RobDownSouth
BoycotDivestSanctio
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 78,470
Pointing out that you didn't watch the debate last night is "nasty"?
Such a sensitive little boy you are.
				
			Such a sensitive little boy you are.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Charles KrauthammerCHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think it's unequivocal, Romney won. And he didn't just win tactically, but strategically. Strategically, all he needed to do is basically draw. He needed to continue the momentum he's had since the first debate, and this will continue it. Tactically, he simply had to get up there and show that he's a competent man, somebody who you could trust as commander in chief, a who knows every area of the globe and he gave interesting extra details, like the Haqqani network, which gave the impression he knows what he's talking about. But there is a third level here, and that is what actually happened in the debate.
We can argue about the small points and the debating points. Romney went large, Obama went very, very small, shockingly small. Romney made a strategic decision not go after the president on Libya, or Syria, or other areas where Obama could accuse him of being a Bush-like war monger. Now I would have gone after Obama on Libya like a baseball bat, but that's why Romney has won elections and I've never had to even contested them. He decided to stay away from the and I think that might have actually worked for him.
What he did concentrate on is the big picture. People don't care what our policy on Syria is going to be. They care about how America is perceived in the world and how America carries itself in the world. And the high point is when he devastatingly leveled the charge of Obama going around the world on an apology tour. Obama's answer was ask any reporter and they will tell you it wasn't so. That's about as weak an answer you can get. And Romney's response to quote Obama saying that, 'we dictate to other nations,' and Romney said, 'we do not dictate to other nations, we liberate them.' And Obama was utterly speechless.
So that is the large picture, America is strong and respecting. What Obama did is he kept interrupting, interjecting and his responses were almost all very small, petty attacks. The lowest was when he's talking about sanctions that are old. 'When I was working on sanctions you were investing in a company in China.' I mean that is the kind of attack you expect from a guy who is running for city council for the first time, that's not what you expect from the president. A personal attack about an investment when talking about Iran?
4es卍_4es卍_gump;42315400 said:Sounds like the troika of merc, Throb and U_D...


"WINNING!"
4es卍_4es卍_gump;42315423 said:These guys are really wound up this morning.
Seems the debate has turned the economy around and won the election; man are they charged!
On their horses with bayonets fixed!
4es卍_4es卍_gump;42315438 said:5, 6, 7, 8!
ONE! singular Obama...
The four debates totaled six hours and you want to complain about nine minutes? What did Romney/Ryan not have time to say in six hours?
If you look at it as an economic proposition, Obama/Biden got 567 seconds more air time or enough for 19 paid 30 second prime time spots. I'm still looking into actual ad costs but it would seem from what I've found so far it would be no less than $10,000K, perhaps $15,000 per in a battleground state. That's $190K of free spend for the incumbents.
Nine minutes out of 360 is a petty complaint. If nine minutes was too unfair for you, what number would be fair? Six minutes?
Obama had +4 minutes after the first debate and he was still widely seen as losing it so I'm not sure it's the advantage you claim it to be.
If you screw up your 4+ minutes it is not an advantage.
My main point, is that the timeline worked out this way.
I attribute it to the politcal leanings of the moderators. Ultimately, who else is there to blame? I suppose Bob did the best in the last debate with only a 35 second edge to the president.
Personally, I think any party that qualifies on enough state ballots to (in theory) win the electoral college should be included in these debates.
I'm intrigued by the thought that the best way to garner votes might be to not show up at all.
No, you voted for the empty chair...
Even the NH Patriots don't play there...
But they will do London!