im going to happy nov 8th when all of this is over but sad knowing that one of these two clowns will be our president

End of Line;1297282 wrote:3 points I took from tonight.

Mitt said "Government does not create jobs." Odd....I swear I've been hearing how he's going to create 12 million jobs.

Apparently, you have to get married or you will GET KILLED BY GUNS!

As for saying "We're all children under the same God." Don't give me that bullshit. Even though I'm an Athiest and didn't care for the comment, I'm sure Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Catholics/Christians etc. didn't care for it as well.

That's what you took?

I believe that Mitt wants to create better opportunities for big and small businesses to thrive here. By making the USA the best place for entrepreneurs, that will create jobs. However, the President can merely make opportunities not jobs. I think most people understand this.

I'm sure you're trying be a tad funny with the marriage/guns thing, but even Obama agreed with Romney there. Strong family values/support systems will help with crime and violence. Stop bringing children into the world when the parents can't even be civil. A childhood of parental resentment surely increases the odds of violence.

No comment about Obama's mention of religion? I'm pretty sure different religions would agree with the statement, however disagree with which God that would be. If a candidates religious belief will keep you away, that's fine. Just seems silly to make that one of the three things you took away from it.

mucalum49;1297324 wrote:Rut-Roh. Reaction to the mid-debate fact check already. Seems like Libya will be the narrative coming out of the debate which will not benefit the President.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/conscience-conservative/2012/oct/16/candy-crowley-lies-during-debate-obama-never-said-/

Ty Webb says you need to look passed the words and at the meaning. Lol

I am afraid Ty Webb is no longer in this star system.

I didn't think someone could be a bigger homer for something than sleeper is for Ohio State, but damn it, Ty Webb just blew him out of the water worse than he thinks Obama just blew out Romney. That's impressive.

Let me guess what happened.

Terry_Tate;1297336 wrote:I didn't think someone could be a bigger homer for something than sleeper is for Ohio State, but damn it, Ty Webb just blew him out of the water worse than he thinks Obama just blew out Romney. That's impressive.

What's funny to me is that i think sleeper knows he's over the top. Gibby has no clue.

Damn, Romney's chain got taken here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1H6SanVXcM

jhay78;1296964 wrote:Romney needs to hammer Chu and energy policy.

Ya ever see this vid? Pretty fun grilling of Chu.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRPPpm8FR70

Does no one else find it absolutely ridiculous that they arrested Jill Stein outside the venue for trying to hold a press conference?

Town Hall debates in a nutshell.

I thought the debate was surprisingly decent, given that Romney did stumble plenty and Obama still has no ideas. But I thought they did a relatively ok job of answering the questions. You have to remember they only have 2 minutes, and have to dumb it down while still having a point supported by some details. LOL, it takes Romney like 45 seconds just to tick-off his 5 point plan.

Really the entire concept is kind of comical. When you consider everything these guys need to know and be responsible for, we are basically putting them thru a rather weak interview totaling about 4.5 hrs. Screw the stupid stump speeches - these guys should debate like twice a week for 60 minutes covering a single, focused topic for 2 months. Still only like 8 hours each.

Seriously, everyone has a tv. What's with all the trips and campaigning? Get up there for an hour every night and tell us about your plans and how to fix the problems. There should be no needs for ads or rallies in Akron.

gut;1297360 wrote:I thought the debate was surprisingly decent, given that Romney did stumble plenty and Obama still has no ideas. But I thought they did a relatively ok job of answering the questions. You have to remember they only have 2 minutes, and have to dumb it down while still having a point supported by some details. LOL, it takes Romney like 45 seconds just to tick-off his 5 point plan.

Really the entire concept is kind of comical. When you consider everything these guys need to know and be responsible for, we are basically putting them thru a rather weak interview totaling about 4.5 hrs. Screw the stupid stump speeches - these guys should debate like twice a week for 60 minutes covering a single, focused topic for 2 months. Still only like 8 hours each.

Seriously, everyone has a tv. What's with all the trips and campaigning? Get up there for an hour every night and tell us about your plans and how to fix the problems. There should be no needs for ads or rallies in Akron.

College kid asks, "What can you say to reassure me, but more importantly my parents, that I will be able to sufficiently support myself after I graduate?"

Romney replies:
"the key thing is to make sure you can get a job when you get out of school. And what's happened over the last four years has been very, very hard for America's young people. I want you to be able to get a job. ... I know what it takes to create good jobs again. I know what it takes to make sure that you have the kind of opportunity you deserve."

Obama replies:
"I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again. ... and that means we change our tax code so we're giving incentives to companies that are investing here in the United States and creating jobs here. ... I also want to make sure that community colleges are offering slots for workers to get retrained for the jobs that are out there right now and the jobs of the future. ... And let's take the money that we've been spending on war over the last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges schools."


It's only one example but do not act like Obama has a monopoly on the no ideas platform.

I Wear Pants;1297362 wrote: It's only one example but do not act like Obama has a monopoly on the no ideas platform.

You picked out one of the shittiest questions asked the entire night. That's the same answer Obama gave 4 years ago. Surely you're not suggesting that's a "plan" from Obama in that answer? Same generalities he musters when he gives anything remotely approaching an answer of substance. LMAO, since when do community colleges turn away qualified applicants?

Romney doesn't have all the answers, but Obama has virtually none (and when he does, it's recycling of failed policies).

Here's an example:

Obama: Exports have been going up. And I'm going to work to increase exports more.

Romney: I'm going to work to increase exports to Latin America. More trade agreements. I'm going to protect our intellectual property so it isn't stolen and copied.

gut;1297363 wrote:You picked out one of the shittiest questions asked the entire night. That's the same answer Obama gave 4 years ago. Surely you're not suggesting that's a "plan" from Obama in that answer? Same generalities he musters when he gives anything remotely approaching an answer of substance. LMAO, since when do community colleges turn away qualified applicants?

Romney doesn't have all the answers, but Obama has virtually none (and when he does, it's recycling of failed policies).

And Romney's few ideas are recycling of failed Bush administration policies. Neither candidate is someone who I like. I wasn't disagreeing with you because I think Obama is great, I was disagreeing with you because I don't think Romney is any better. They are both awful.

gut;1297364 wrote:Here's an example:

Obama: Exports have been going up. And I'm going to work to increase exports more.

Romney: I'm going to work to increase exports to Latin America. More trade agreements. I'm going to protect our intellectual property so it isn't stolen and copied.

Vague as fuck and means nothing. Same with "crack down on China". It means nothing.

Obama mentioning that he wants to get another assault weapons ban instated. Is he trying to lose, nothing is going to piss off the conservative base more.

Obama mentioning that he wants to get another assault weapons ban instated. Is he trying to lose, nothing is going to piss off the conservative base more.

Obama mentioning that he wants to get another assault weapons ban instated. Is he trying to lose, nothing is going to piss off the conservative base more.

tk421;1297372 wrote:Obama mentioning that he wants to get another assault weapons ban instated. Is he trying to lose, nothing is going to piss off the conservative base more.

No he didn't. He said we need to work with enforcement to get automatic weapons out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. A sort of obvious and vague thing but not close to "assualt weapons ban".

Romney's answer to gun violence however was about two parent heterosexual households and marriage. How that's satisfactory as an answer for anyone on the topic of gun violence I don't understand.

Is there anyone more delusional than Gibby? My god people like him make discussing politics unbearable.

tk421;1297372 wrote:Obama mentioning that he wants to get another assault weapons ban instated. Is he trying to lose, nothing is going to piss off the conservative base more.

I’m getting my next assault weapon mail order from the Holder Fast and Furious Dept. and just skip the paper work :laugh:

like_that;1297376 wrote:Is there anyone more delusional than Gibby? My god people like him make discussing politics unbearable.

Quaker Oats is right there.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1297383 wrote:Quaker Oats is right there.

No doubt but he has about 3 posts on this thread.