As Zeb said, the first Presidential Debate may be worth watching because of the way it tends to “set the tone”.
It also is on the Economy, with both candidates needing at least a reasonable showing; Romney (for his vision on stimulating economic growth) and the President for explaining where we are and where he expects us to go.
Mufasa
As Zeb said, the first Presidential Debate may be worth watching because of the way it tends to “set the tone”.
It also is on the Economy, with both candidates needing at least a reasonable showing; Romney (for his vision on stimulating economic growth) and the President for explaining where we are and where he expects us to go.
Mufasa
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s interesting how each side thinks that the OTHER side will be prone to making a major Gaff.
Conservatives think that the President is more prone because he is arrogant and cocky.
Liberals think that Romney is more prone because he is a rich, out-of-touch guy who just “doesn’t get it”.
Now Ryan and “Killer Joe” should be interesting too (albeit just for one Debate). They both come from similar working-class backgrounds…but Ryan is an admitted “Political Detail/Wonk” guy…and Joe is…“KillerJoe”! Joe is damn good at deflection and “regular-guy-ness”…and not giving a flying f$ck about his gaffs…and Ryan IS a “detail” person.
The problem I see is that the Debates are really not set up for a lot of “substance and detail” (which favors KillerJoe)…but Joe can really, REALLY stick his foot in his mouth.
We’ll see!
Mufasa[/quote]
Neither of them come off as particularly quick witted when taken off message or pressed into answering off the cuff. Just an observation, as being quick on your feet has zero to do with being good presidential material…
[/quote]
Actually, if you recall the republican debates Romney was the only candidate to have a logical beginning, middle and end to his responses. Other than a few minor gaffes that the press ran with, like trying to bet Rick Perry $10,000 at on point he made few errors (He should have dumbed it down and said "bet you ten dollars- You see it’s bad to be wealthy in America today so you have to pretend that you’re “Joe everyman”).
Romney debated something like 12 times or so. He’s polished and he doesn’t melt under fire. I take nothing away from Obama either. The man is brimming with confidence and that is always a good thing when you are facing the bright studio lights and a potential audience of 35 million people. But I also think that Obama is somewhat lost without his teleprompter. And he’s had the use of that teleprompter for four years. No one has pushed him on an issue, especially publicly. He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. He may very well rise to the occasion, but I will tell you this, I’d hate to have to defend this economy. And that is exactly what he has to do. So it’s not just a matter of which man is better on his feet (and I think Romney is) it’s a matter of which position that they have to take.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’d look at the camera and I’d ask one simple question to the American people.
If this isn’t failure, 8% for 43 straight months, 16 trillion in debt, 45 million on food stamps etc… the what is? How poor of a job does this President have to do before you decide that he does not deserve another four years?
[/quote]
This is certainly his best strategy. It also has the advantage of simplicity (relative to Obama’s counter). By this I mean that the more times a politician has to set conditions, qualify specific points, explain complexities and hypotheticals, the more he seems to be dissembling and the more impotent his argument will be. If Romney chose to do something like the above, he would be presenting stark and simple numbers. Obama would have to counter with a number of different explanations–many of them based upon “what might have happened”–and would probably seem unconvincing to most Americans.
In my belief, the truth of the matter would lie somewhere between the two arguments. But Romney’s would undoubtedly resonate with more clarity.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. [/quote]
Did you watch 60 minutes last weekend, Zeb?
I actually thought (and was surprised to think) there was more hostility shown toward Obama than toward Romney. And where Romney seemed eager to speak and affable, Obama seemed almost angry that he was being questioned at all. I didn’t see the whole thing though.
Therin lies the problem, Zeb.
Romney can’t just zip off a list of negative descriptions of the economy; he has to articulate how he will turn it all around.
He HAS to have (IMO) some “Grand Vision”. As it stands, he is mostly reciting general Supply-Side Economic theory; and that won’t get him over the hump.
Mufasa
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s interesting how each side thinks that the OTHER side will be prone to making a major Gaff.
Conservatives think that the President is more prone because he is arrogant and cocky.
Liberals think that Romney is more prone because he is a rich, out-of-touch guy who just “doesn’t get it”.
Now Ryan and “Killer Joe” should be interesting too (albeit just for one Debate). They both come from similar working-class backgrounds…but Ryan is an admitted “Political Detail/Wonk” guy…and Joe is…“KillerJoe”! Joe is damn good at deflection and “regular-guy-ness”…and not giving a flying f$ck about his gaffs…and Ryan IS a “detail” person.
The problem I see is that the Debates are really not set up for a lot of “substance and detail” (which favors KillerJoe)…but Joe can really, REALLY stick his foot in his mouth.
We’ll see!
Mufasa[/quote]
Neither of them come off as particularly quick witted when taken off message or pressed into answering off the cuff. Just an observation, as being quick on your feet has zero to do with being good presidential material…
[/quote]
Actually, if you recall the republican debates Romney was the only candidate to have a logical beginning, middle and end to his responses. Other than a few minor gaffes that the press ran with, like trying to bet Rick Perry $10,000 at on point he made few errors (He should have dumbed it down and said "bet you ten dollars- You see it’s bad to be wealthy in America today so you have to pretend that you’re “Joe everyman”).
Romney debated something like 12 times or so. He’s polished and he doesn’t melt under fire. I take nothing away from Obama either. The man is brimming with confidence and that is always a good thing when you are facing the bright studio lights and a potential audience of 35 million people. But I also think that Obama is somewhat lost without his teleprompter. And he’s had the use of that teleprompter for four years. No one has pushed him on an issue, especially publicly. He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. He may very well rise to the occasion, but I will tell you this, I’d hate to have to defend this economy. And that is exactly what he has to do. So it’s not just a matter of which man is better on his feet (and I think Romney is) it’s a matter of which position that they have to take.[/quote]
I don’t disagree with what you’ve said here. I was just more referring to expecting a killer ‘off the cuff’ remark from either. I just don’t see that happening.
I don’t think you’ll see a meltdown from either man, either. They’re both too polished and controlled. As an interested spectator, I hope the first debate does spark somewhat, otherwise they could all turn into complete yawnfest non events. In my opinion Romney does have more ‘fire’, that’s perhaps what gets him into a bit of trouble in the off the cuff remark department. I’m liking that more and more (the fire). Saw him on 60 minutes and I thought he came off rather well. Didn’t watch the Obama interview directly after, so can’t make a direct comparison. Obama is coming across REALLY drone like in this run , for me. Maybe I’m just used to his style and delivery at this point, but I really see very little that would excite me there if I was a US voter at this point.
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. [/quote]
Did you watch 60 minutes last weekend, Zeb?
I actually thought (and was surprised to think) there was more hostility shown toward Obama than toward Romney. And where Romney seemed eager to speak and affable, Obama seemed almost angry that he was being questioned at all. I didn’t see the whole thing though.[/quote]
Ha! As I just said in my previous post, I thought Romney came off really well in that interview. Didn’t see the Obama segment though, so can’t comment.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. [/quote]
Did you watch 60 minutes last weekend, Zeb?
I actually thought (and was surprised to think) there was more hostility shown toward Obama than toward Romney. And where Romney seemed eager to speak and affable, Obama seemed almost angry that he was being questioned at all. I didn’t see the whole thing though.[/quote]
Ha! As I just said in my previous post, I thought Romney came off really well in that interview. Didn’t see the Obama segment though, so can’t comment.
[/quote]
Yeah, I thought Romney came across better. Obama seemed distant, slightly dull, and slightly (oddly) irritated. I think the most striking thing was that he and Steve Kroft seem to genuinely dislike each other.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
No, they don’t. I would say many American’s don’t even know what is going on in Europe right now. AT least not those on social media.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. [/quote]
Did you watch 60 minutes last weekend, Zeb?
I actually thought (and was surprised to think) there was more hostility shown toward Obama than toward Romney. And where Romney seemed eager to speak and affable, Obama seemed almost angry that he was being questioned at all. I didn’t see the whole thing though.[/quote]
Ha! As I just said in my previous post, I thought Romney came off really well in that interview. Didn’t see the Obama segment though, so can’t comment.
[/quote]
Yeah, I thought Romney came across better. Obama seemed distant, slightly dull, and slightly (oddly) irritated. I think the most striking thing was that he and Steve Kroft seem to genuinely dislike each other.[/quote]
I was playing with my daughter and missed it. Obama doesn’t come off that way in the transcripts. Interesting.
“…I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close…”
Neuro, I don’t disagree with you.
However; if that is the case; I just don’t think either man or either party can stop it.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
“…I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close…”
Neuro, I don’t disagree with you.
However; if that is the case; I just don’t think either man or either party can stop it.
Mufasa[/quote]
Nah, both parties could stop it, and so could both men running. Neither would get elected if they said they were going to try though.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
No, they don’t. I would say many American’s don’t even know what is going on in Europe right now. AT least not those on social media.[/quote]
They would do well to take an interest. QE will only kick the can so far down the road. The key moment will be when the interest moves off Europe for a while when the printing press REALLY get up to speed in the Eurozone and interest rates come down as a result of that, and the market’s attention turns to the US. At the moment your fundamental issues are going under the radar in a manner of speaking, because Europe is in the spotlight. But that won’t last forever. You guys have time, and it would be a very good idea to make use of it productively. Everything should be in the cost cutting firing line. Defense spending, entitlement programs, everything.
Just my .02c.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
No, they don’t. I would say many American’s don’t even know what is going on in Europe right now. AT least not those on social media.[/quote]
They would do well to take an interest. QE will only kick the can so far down the road. The key moment will be when the interest moves off Europe for a while when the printing press REALLY get up to speed in the Eurozone and interest rates come down as a result of that, and the market’s attention turns to the US. At the moment your fundamental issues are going under the radar in a manner of speaking, because Europe is in the spotlight. But that won’t last forever. You guys have time, and it would be a very good idea to make use of it productively. Everything should be in the cost cutting firing line. Defense spending, entitlement programs, everything.
Just my .02c.[/quote]
The dems have people convinced that raising taxes to clinton era rates on people making over 250k is going to solve this problem.
The republicans are trying to hold off the Tea Party by ignoring how drastic the issue is.
I would say 30-45% of people see what is coming. Of which many of those prefer to stick their head in the sand. The rest… Well they are lost to the Dancing With The Stars generation anyway. Until an A list celebrity starts talking about it, they won’t care.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
No, they don’t. I would say many American’s don’t even know what is going on in Europe right now. AT least not those on social media.[/quote]
They would do well to take an interest. QE will only kick the can so far down the road. The key moment will be when the interest moves off Europe for a while when the printing press REALLY get up to speed in the Eurozone and interest rates come down as a result of that, and the market’s attention turns to the US. At the moment your fundamental issues are going under the radar in a manner of speaking, because Europe is in the spotlight. But that won’t last forever. You guys have time, and it would be a very good idea to make use of it productively. Everything should be in the cost cutting firing line. Defense spending, entitlement programs, everything.
Just my .02c.[/quote]
The dems have people convinced that raising taxes to clinton era rates on people making over 250k is going to solve this problem.
The republicans are trying to hold off the Tea Party by ignoring how drastic the issue is.
I would say 30-45% of people see what is coming. Of which many of those prefer to stick their head in the sand. The rest… Well they are lost to the Dancing With The Stars generation anyway. Until an A list celebrity starts talking about it, they won’t care.[/quote]
That’s grim.
It may come down to both cutting costs AND raising taxes across the board. Bottom line is the status quo is unsustainable, and I don’t think that just one course or the other will suffice. I think it will have to be both. People just have to nut up and accept reality. But of course…most people are notoriously reluctant to see reality. On all sides of any political spectrum.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
That’s grim. [/quote]
No doubt. I just hope that we can face this mess now, so my daughter doesn’t have to deal with it.
I’d rather hurt and her have the life she is supposed to. My son at 14 is doomed either way, poor kid.
[quote]It may come down to both cutting costs AND raising taxes across the board. Bottom line is the status quo is unsustainable, and I don’t think that just one course or the other will suffice. I think it will have to be both. People just have to nut up and accept reality. But of course…most people are notoriously reluctant to see reality. On all sides of any political spectrum.
[/quote]
You don’t need to cut taxes if the economy is thriving. But, 5% isn’t the end of the world. It will have to be on everyone though.
I’d like to see the spending cut first. Without question. The pig needs to step away first, and then I’ll think about handing over more money.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
No, they don’t. I would say many American’s don’t even know what is going on in Europe right now. AT least not those on social media.[/quote]
They would do well to take an interest. QE will only kick the can so far down the road. The key moment will be when the interest moves off Europe for a while when the printing press REALLY get up to speed in the Eurozone and interest rates come down as a result of that, and the market’s attention turns to the US. At the moment your fundamental issues are going under the radar in a manner of speaking, because Europe is in the spotlight. But that won’t last forever. You guys have time, and it would be a very good idea to make use of it productively. Everything should be in the cost cutting firing line. Defense spending, entitlement programs, everything.
Just my .02c.[/quote]
The dems have people convinced that raising taxes to clinton era rates on people making over 250k is going to solve this problem.
The republicans are trying to hold off the Tea Party by ignoring how drastic the issue is.
I would say 30-45% of people see what is coming. Of which many of those prefer to stick their head in the sand. The rest… Well they are lost to the Dancing With The Stars generation anyway. Until an A list celebrity starts talking about it, they won’t care.[/quote]
“DWTS”???
Sorry, CB…I’m a “Honey-Boo-Boo” kinda’ guy, actually…
Mufasa
(…Wait…that didn’t sound too cool, did it?)
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
That’s grim. [/quote]
No doubt. I just hope that we can face this mess now, so my daughter doesn’t have to deal with it.
I’d rather hurt and her have the life she is supposed to. My son at 14 is doomed either way, poor kid.
[quote]It may come down to both cutting costs AND raising taxes across the board. Bottom line is the status quo is unsustainable, and I don’t think that just one course or the other will suffice. I think it will have to be both. People just have to nut up and accept reality. But of course…most people are notoriously reluctant to see reality. On all sides of any political spectrum.
[/quote]
You don’t need to cut taxes if the economy is thriving. But, 5% isn’t the end of the world. It will have to be on everyone though.
I’d like to see the spending cut first. Without question. The pig needs to step away first, and then I’ll think about handing over more money.[/quote]
I agree. Cuts first and foremost.
It’s a tough row to hoe growing an economy in the current worldwide economic climate, on the back of a very affluent and expensive workforce (by world standards), By a big enough number to impact your debt size. And yes, 5% across the board should be enough. People are just not getting that the days of assuming the right to a better life than your parents while maintaining mediocre to low standards (of everything , education, productivity etc) are OVER.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s interesting how each side thinks that the OTHER side will be prone to making a major Gaff.
Conservatives think that the President is more prone because he is arrogant and cocky.
Liberals think that Romney is more prone because he is a rich, out-of-touch guy who just “doesn’t get it”.
Now Ryan and “Killer Joe” should be interesting too (albeit just for one Debate). They both come from similar working-class backgrounds…but Ryan is an admitted “Political Detail/Wonk” guy…and Joe is…“KillerJoe”! Joe is damn good at deflection and “regular-guy-ness”…and not giving a flying f$ck about his gaffs…and Ryan IS a “detail” person.
The problem I see is that the Debates are really not set up for a lot of “substance and detail” (which favors KillerJoe)…but Joe can really, REALLY stick his foot in his mouth.
We’ll see!
Mufasa[/quote]
Neither of them come off as particularly quick witted when taken off message or pressed into answering off the cuff. Just an observation, as being quick on your feet has zero to do with being good presidential material…
[/quote]
Actually, if you recall the republican debates Romney was the only candidate to have a logical beginning, middle and end to his responses. Other than a few minor gaffes that the press ran with, like trying to bet Rick Perry $10,000 at on point he made few errors (He should have dumbed it down and said "bet you ten dollars- You see it’s bad to be wealthy in America today so you have to pretend that you’re “Joe everyman”).
Romney debated something like 12 times or so. He’s polished and he doesn’t melt under fire. I take nothing away from Obama either. The man is brimming with confidence and that is always a good thing when you are facing the bright studio lights and a potential audience of 35 million people. But I also think that Obama is somewhat lost without his teleprompter. And he’s had the use of that teleprompter for four years. No one has pushed him on an issue, especially publicly. He gets softballs from the press we all know that. So let’s see how he performs without a net. He may very well rise to the occasion, but I will tell you this, I’d hate to have to defend this economy. And that is exactly what he has to do. So it’s not just a matter of which man is better on his feet (and I think Romney is) it’s a matter of which position that they have to take.[/quote]
I don’t disagree with what you’ve said here. I was just more referring to expecting a killer ‘off the cuff’ remark from either. I just don’t see that happening.
I don’t think you’ll see a meltdown from either man, either. They’re both too polished and controlled. As an interested spectator, I hope the first debate does spark somewhat, otherwise they could all turn into complete yawnfest non events. In my opinion Romney does have more ‘fire’, that’s perhaps what gets him into a bit of trouble in the off the cuff remark department. I’m liking that more and more (the fire). Saw him on 60 minutes and I thought he came off rather well. Didn’t watch the Obama interview directly after, so can’t make a direct comparison. Obama is coming across REALLY drone like in this run , for me. Maybe I’m just used to his style and delivery at this point, but I really see very little that would excite me there if I was a US voter at this point.
I also don’t think the average voter in the US gets exactly how far down the pike the US is as far as something similar to a Eurozone meltdown happening there. And it is very close. [/quote]
You didn’t watch the Obama interview on 60 minutes? You missed all those hard hitting questions like, “was it hard for Michelle to adjust to life in the White House?”…or some such nonsense.
I agree with you on most of what you’ve posted. There will not me a melt down be either candidate. Although Obama breaking down and saying “Karl Marx was mostly right and he is my hero” would be nice 