Third Presidential Debate, 22 October 2012

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 19:07

Do you see the watch Bob Schieffer is wearing! (Is it too late to change my major?)

BKKMAN · 10-22-2012, 20:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Do you see the watch Bob Schieffer is wearing! (Is it too late to change my major?)

I did notice when he said Obama Bin Laden when talking about Pakistan...nice Freudian slip...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/video-...rticle/2511478

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by BKKMAN

I did notice when he said [Deleted] Bin Laden when talking about Pakistan...nice Freudian slip...

Facebook won't let me make a comment on that slip of the tongue.

BKKMAN · 10-22-2012, 20:31

As for "fact checking" Mitt Romney on the auto bailout...he was right and the President was incorrect...

"The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/op...mney.html?_r=0

Just as I thought Romney was incorrect to challenge the President on what he said in the Rose Garden on Libya in the last debate (I thought he should attack in a more general sense, rather than getting mired in semantics), the President made a tactical error in challenging Romney on what he wrote in the op-ed in the New York Times...

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 20:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by BKKMAN

As for "fact checking" Mitt Romney on the auto bailout...he was right and the President was incorrect...

"The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/op...mney.html?_r=0

Just as I thought Romney was incorrect to challenge the President on what he said in the Rose Garden on Libya in the last debate (I thought he should attack in a more general sense, rather than getting mired in semantics), the President made a tactical error in challenging Romney on what he wrote in the op-ed in the New York Times...

After the last debate, NBC's Andrea Mitchell agreed that the president was misrepresenting Governor Romney's editorial. She also pointed out that the title of the editorial was selected by the editors of the New York Times.

However, she pointed out that Romney was opposed to the bail out as proposed. He wrote.

Quote:

But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost.

MOO, the president could take this risk because he's already laid the groundwork for painting Governor Romney as a plutocrat who does not care for the American working classes.

BKKMAN · 10-22-2012, 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

...MOO, the president could make this risk because he's already laid the groundwork for painting Governor Romney as a plutocrat who does not care for the American working classes.

Unfortunately, I think that the majority of the electorate will not take (or has not taken) the time to read the op-ed for themselves, thus allowing the President and his campaign to shape the narrative on what Romney's position on the bailout was...

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by BKKMAN

Unfortunately, I think that the majority of the electorate will not take (or has not taken) the time to read the op-ed for themselves, thus allowing the President and his campaign to shape the narrative on what Romney's position on the bailout was...

I agree.

I think both parties are counting on most voters not going and doing their own research on who said what.

Divemaster · 10-22-2012, 20:53

Is it just me, or did Mr. Obama come across as though this was his first run for the White House? Refering to the policies of the past while conveniently skipping the polices in place during 2009 - 2012 seems a bit disingenuous to me. Also, Mr. Romney correctly noted that the President's attacks on him do not equate to a vision for the future.

ZonieDiver · 10-22-2012, 20:56

Okay, on to the important issue: the performance of the moderator!

I'm no Bob S. fan. His interview with Marco Rubio on the Sunday morning show was pathetic. However, I think he did an excellent job (except when he was packing up his laptop while Romney still blathered in his closing).

This despite the fact, as I learned today, that Scheiffer's 3rd cousin, twice removed, knew a guy who once talked one of the parking valet's at at 'bat mitzvah' attended by Michelle Obama's aunt's mother's neighbor.

http:/wwww.icantbelieveyoureadthisbs.net

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

This despite the fact, as I learned today, that Schieffer's 3rd cousin, twice removed, knew a guy who once talked one of the parking valet's at at 'bat mitzvah' attended by Michelle Obama's aunt's mother's neighbor.

Did the valet give the guy a receipt? If not, Schieffer was biased.

ZonieDiver · 10-22-2012, 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

I agree.

I think both parties are counting on most voters not going and doing their own research on who said what.

And I am pretty sure they are both on safe ground in making that assumption, unfortunately.

XngZeRubicon · 10-22-2012, 21:06

While I personally would've enjoyed seeing a more aggressive Mitt Romney, Romney did what HE needed to do with that small group of undecideds he was targeting. And what that group did not want to see was a warmonger.

Sigaba · 10-22-2012, 21:14

Quote:

Romney did what HE needed to do with that small group of undecideds he was targeting. And what that group did not want to see was a warmonger.

If that is so, what they got was a look inside a mind that doesn't know the difference between a list of talking points and a cohesive grand strategy.

**PRB** · 10-22-2012, 21:18

I thought Mitt was spot on.
Obummers team thought he'd come out swinging on Libya...Obummer was prepped to paint him as a righty loon....
All Obama could do was snipe and make himself look small.
He did a great job for this limited mission of swing voters....he really does analyze and focus.

Reminds me of the recruiting effort some years ago when they ran it by us at the FORSCOM Commanders seminar prior to hitting the streets,,,,
It was the "Army of One" by line...they played some commercials and asked us what we thought....
We hated it and had thousands of reasons why....
The Col recruiter said ...excellent....if it appealed to you we would have totally missed our audiance. He was right.

XngZeRubicon · 10-22-2012, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

If that is so, what they got was a look inside a mind that doesn't know the difference between a list of talking points and a cohesive grand strategy.

I agree it was a list of talking points - that's all they can do in these silly debates with the time constraints. But the President was much worse at spelling out a cohesive grand strategy. His record is a disaster. In both the economy and foreign policy. The Middle East is on fire. The economy is anemic. That's the record this President can't run from -- no matter how much the press tries to let him. Romney has a lot of money left; the President is out of money and has to borrow $15million. I expect the Romney campaign to fill in the blanks from tonight with final two weeks of ads.