Let's hope Obama is better prepared for the next one. Romney owned him on this one. He had an answer for everything and didn't let anything get by him without saying his peace about it. I still want to know why Obama brought up Lincoln and Reagan? Both Republicans. I don't think Romney compared himself to anyone.
As for the lies
I've read the facts, here's one list
http://theweek.com/article/index/234...#disqus_thread

Pretty simple how to vote, if you like the way things are going , then vote for Obama, if not, vote for Romney.
I'm voting for Romney, because when the incumbent has the record for unemployment above 8% and passed a major law based on a law the challenger passed in his state, that's not saying much for the incumbent.

I'm still pissed about what Obama did when Scott Brown was elected and I'm still pissed about all the presidential executive orders Obama has signed, 139, while Bush only signed 43 in twice the time, Obama can't be bothered with the system that's in place.

Very true.
But Bush had a good economy and low unemployment. Everyone was pissed at him over the war in Iraq...but as long as the economy was good he was forgiven.

I believe if Obama had simply made the right moves to get the economy rolling instead of spending the first two years on ObamaCare he would win in a landslide. He's got that same likeability that Bush had, but with 4 years of bad economy and unemployment he's in a much different situation.

I would certainly have a different opinion of him. Jobs are more important than anything, he was in a unique position of having more power than most presidents will ever have by having both the House and The Senate completely in Democrat control, and he still had a hard time getting Obamacare passed.
If he would have focused on getting jobs to people, the country would have been a lot better off. They would be working and more people would have health insurance because of it.

a politician saying things that aren't true? No way.

wtf kind of news is this. It's news when a politician DOESN't lie - that would be the first since the invention of politics.

Obama had so much going for him when he got into office. The democrats had the house and the senate, the nation hated the republican party because of what Bush did to the country and the world was at his back and it seems like he just made one mistake after the next.

To be honest I don't know that there is anything anyone could have done to that could turn the shitty economy around in 3 years, but it came off more like he was focused on passing the healthcare bill that working on the economy and he let the republicans bully him around. They treat him with utter disrespect and he just takes it. He is just now having the conversations about turning the economy around that he should have been having three years ago.

I won't be voting for him. I'm voting Johnson, but I think, in the end, he will still win. Romney has such an uphill battle to win the election that it is going to take more than one good debate to do so especially if Obama comes out and does decently in the next two.

Had he focused heavily on the economy and right now the unemployment rate was down to 6% or less Romney would be so far behind in the polls that it wouldn't have mattered at all what he said during the debate because Obama would have been able to stroll to a victory.

Well , Obama just got a little boost, the unemployment rate just went under 8% for the first time since the stimulus package , too little too late I think, but they will spin that I'm sure

Yeah, but it's just like last month's "drop" :(

Less jobs were created this month than last month. So it would have gone up. But more people stopped looking for work at all again this month which lowered the rate.

Just saw the numbers crunched on CNN. If the same amount of people were still in the work force today as there were when Obama took office...the unemployment rate would be 10.7%!!!! :disgust

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...012_p465-1.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...zsbso1_500.gif

I love how people think over a debate, that Obama still isn't a pretty big favorite LOL.

Obama still leads in Ohio. He was up big in Ohio prior to the debates and even with Romney cutting in he's up. He's up because they love the auto-bailout and he has a super strong ground game there, that is signifcantly better than Romney's.

If Mitt loses Ohio, he would have to win every other battleground state to win the election. He's already lowered his spending there, and his strategists are making contingency plans to try to win the election while still losing Ohio. By ground game, I am talking field operation offices, people working on voter turnout, etc. The campaign invested heavily in Ohio, for this precise reason.

I don't care if you like Romney. If you think he's up huge in the polls, or that he is now somehow a favorite to win, then you are a sheep. Bahhhhh. Mitt is going to need more momentum to take this race than a night's worth of debates, and let's not forget there's 2 more debates. By the time the 3rd one is done, the 1st one won't be so fresh in the mind as it is 24h after. The attn span of the American public is the size of a peanut.

Polling today is like polling after the RNC. Enjoy the sugar high. Until Ohio becomes contested, this isn't a race. A repub hasn't won the house without Ohio since the 1850s, and Obama will fight hard in the next 2 debates. History also shows what the poll #s are going into debates ends up being what they are coming out. It might be different this time, but history suggests as a whole, debates don't matter. People's minds are typically made up, nor is a debate a reason to switch sides. A debate is more like a wrestling match. Demeanor is more important than substance:

"OH YEAHHH... MITT BODY SLAMMED OBAMA, OMG!"
"Obama looked like a scared little puppy!"

You want to know whose going to win? Follow the $. Obama just raised $150M in September, smashing thru any record set in this election cycle. You think support for him is wavering? lol

While I like the fact Mitt will lower my taxes and his policies might be better in terms of promoting business - I don't think either guy can truly fix the world's economic problems, I dont want more conservative judges, and frankly put, I don't know which Mitt is the real Mitt. The only thing that appears truthful to me is, he will say whatever, to any audience, to try and win an election. Is he the moderate from MA, or is he the man who panders to the far right? The truth: nobody fucking knows, and I'm not about to find out.

If you're a die hard Repub, enjoy clinging onto a night's worth of events. I'm sure Obama will take the $150M, the fact he holds an advantage in Ohio, and about 30 days left before we vote. A 7.8% jobs # can only help, although it smells. Let's not forget Mitt has never led in an average of the polls, and that is still true of today. Obama is holding the cards right now. It would take a series of 2-3 pretty bad events for him to lose. Could it happen? Sure. Likely? No.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pABOVIGc59...q86qo1_500.png

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto..._1233725_n.jpg

http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/up...bate-Trick.jpg

:stoned

ADG

Snoop on Romney n Obama
 

Reagan VS Carter disproves that. Carter was far ahead of Reagan in the polls at this same time in the election. Then they had the debate and Reagan was personable and energetic and full of optimism. Carter looked tired and depressed.
Reagan won in a landslide.

Kinda like this debate that just happened.

Not saying that is gonna be anywhere NEAR what happens this time. Obama pretty much has the black vote 100% sewn up. Not 60%, not 70%...but almost 100%. And Obama is going to win the womens vote big time to thanks to the Republicans retarded strategy of pandering to the fucking religious groups.

I think this election is gonna be pretty close in the popular vote. And as you said...if Obama does indeed take Ohio (the auto bailout helps and he also just gave ONE MILLION FREE PHONES to people in Ohio...they are calling them "Obama-Phones" lol...just blatantly buying votes!), then there's no way Romney is gonna be close on the electoral vote as of today.

However...if Romney somehow has a miracle occur and can win the other two debates convincingly, THEN you might see those swing states change.

I don't think that's gonna happen though. The parts of the media who love Obama (MSNBC & CNN) are now in "panic" mode and it's 24/7 bashing of Romney on MSNBC. They are going to do everything in their power to stop Romney.

They aren't even trying to hide it! lol
You can tune into Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC and she is just smirking and attacking Romney for the whole hour. Calling him a liar and making fun of him...it's like she's posting on GFY instead of doing a "news" show. :1orglaugh

I dont get USA politks...

Let me explain it to you:
Republicans and Democrats have rigged the system so they are the only two parties that get any serious consideration.

Then they integrate themselves into people's lives and form a kind of "bond" like you have with your favorite sports team. Families even "pass down" their party affiliation from generation to generation and the next generation follows blindly.

Then the election is more like a sports event. Instead of anybody worrying about the actual issues...everybody just cheers (and votes) for their "side".

It works out great for the thieving career politician Republicans and Democrats. They always win, and the people always lose.

He was taking care of the Embassy hostage crisis in Iran ....:2 cents:

No, he was failing to take care of it. I remember it very well.

Kind of exactly like obama except for the 'fat' part.

Oh, and the 'everyone knows it part' too as 95% of the people (who actually vote) still vote Dem or Rep.

I will honestly always wonder what really happened there...

Stange , isn`t it :

... minutes after ... Probably my fertile imagibation , but tgis looks like a well orchestrated ballet ... :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Anyway, you must be RIGHT .... as always.

October Surprise...

If you read up on it you'd know that Reagans team had the entire release negotiated and set up to happen as soon as Reagan took office. I was 19 years old when it happened and like everyone else in my country was following it every day on the news.

And yeah I am RIGHT on this. (and yes I get your weak jab at me...but the hostages getting released had nothing to do with being "conservative" or "liberal" and everything to do with Carters team fucking it up)

I just re-watched the entire debate, and it's kinda funny, but this time around Obama actually did a pretty good job stating his case.

He looked down, he looked at the camera, and he didn't take a combative posture, but his points were accurate.

Romney on the other hand, had better body language and seemed better prepared for the debate, as far as style, but his positions were 100% flipped from the positions he's stated over the past year. He had no details, and he lied continuously.

I would definitely pick Romney over Obama as head salesman of my used car lot, as he lies so seemlessly.

If I was a conservative, drinking the Romney/Ryan kool aid over the past year, I would especially think Romney was a liar, as he reversed his stance on almost everything on a dime.

I think democrats and Obama fans really wanted a big fight, and the fact that there weren't any real fireworks disappointed them, myself included. The actual context wasn't nearly as lopsided the second time around, compared to how I perceived the results of the debate the first time I watched it live.

AND THERE you have the real problem.

These debates are pointless if either side is allowed to get away with half truths or lies.

Romney can't cut taxes without cutting spending or borrowing, printing more. Unless he is a magician. no politician can in any country. Yet they are allowed to stand there and straight lie to millions around the world.

What's required is an adversarial where they make a statement to a panel who are plugged into experts behind the scenes to be cross examined on their spin. 100% possible in todays world. This is about getting the best man in charge, not the best looking most media friendly guy in the hot seat.

:thumbsup

I was 29 years old ... and if my old alzheimer memory doesn`t default me, I have a vague recollection that CANADA was involved in that ' situation ' .....

LOL, I was off the coast of Iran, punching holes in the Ocean, I was in the boat closest to the shore, We didn't hear any oars in the water, so Canada wasn't there. I was 19

As expected, another moronic non-educated post ... probably the lack of oxygen while washing the dishes in the submarine ...

any other idiotic comment ... ????

Can you explain how please.