The Politics Thread

[GoldenDogs]

Wow, so Candy Crowley corrected herself on CNN after the debate... Romney was CORRECT about Libya? Either way on the Libya thing, it's a problem for Obama because if it WASN'T a terrorist attack, why did the administration deny that for weeks? If he DIDN'T state it was a terrorist attack, then what was Obama's point in the debate? It's a paradox and the only reason Obama got away with it is because he received help from Crowley. No surprise there... but wow.

It was interesting to see how many times Obama hid behind Crowley. To the point where he would actually LOOK to Crowley for help in shutting Romney up, or even interrupting asking to move on. Amazing, especially since the man had almost four minutes more speaking time than Romney.

I think the two were even on substance, Obama wins in bluster. The fact of the matter is that this all boils down to Obama and his record. Can he defend it? Can he defend his economic and energy policies? And how long can he maintain this ruse regarding Libya and foreign policy in general?

The one thing that I criticize Romney for in this debate is that he willingly limped off to his corner after being hushed by both Obama and Crowley. That was a mistake, in my opinion. He interjected a couple of times, one to Biden-like smiling from Obama... he should have done it more often. Nobody knows where you stand on an issue if you aren't heard... he should have insisted. What, Crowley was gonna call in security to lead him out? Come on... Romney should have been as aggressive as Obama, maybe even more so.

[Roman]

He did just that, while Romney came off as an arrogant, rude self serving bully who gets offended if anyone ask him how and what he will do as POTUS. Jon Huntsmann was their very best chance to win the election, but he ran in the year of the crazy in that party, and it cost him.

[Wales2004]

I don't really get why Republicans are so stuck on Libya when I thought the economy was supposed to be their issue.

What did Candy Crowley correct after the debate? It would be helpful when you make those statements if you'd provide more information so everyone will know to what you're referring. All I know about is the phrase "Acts of terror" which Barack Obama did say. The semantics of it are quite another thing.

Mitt Romney interjected a whole lot more than he should have and I don't think it helped him but then again I'm not a Republican and I'm not a Democrat either so..... I found Mitt Romney overly aggressive and he can't help his condescending nature apparently.

But back to the fascination with Libya as if it's the greatest source of weakness to be found along with the whining about how Barack Obama won't give Benjamin Netanyahu his way and how China is a currency manipulator. The whole thing makes Republicans look more than daft and quite desperate actually. Who do the warmongers want to attack now....every nation in that region not called Israel? And at the same time get China irritated because this makes a whole lot of sense. This nation has been hampered by the whole WMD lie for over a decade and their big gotcha on foreign policy is politicizing what happened in Libya and pretending that everyone in the nation wants to know every detail.....as if there aren't things involving National Security that people will never understand. Pretty darn smart for those who want to restore Anglo-Saxon relations. Mitt Romney was this summer's laughingstock in Britain and elsewhere so yeah.....let's take him seriously on his foreign policy prowess with his George W. Bush foreign policy experts.

I am guessing that people will remember the Somali pirates put down. Osama Bin Laden. Muammar Qadaffi dead. Among others. And this happened while the alleged Muslim was running this country. Yikes.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Wales2004

[marceline]

The economy is only the number one issue when they want the women, gays and coloreds to stop talking about other things that matter to them.

The Libya thing just isn't going to get much traction because, sadly, Americans no longer really care about foreign affairs. If we did, we'd be freaking the [!@#$%^&*] out about the fact that we're still at war in Afghanistan. We're no longer a nation at war, we're a nation that sends people to fight wars. If we don't care about the people dying in Afghanistan, then why does Romney and the Foxbots think we're going to storm the White House over Libya?

[Ann_SS]

There was nothing for Candy or anyone to correct other than in the imaginations and delusions of Republicans. She and the President were right and Romney was rightly owned on that and many other points.

Jonathan Bernstein from the Washington Post describes Romney and the Republicans issues nicely here:

http://www.washingto...og.html?hpid=z3

Edited October 17, 2012 by Ann_SS

[MichaelGL]

People will also remember that it took a far more shorter time to liberate the people of Libya than with both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Edited October 17, 2012 by MichaelGL

[Wales2004]

Reince Priebus seems to believe that the more talk about Libya the better. He basically promised there will be more on Monday.

Maybe Mitt Romney will talk about how he's using George W. Bush's foreign policy advisers. I rather liked how he made George W. Bush sound as if he was President in the Middle Ages....2008 was such a long long time ago.

It kind of sounded as if he was governor back in the fifties when it was hard to find women for the complicated government jobs that required a search through binders full of women.

A friend told me that a PBS special on him showed how concerned he and his church were about the single mothers. They wanted to give the children up for adoption so that those little ones could all have the advantage of a two-parent home. I can only imagine how angry Madonna made them with "Papa Don't Preach" even though that may have been their anti-abortion anthem.....such conflict.

[DRW50]

Pathetic.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/republicans-empty-binder.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

[Delia]

If your complaining about the moderator, that means you lost.

[marceline]

LMAO! That really is sad.

[Ann_SS]

Pathetic. LOL!

[Wales2004]

Even more so because he lied about the binders. A group of women prepared the binders before the election so that whoever became governor would have a pool with which to work.

[JaneAusten]

Obama won the debate because he was aggressive and actually addressed a lot of the BS the GOP are spewing.i won't say it was a knockdown. Romney held his own to a great extent. I'm just pleased to see that Obama came out more forceful this time.

Romney just continues to stick his foot in his mouth and no one cares.

[marceline]

We're long past "sticking his foot in his mouth." He's just a liar. A sick, twisted pathological liar.

[Money]

Oh, people care. I thought Romney was effective in pointing out Obama's failure with the economy because Obama still hasn't laid out an effective plan for the next four years and he was absolutely right in stating Obama did not keep his promise to even file legislation for immigration reform when he had both the House and Senate. Obama had no answer for the latter. Both should have been slam dunks for Romeny but he's such a flip flopper all Obama has to do is continue to pick apart the lies he told which isn't very difficult.

I'm looking at some of the highlights again and I'm trying to understand why Romney thought it was a smart move to start rambling about Obama's pension during the immigration segment. It was a huge WTF moment.

MSNBC is stating that the woman who asked him how he' differs from Bush wasn't satisfied with his response and she'll be voting for Obama. It's hard to imagine there are still Undecideds at this point.