2012 Presidential Debates

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

I honestly think something was wrong with the President. Physically? Mentally? Both?

[/quote]

LOL. What was wrong with him was that he isn’t used to people speaking to him like that. He’s a narcissist who surrounds himself with sycophants. When Romney started telling him the truth to his face he couldn’t take it and reverted to a petulant, spoilt, angry and embarrassed little punk.[/quote]

So are you trying to tell us it was his attitude and not the altitude? Really?

I thought the altitude theory was “settled science.” After all 80% of all political pundits are in agreement that it’s the altitude that must’ve caused Bam’s lethargy.

Even Blow-Me-After-You-Rub-My-Shoulders-Gore is coming out with a new documentary titled, “An Inconvenient Debate” which details all the facts surrounding the idea that thin air is debilitating on sitting Presidents.

Can you imagine the (further) devastating results if the debate had been held at the summit of Mt. Whitney? Bam would’ve been a drooling idiot who continually fell out of his chair.[/quote]

Maybe being a mormon gives Mitt a genetic advantage at altitude, like being a Sherpa. Or something.[/quote]

It is all about proper preparation. Mitt probably just practiced talking into a microphone while remaining stationary at high altitudes to give him the edge. I bet he drank the urine of a ram as well.

Obama hasn’t debated in 4 years. Mittens debates 35 times to get republican nomination

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Obama hasn’t debated in 4 years. Mittens debates 35 times to get republican nomination[/quote]

Ok.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

I honestly think something was wrong with the President. Physically? Mentally? Both?

[/quote]

LOL. What was wrong with him was that he isn’t used to people speaking to him like that. He’s a narcissist who surrounds himself with sycophants. When Romney started telling him the truth to his face he couldn’t take it and reverted to a petulant, spoilt, angry and embarrassed little punk.[/quote]

So are you trying to tell us it was his attitude and not the altitude? Really?

I thought the altitude theory was “settled science.” After all 80% of all political pundits are in agreement that it’s the altitude that must’ve caused Bam’s lethargy.

Even Blow-Me-After-You-Rub-My-Shoulders-Gore is coming out with a new documentary titled, “An Inconvenient Debate” which details all the facts surrounding the idea that thin air is debilitating on sitting Presidents.

Can you imagine the (further) devastating results if the debate had been held at the summit of Mt. Whitney? Bam would’ve been a drooling idiot who continually fell out of his chair.[/quote]

Now, I have climbed Mt. Whitney 4 times, but never with a portable oximeter, but I did have a barometer.
The atmospheric pressure is 400 torr, so a person at rest would experience an piO2 of only 80 torr. Allowing for stable CO2 production, and an A-ao2 gradient of about 6, we’re talking here of a maximum arterial pO2 of 34, give or take. The brain functions at maximum extraction, the equivalent of a 25 torr reduction. So there is barely enough oxygen left to think a thought.

…and still, I could have out-thunk Obama in Denver (at about 625 torr)

I was blown away by Obama’s body language.

Like Raj said, his eyes were to the floor most of the time, when he did look up he looked nervous and unsure.

I’m surprised it hasn’t been mentioned but there is one point ( can’t remember which exactly ) where Romney is responding to Obama, point by point, and Obama is standing there with his head down saying “ok” , “ok”, “ok”, and doing so very softly, all the while never making eye contact. He honestly, without exaggeration, looked like an ashamed little boy being scolded.

Throughout the debate Romney faced and spoke to the President significantly more than the president did him, used his hands more expressively, faced the President during the few times he was being spoken to, and spoke with significantly more energy and enthusiasm. The difference in stage presence between the two was sharp and distinct.

Then there is the matter of substance. There was a clear distinction in the substance the two brought to the debate. Obama, as usual, spoke in generalities, didn’t follow or address points properly, made many appeals to emotion, and lacked structure, logic, etc. Imo, the extent to which he did this was made even more clear by Romney’s use of a “point by point” approach, and his strong command of facts.

I’m quite excited to see the second debate.

Maybe they don’t have any arugula in Denver.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

I honestly think something was wrong with the President. Physically? Mentally? Both?

[/quote]

LOL. What was wrong with him was that he isn’t used to people speaking to him like that. He’s a narcissist who surrounds himself with sycophants. When Romney started telling him the truth to his face he couldn’t take it and reverted to a petulant, spoilt, angry and embarrassed little punk.[/quote]

So are you trying to tell us it was his attitude and not the altitude? Really?

I thought the altitude theory was “settled science.” After all 80% of all political pundits are in agreement that it’s the altitude that must’ve caused Bam’s lethargy.

Even Blow-Me-After-You-Rub-My-Shoulders-Gore is coming out with a new documentary titled, “An Inconvenient Debate” which details all the facts surrounding the idea that thin air is debilitating on sitting Presidents.

Can you imagine the (further) devastating results if the debate had been held at the summit of Mt. Whitney? Bam would’ve been a drooling idiot who continually fell out of his chair.[/quote]

Maybe being a mormon gives Mitt a genetic advantage at altitude, like being a Sherpa. Or something.[/quote]

hmmm… If the rope-a-dope thing didn’t come up, I wouldn’t assume anyone was deluded enough to believe the altitude thing, but just in case… Mile High didn’t seem to both him in 2008.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Obama hasn’t debated in 4 years. Mittens debates 35 times to get republican nomination[/quote]

Are you playing devils advocate or can you just not accept the fact obama lost?

Not related to just Raj:

I wouldn’t think this debate loss was that big of a deal until I’ve seen how fucking unhinged lefties have come last night and today…

I mean, wow.

I definitely think he lost the debate but I think it was due to him not having his A game for some reason.

The reasons cited by most here are just Outlandish IMO.

I’ll be shocked if the next debate goes the same way

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

Now, I have climbed Mt. Whitney 4 times, but never with a portable oximeter, but I did have a barometer.
The atmospheric pressure is 400 torr, so a person at rest would experience an piO2 of only 80 torr. Allowing for stable CO2 production, and an A-ao2 gradient of about 6, we’re talking here of a maximum arterial pO2 of 34, give or take. The brain functions at maximum extraction, the equivalent of a 25 torr reduction. So there is barely enough oxygen left to think a thought.

…and still, I could have out-thunk Obama in Denver (at about 625 torr)

[/quote]

Good thing we keep you 'round here. Lots of the other guys wouldn’t have known all that stuff.
[/quote]

…and don’t even get me started on 2,3DPG and oxyhemoglobin dissociation at low atmospheric pressures!

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I definitely think he lost the debate but I think it was due to him not having his A game for some reason.

The reasons cited by most here are just Outlandish IMO.

[/quote]

So, “Mitt did a better job” is outlandish? Or the lapdog excuses we keep linking to are outlandish?