about Obama losing the debate without simultaneously making a case against Romney?

 

[Souldriver]

I see it's the Phoenix Dark show again.


*leaves thread*

 

[Allard]

As am I, after I play some WoW.

I'm trying to be honest, and figured this type of debate performance would jar some folks; not to make them chicken littles, but to at least be open to the fact that yes, Obama can still lose; he does not have a 100% chance of winning.

My final point is simple: I didn't see any killer instinct tonight. Does anyone believe Hillary Clinton would have sat back and allowed an opponent to throw shots at her like that? She would have defended herself and even if she lost, her supporters could at least defend the performance. Obama looked neutered tonight.

We aren't saying he can't lose, we are saying Romney can't beat him. Obama can only beat himself at this point as people have already settled on voting for Obama based on what they know NOW about him, the debate tonight will not change peoples minds that were already going to vote for him before tonight and voting has already started. Short of a large scandal within the White House or an event that makes people 'wish' they wanted someone else and somehow magically believe Romney would be better, the race isn't going to change from this debate. Its just going tighten and that's it. (at best)

 

[Particle Physicist]

I remember a while back someone in this thread suggested that perhaps Romney kept all his plans a secret till the debate so that Obama can't really prepare on criticising him on those, and that on the debates themselves Romney would suddenly come with completely new, out of left field ideas and policies and lies, leaving Obama flustered.


To a certain degree, this actually happened.

Yeah, I remember that, who said it?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

I still don't think this is anything approaching a big deal.

Obama lost the debate. But debates have their impact on the campaign only after they get filtered through the media. So why did Obama lose the debate?

Not because Romney landed great hits.

Not because Obama said or did something phenomenally stupid.

Because Obama failed to call out Romney's lies and because he didn't make obvious attacks.

So how does the media talk about Obama losing the debate without simultaneously making a case against Romney?

See headline @ link below:

http://www.cnn.com/?refresh=1

 

[Thequietone]

 

[Aaron Strife]

I still don't think this is anything approaching a big deal.

Obama lost the debate. But debates have their impact on the campaign only after they get filtered through the media. So why did Obama lose the debate?

Not because Romney landed great hits.

Not because Obama said or did something phenomenally stupid.

Because Obama failed to call out Romney's lies and because he didn't make obvious attacks.

So how does the media talk about Obama losing the debate without simultaneously making a case against Romney?

I feel like the inevitable fact checks against Romney are going to be the bigger story than him looking like a tough guy on stage.

 

[isoquant]

I just watched the debate on delay. Haven't had a chance to read this thread yet. It was clearly a crushing win for Romney.

After all the shit poligaf has been talking for months about Obama being the 'best debater in a generation' and how Romney was going to get slammed etc... Methinks the following picture is appropriate:

 

[reilo]

Man, PD really went HAM on these new junior alt accounts.