Active Member
Stubby Member
It must be nice when you have the moderator on your side.
Administrator
The unsporting losing team always blames the refs.Originally Posted by 50 Volt Phantom
Active Member
It must be nice to live in your own world with your own facts.
Stubby Member
Who had more time talking? Who was stopped short more?
FATUM NOS IUNGET
Who still attempted to bully the moderator at pretty much every turn? Again?
Administrator
Consider cutoffs good for Romney - the longer he talked, the bigger the hole he dug himself.
That said - the president got four more minutes. If they split that evenly and each candidate got two minutes, Romney would have won the debate, right?
Stubby Member
Getting married, stopping AK47 deaths since 2012.
Stubby Member
I wouldn't know, ask your boy Obama.
The moderator was clearly biased leading into the debate, I'm certainly okay with him going after her.
Throbbing Member
Oh god, just lose like a man for once.
Active Member
Considering how far on the right she is, I thought she did well. Much better than I was expecting.
"Have you looked at your pension?"
"It's not as much as yours"
That part killed me.
Stubby Member
If pointing out what an unabashed phenomenal failure Obama has been in the last four years in every feasible way is digging a hole then ya he dug one hell of a hole.
FATUM NOS IUNGET
As Mitt secretly thought to himself: 'Pen...sion?....what's a...pension?'
Administrator
I'm looking at my mutual funds... and I'm loving the direction Obama's taking things.
So is it because Obama got to talk more, or is it the moderator? It wasn't Mitt Romney failing?
Stubby Member
Outside of an ABC poll that I couldn't give a shit less about, I don't believe Romney lost.
Throbbing Member
What will this debate do to the polls, and did it reach as many people (67 million) as the first one?
Administrator
So you should be happy with the debate outcome, right?
Also: Thank you Barack Obama for saying over and over again, "That is not true, Governor."
Throbbing Member
Horseshit. It's a sure sign of an opposition win when one side is whining about the moderator.
Stubby Member
Ya, excessive deficits and taxing the rich is the right direction....
The moderator more aggressively went to shut down Romney then Obama, her agenda and aid to Obama was outright.
Administrator
Truth. I fucking hated Jim Lehrer after that first debate, hehe.
Stubby Member
Biden acted like an asshole and clearly lost to Ryan and I think the moderator in that one was fucking abysmal too, your point is invalid.
Active Member
All of the above? She didn't let Mittens push her around like he did to Lehrer. I was amazed that she actually called him out on lying/misinformation on Obama's speech after the embassy attack. Romney made an ass of himself. He comes up with numerous claims of how Obama's a failure, but can never come up with a logical solution. He's a business man. Good for him. He's a fucking idiot with foreign policy. He's already got other countries hating him. Do we really need HIM as our figurehead?
Administrator
Can you imagine what kind of assholes you have to deal with to make your way into a respectable position in television news as a woman? Particularly when all the 'successful' women in your field are pretty/vacant. You don't get there by being a pushover.
As I remember the 2008 campaign, I actually had negative reactions specifically to Candy Crowley's treatment of Obama as a candidate at the time.
Bent Member
My favorite Crowley moment was, "Sit down, Governor Romney."
Stubby Member
Ya except Romney was right, Obama did say "act of terror" but not in regard to the actual incident, and if he had believed it was terrorism then why would he send his surrogates out to say it wasn't for two weeks?
Active Member
I thought she was going to side with Romney, to be completely honest. It's no secret how far on the right wing she is. But she came through as the unbiased moderator. Mad props to her. But good for her not taking any real nonsense. Some rules were obviously broken (apparently, the candidates aren't supposed to talk to one another), but she let it slide.
edit:
What else would he have meant by "act of terror"? Hint. He said TERROR.
Stubby Member
Context. Again, his surrogates said otherwise for two weeks.
Active Member
Basically, you're going with his wording of it? He said "act of terror" just to say it? Because if I were to hear anyone say "act of terror", i'd automatically assume they're talking about terrorism. Just because someone wants to jumble through his transcripts, or skim from the top, he still addressed it the next day, no matter how he worded it. Wasn't aware anyone really needed to spell out "act of terror".
Throbbing Member
I'll bet "terror" has been in every presidential speech for the last 10 years.
He didn't say it was a terrorist attack and he didn't say it wasn't.
He could mean a terrifying act or a terrorist act.
Either way, both of them are full of shit.
Administrator
Obama gave a speech in the rose garden about Benghazi where he opened by denouncing an act of terror. Because he didn't specifically say "the Benghazi killings were an act of terror", the right wants to say he didn't say it. I can't even believe how ridiculous this talking point is. To me, it says you have nothing but faux outrage.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
