View Full Version : Belmont University Debate
Loadsmasher
10-07-2008, 19:29
We're about 1/4 of the way through this debate and so far it seems like McCain is walking all over BHO, especially on economics. McCain slammed him with that comment on the letter about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Thought/Comments
I think Mac is doing a good job not digging his hole any deeper, but BHo has him beat on stage presence and speaking ability.
BHo is a silver tounged devil.
My favorite line from McCain so far was, "I'll actually answer the question (re: SSI and Medicare)." After Obama once again dodged the issue.
BTW can any Obama supporters explain to me where exactly he is planning on cutting spending in the budge to make monies available for these programs he is proposing while simultaneously providing tax cuts for 95% of Americans. He talks a good game on some of his programs, but I don't see where he is getting the money.
Loadsmasher
10-07-2008, 19:55
but BHo has him beat on stage presence and speaking ability.
You're kidding, right?
McCain is energized, walking around the stage, looking people in the eye when they ask questions.
BHO turned and faced the wall while talking into the microphone for a good 8 seconds when answering a question.
McCain is being relentless in his attacks at BHO. He has called him out on almost every single comment he has made.
I'm not saying it's a grand slam, but McCain is working this one very well
Oh, and did he compare Obama to Jello?
priceless
BHo has him beat on stage presence and speaking ability.
I disagree. I think Obama is coming off overly academic and stiff. McCain is speaking far more clearly and in a direct manner while Obama is dodge question to maintain his rhetoric and poor pitiful me stance (a la "swift boat tactics yad yad) like his side isn't throwing mud :rolleyes: I hate this stage of the election where everyone is so busy pointing at the other guy or trying to look like the victim that no one is really talking issues.
The Reaper
10-07-2008, 20:01
Obama is lost without the Teleprompter.
He is stuttering, stumbling, and wandering off track.
Most of what I have seen, he is trying to respond to McCain, rather than answering the questions asked. IMHO, Obama is spending his time trying to defend himself against McCain's comments.
So far, I like McCain's answers and his manner much better.
TR
You're kidding, right?
McCain is energized, walking around the stage, looking people in the eye when they ask questions.
BHO turned and faced the wall while talking into the microphone for a good 8 seconds when answering a question.
McCain is being relentless in his attacks at BHO. He has called him out on almost every single comment he has made.
I'm not saying it's a grand slam, but McCain is working this one very well
Oh, and did he compare Obama to Jello?
priceless
I disagree. I think Obama is coming off overly academic and stiff. McCain is speaking far more clearly and in a direct manner while Obama is dodge question to maintain his rhetoric and poor pitiful me stance (a la "swift boat tactics yad yad) like his side isn't throwing mud :rolleyes: I hate this stage of the election where everyone is so busy pointing at the other guy or trying to look like the victim that no one is really talking issues.
McCain is saying what I want to hear and doing well. What I am getting at is Obama is smooth, well spoken and easy to watch....the sheeple eat that up.
I like BHOs remark that 'earmarks' account for only $18B of the federal budget. ONLY $18B? :confused:
Oh, and listening to his foreign policy statements, are we ready to rush into the Congo, Rwanda, etc? :confused:
Richard :munchin
I grew tired of hearing BHo reiterating 'the last 8 years'. My belief is that our problems go back much further than 8 years.
I am tired of "the last eight years" argument as well. I don't want a history lesson. I wanna know what you are gonna do. Give me a plausible and economically feasible plan for the NEXT eight years rather than bedraggling Bush policies ... who last I checked wasn't running in this race :rolleyes:
Puertoland
10-07-2008, 21:05
McCain handled this one extremely well. Obama stayed on the defensive, especially in the first half.
McCain got in an aggressive rhythm, spoke well, and his presence was on point tonight. Walking around, looking to each person, and not muttering incoherent and hot noise that had nothing to do with the question.
Obama on the other hand was much more rigid, and definitely not in his rhythm.
Would somebody please send McCain to DS or DI school so he doesn't sound like such a wimp! :mad:
Too bad this wasn't a tag-team match. :D
Pat
cowboydan
10-07-2008, 21:17
I like BHOs remark that 'earmarks' account for only $18B of the federal budget. ONLY $18B? :confused:
Here's the actual OMB website which gives a number on the Earmarks spent this year.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/earmarks/public-site-preview/2008_appropriations_home.html
Its actually $16,501,833,000 so he overstated the Earmarks by saying 18 billion.
charlietwo
10-07-2008, 21:23
Most of what I have seen, he is trying to respond to McCain, rather than answering the questions asked. IMHO, Obama is spending his time trying to defend himself against McCain's comments.
TR
I second that. I didn't realize until the debate was almost over, but Obama spent a lot of time responding to McCain's lead. I had a picture in my head of Obama chasing McCain down a road shaking his fist.
As to McCain's performance, it didn't seem like he made any serious blunders. When he picked up the pace, and got aggressive, I enjoyed listening to him. But when he started playing nice to appeal to the 'sensitive' types, I felt like turning off the TV.
On a side note, I though the format was utterly absurd. 1 friggin' minute to explain complex foreign and domestic policy issues? Ridiculous. I didn't think a town hall debate had a moderator? Sort of defeats the purpose I think.
I don't think Obama is good at public speaking. In fact, I think he's a terrible speaker. I don't know what he's talking about and I don't think he does either.
Senator Obama spends so much time putting his thoughts together and yet fails to see how one statement is going to be in conflict with the next.
Senator Obama's teleological interpretation of contemporary American history is intellectually bankrupt, not the least because he spent so much energy discrediting the "achievements" of the Clinton years during the primaries.
It wasn't within America's power change the outcome in Rwanda? Really? Even President Clinton has admitted that his administration mishandled that crisis terribly.
Obama should change his campaign slogan to "hey... at least I'm not Bush"
USANick7
10-08-2008, 04:20
Here's the actual OMB website which gives a number on the Earmarks spent this year.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/earmarks/public-site-preview/2008_appropriations_home.html
Its actually $16,501,833,000 so he overstated the Earmarks by saying 18 billion.
I think the point was..."only" 18 Billion. The mere fact that Obama passes that off as if it is nothing is the problem.
16.5 Billion is a great deal of money even when you are talking about the federal budget.
Just because the federal budget is in the trillions does not mean they have that much to really play with. Most of that money is obligated to one place or another. Congress has to pay the bills, as it were, too.
Money they use for earmarks is important because it is how they use the federal government to undermine federalism. Earmarks are also used in order to thwart or manipulate legislation. So its not just about the money; its the principle of the matter, and the overarching effect it has on our legislative process.
... Congress has to pay the bills, as it were, too....
Yeah, with taxpayer money.
No knockout blow, both sides will see what they want in their guy. Trying to be nonpartisan I'd still give the edge to McCain.
The Undecided? Yeah right!
Me? My vote will be based on the 2nd Ammendment, Security, 1st Ammendment and Court Appointments - in that order.
Taxes and size of government? Just depends on if you want the fast or slow slide.
Obama should change his campaign slogan to "hey... at least I'm not Bush"
Kerry tried that four years ago, and it didn't work for him either. Dems should have revamped after the Kerry loss and didn't. Now they are back to the same old crap.
USANick7
10-08-2008, 04:36
Yeah, with taxpayer money.
Well unless Obama gets elected, then congress will be able to pay the bills with "Hope Currency"; its like regular money...but worthless.
Would somebody please send McCain to DS or DI school so he doesn't sound like such a wimp! :mad:
Too bad this wasn't a tag-team match. :D
Pat
That is what I was looking for and I couldn't put my finger on it. A bit more commanding and less grandfatherly. I thought all in all they were chasing each other around the tree and overall I'd call it a draw, Obama didn't make any huge mistakes and McCain didn't make any huge advancments.
The one thing McCain said I thought was odd was about the Government buying up bad mortgages....bad idea IMO.
Me? My vote will be based on the 2nd Ammendment, Security, 1st Ammendment and Court Appointments - in that order.
Taxes and size of government? Just depends on if you want the fast or slow slide.
Your reading my mind.
rubberneck
10-08-2008, 08:10
I noticed something interesting after last nights debate. When it was over I was watching Fox but switched over to CNN when Fox went to spin row. I went to CNN becuase I wanted to hear how the Obama camp was spinning the debate. At the time Solidad O'Brien was interviewing a focus group of 25 that was comprised of likely voters who where either leaning Democrat/Republican or uncommitted. She asked this group a series of question about their take on the debate and the candidates themselves. Not surprisingly the split on just about every question was 14 or 15 in favor of Obama versus 10 or 11 for McCain.
Then something really interesting happened as they ended the discussion O'Brien asked by a show of hands who would vote for McCain and who would vote for Obama if the election was today. Fifteen out of the 25 said that they would have voted for McCain despite all the positive things they had to say about Obama. Anderson Cooper was so stunned that he asked O'Brien if he what he just saw really happened.
I think it is indicative of the fact that support for Obama is fairly wide but very shallow. I don't think the polls accurately reflect that lack of depth and come election day many who say that they support Obama may stay home or end up voting for McCain.
I think that the Democrats need to go back to first principles, vet every assumption, revisit every concept and, as they say, re-imagine, re-invent, and re-launch themselves.
In my view, they seem to think that the New Deal coalition is the natural order of things, that they have a monopoly on good ideas, and that the only way they lose elections is because they're 'cheated'.
They need to define themselves in terms of what they are and what they believe rather than recycling cynical notions of what they are not.
Kerry tried that four years ago, and it didn't work for him either. Dems should have revamped after the Kerry loss and didn't. Now they are back to the same old crap.
Would somebody please send McCain to DS or DI school so he doesn't sound like such a wimp! :mad: Pat
Have you ever heard a recording of GEN Patton? :eek: In spite of how wimpy he sounded, the guy could motivate and lead troops and kick ass. :lifter
Richard's $.02
Similarly, if you ever hear a recording of Theodore Roosevelt's voice, you might find it a bit high pitched.
Have you ever heard a recording of GEN Patton? :eek: In spite of how wimpy he sounded, the guy could motivate and lead troops and kick ass. :lifter
Richard's $.02
Have you ever heard a recording of GEN Patton? :eek: In spite of how wimpy he sounded, the guy could motivate and lead troops and kick ass. :lifter
Richard's $.02
I'm not sure that I have. I guess my image of GEN Patton is the George C. Scott version. :D
Pat
I'm not sure that I have. I guess my image of GEN Patton is the George C. Scott version. :D
http://www.earthstation1.com/General_George_S._Patton.html :cool:
Richard :munchin
CPTAUSRET
10-08-2008, 10:37
http://www.earthstation1.com/General_George_S._Patton.html :cool:
Richard :munchin
Interesting, he sounds a bit like HST.
Recordings from the 30's and early 40's seem to be "Off" somewhat to my ear.
Movies made around that time sound fairly close to modern sound but radio seems a bit "tinny" or metalic.
At least to me.
http://www.earthstation1.com/General_George_S._Patton.html :cool:
Richard :munchin
Thanks, Richard.
This is evidence that substance trumps style. ;)
Pat
The Reaper
10-08-2008, 14:17
Similarly, if you ever hear a recording of TR's voice, you might find it a bit high pitched.
I doubt it.
Do I know you?
TR
Teddy Roosevelt, I'm guessing. :D I have heard your voice (very briefly), and did not find it high pitched.
Dan
greenberetTFS
10-08-2008, 15:29
I doubt it.
Do I know you?
TR
TR,
I don't know you,but where in the hell is this guy coming from?.....:confused:
GB TFS :munchin
Sir--
The TR to whom I referred is Theodore Roosevelt.
Respectfully,
Sigaba
I doubt it.
Do I know you?
TR
Sir--
The TR to whom I referred is Theodore Roosevelt.
Respectfully,
Sigaba
Whew........that was a close one.:D
alright4u
10-09-2008, 08:53
I am tired of "the last eight years" argument as well. I don't want a history lesson. I wanna know what you are gonna do. Give me a plausible and economically feasible plan for the NEXT eight years rather than bedraggling Bush policies ... who last I checked wasn't running in this race :rolleyes:
The problems started long before with the CRA, plus all the PC MC social engineering. Add all the diversity mandated lending to even illegals to own homes.
This crap goes back to even Carter. Credit derivatives/credit default swaps same same.. Look at Obama's advisors on homes. They ripped off Freddie and Fannie. Truthfully, all in both houses are feeding high on the hog at the public trough.
All here know what a BI is. How could Obama pass a thorough BI?