• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Did Obama Throw the Debate?

presidential debate

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

Poll: Did Obama Throw the Debate? (10 member(s) have cast votes)

Did Obama throw the debate?

  1. Maybe (3 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  2. Yes (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. No (6 votes [60.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  4. Don't know (1 votes [10.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote
⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#1 Luminosity

  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:34 AM


There's one thing Obama can do: talk. He's given some great speeches. He's prepared, disciplined and a tireless campaigner. So how come he lost the debate to Mitt Romney?

They basically work for the same people: banksters, Wall Street, oil companies, big business, rich people, and the defense industry. Did they have a word with him? Did they tell him the he was out and Romney was in? Can you even do that? What would it take to get someone to throw a presidential race?

Now Romney's polls are up, they say. How many people were that undecided this late in the game?

If you want to watch the real debates, the ones that included all viewpoints, go to Democracy Now. They pieced together an expanded debate, editing in Green Party Candidate Jill Stein and Justice Party Candidate Rocky Anderson. What a pleasure it was to hear the truth spoken. Jill Stein is my president.

http://www.democracy...ee_hour_special

What do you think happened?

To see more of my commentary, go to my blog at:
http://www.longecity...at-7-commentary

Edited by Luminosity, 10 October 2012 - 03:41 AM.

  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

#2 Application

  • Guest
  • 153 posts
  • 99
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:33 AM

On conspiracy radio (Alex Jones) I heard Lindsey Williams' spouting a theory that Romney intimidated Obama by communicating in his attacks that he was now the elites' choice. This completely ruined Obama's confidence. Williams said Obama pissed the elites off by not expanding drilling in US quickly enough and not backing the oil sands pipeline fully among other sins.
  • dislike x 2

#3 Connor MacLeod

  • Guest
  • 619 posts
  • 46

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:39 PM

MITT ROMNEY IS A REPTILIAN-HUMANOID. OBAMA IS A STAR-SEED CHILD. THE FORCES OF DARKNESS AND LIGHT HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN A STRUGGLE LONG BEFORE HOMO-SAPIENS APPEARED ON THE SCENE. MITT ROMENY (A.K.A. ARKANUS NAR DRUL) USED HIS PSIONIC POWERS TO TEMPORARILY TEAR A RIFT IN THE STAR SEED CHILDREN'S DNA MATRIX-HOLOGRAM. I, ALONG WITH A FEW OTHERS, HAVE BEEN RECRUITED TO HELP HEAL THAT RIFT. HOWEVER, TIME IS SHORT, AND WE ARE NEEDFUL OF MORE BAGELS AND LOX.

PAUL RYAN IS ALSO REPTILIAN-HUMANOID (DONT ASK FOR HIS REAL NAME, EVEN A CRUDE APPROXIMATION IS IMPOSSIBLE IN ANY HUMAN TONGUE.) THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT BIDEN IS NOT A STAR-SEED, JUST A HUMAN (WHICH, IF YOU ARE CURIOUS, IS WHY OBAMA SELECTED HIM), SO PSIONIC ATTACKS ON MATRIX HOLOGRAM WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON HIM. HOWEVER, BIDEN IS AS DUMB AS WOOD, SO WE'RE PROBABLY SCREWED IN ANYCASE.
  • like x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 scottknl

  • Guest
  • 420 posts
  • 325
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:14 AM

No, it was the Gish Gallop that Obama couldn't deal with.
http://rationalwiki....iki/Gish_Gallop

Some days I'm so glad I'm not a lawyer or a politician.

#5 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:17 AM

Chemistry explains it once again... Mormons don't drink coffee, but the religion takes no stance on methamphetamine. Meanwhile, someone slipped Obama a couple Ambien. Chris Christie was obviously appraised of all this in advance.

#6 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 11 October 2012 - 02:15 AM

I think the Gore's Altitude explanation is the most likely, along with serious overconfidence.

#7 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 13 October 2012 - 06:21 AM

Thanks for your opinions. MAYBE he had an off night or didn't want to seem like an angry black man?

#8 cesium

  • Guest
  • 138 posts
  • 28

Posted 14 October 2012 - 12:29 AM

Maybe Obama knows that this ponzi scheme we call an economy has pretty much run its course and the total economic collapse of the Western World is just around the corner, and figures hey screw it, let Mitt take the blame instead of letting them try and stick it to me, lol.
  • like x 2
  • dislike x 1

#9 Turnbuckle

  • Member
  • 3,659 posts
  • 1,499
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:37 AM

Maybe Obama wants out. Maybe he's tired of being blackmailed and dancing to the tune of whoever owns him--the CIA perhaps, with his real birth certificate. Michelle certainly looked odd before the debate. As if she knew what was coming and didn't approve. So yeah, maybe he did throw it. I mean, just how hard would it be to demolish Romney?
  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#10 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 15 October 2012 - 02:04 AM

Good point.

#11 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:19 AM

Here's an alternate explanation: One source said that the government was about to announce the approach of planet X

http://www.examiner....-obama-imminent
  • dislike x 1

#12 mikeinnaples

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 285
  • Location:Florida

Posted 30 October 2012 - 04:00 PM

Chemistry explains it once again... Mormons don't drink coffee, but the religion takes no stance on methamphetamine. Meanwhile, someone slipped Obama a couple Ambien. Chris Christie was obviously appraised of all this in advance.


The real question is who slipped Chris Christie all those big macs.
  • like x 1

#13 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:21 AM

Try taking one away from him.

Romney drinks diet coke because his religion, formed in the 1800's, only prohibits coffee and tea.

#14 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:39 AM

Honestly I hope Planet X is coming or it’s a big conspiracy or Something! Cause the truth is probably just as boring as it usually is…

Obama’s excuse (he was a little down because of the flight) along with legitimately feeling that he’d failed at completing his set goals was the reason for his poor performance. Obama doesn’t strike me as someone who easily rids himself of blame when he screws up.

To Obama that debate was probably (to a degree) the parent teacher meeting after the child fails on the last test and may not graduate on. Obama was probably dreading the debate for months.

#15 Brafarality

  • Guest
  • 684 posts
  • 43
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:06 PM

Not sure, but, if so, then it was a costly blunder: not one that will cost him the election, but one that necessitated a lot of scrambling to recover.
At this point, I think President Obama has reestablished a narrow but definite lead and am hoping that this results in a VICTORY today!

Oh Yeah! Love Barack Obama. Best thing to happen to American politics in a loooong time.

#16 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 03:05 AM

His performance in the other two debates was back to normal. I hope he wins, because I prefer him to the alternative. I hope you are safe in New Jersey. Anything to report?

#17 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:54 AM

Well, the Republican message didn't quite catch on. Now, I wonder if it would even be possible for the two sides in this country to come together. I'd like to think it would be, providing we could agree over basic facts. I can respect values that are different than my own, but I can't respect people who favor ideology over evidence.

#18 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 07 November 2012 - 03:31 PM

This seems to be a repudiation of a couple of things:
1. The social conservatives who seem to be pro life without exceptions for rape.
2. The anti-immigration wing of the GOP

Obama won, but the GOP kept the house, and kept filibuster capability(40) in the senate.

#19 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 07 November 2012 - 09:36 PM

....and so the show goes on.

That's the issue really; it's a "Show". Regardless of whether Mitt had won instead of Obama this would still be the issue.

In Canada our politics is mostly boring, reasonable, and productive. Sometimes we see the rare political scandal and a bit of poo flinging but mostly it’s boring and not worth the attention. That’s how it should be.

#20 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 09:55 PM

And on deck, The Fiscal Cliff! I wonder how that's going to work out? It's ok with me if we hit the cliff. I don't think it's going to have as profoundly negative an impact on the economy as some people do. I see a relatively brief and shallow recession if a-sequestering we go.

#21 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 07 November 2012 - 10:16 PM

And on deck, The Fiscal Cliff! I wonder how that's going to work out? It's ok with me if we hit the cliff. I don't think it's going to have as profoundly negative an impact on the economy as some people do. I see a relatively brief and shallow recession if a-sequestering we go.


I’ve always been a Liberal. I feel there is a place for Government in our life. That being said I feel that with us living in capitalist society we should allow things to run their course.

The reason for the 2008 fiscal collapse was because of a failure within the system. That failure was prevented from occurring and as a result we’re still susceptible in the west to an even larger collapse.

I hope that the fiscal cliff occurs and I hope that it will result in another financial collapse. True it’s easier for me to say that being that I’m in Vancouver and I’ll likely feel the effects of that collapse a lot less. But I also feel that we are starting to see a much lower growth rate around the world and our economies are still geared to work with a high rate of growth.

We need to collapse and reorient ourselves. Whether you are a Republican, a Democrat… A Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Green, or Parti Québécois (to name a few Canadian parties) – we need to remap, reorganize and rethink our views of a sustainable lifestyle and society.

With Climate change, an increasing middle class in countries like India and China, an ever increasing resource expense… It’s only natural to think that things can and will become more challenging in the future. Based on this one cannot expect to have such a high growth rate for much longer.

Does that make sense? And what does that have to do with Obama throwing the debate? I think it has a lot to do with his reaction during that debate. I think he sees the same thing I do.

#22 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 10:50 PM

The reason for the 2008 fiscal collapse was because of a failure within the system. That failure was prevented from occurring and as a result we’re still susceptible in the west to an even larger collapse.


There was certainly a failure within the system, but it wasn't prevented from occurring. It did occur. Then the mess was cleaned up with a huge government intervention so that we wouldn't have another worldwide Great Depression. Instead, we got off relatively easy with the "Great Recession". How do you figure that we're still susceptible to an even larger collapse? The prevention of that is what Dodd-Frank is supposed to be about. I guess that since Dodd-Frank didn't fix every possible way in which things could blow up, there is still a possibility of another financial crisis, but I think the odds of that have been reduced, and if one does happen, it will probably be smaller than it otherwise would have been.

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#23 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:08 PM

There was certainly a failure within the system, but it wasn't prevented from occurring. It did occur. Then the mess was cleaned up with a huge government intervention so that we wouldn't have another worldwide Great Depression. Instead, we got off relatively easy with the "Great Recession". How do you figure that we're still susceptible to an even larger collapse? The prevention of that is what Dodd-Frank is supposed to be about. I guess that since Dodd-Frank didn't fix every possible way in which things could blow up, there is still a possibility of another financial crisis, but I think the odds of that have been reduced, and if one does happen, it will probably be smaller than it otherwise would have been.


To me the larger issue is the debt and the philosophy behind it. With Obama in office perhaps he’ll leave with a Surplus but I don’t see that larger debt issue (globally) going away. If another Great Depression had occurred I think we may have come upon a reason to really look hard at how we live our lives and change.

It’s standard for people to be in debt these days. Debt is a HUGE issue! The bailout mended things short term but it completely ignored the larger issue. Dodd-Frank and other resolutions like it may fix some of the holes that caused the 2008 collapse but I feel there is a larger philosophical issue in the west that we’ve completely failed to address.

It wasn’t just the holes in finance that sunk the ship it was the unrealistic expectations of the public. People in the west still think they deserve to be wealthy and I think that is a huge failing. There is a virtual flood of highly educated people from the east willing to work 16hrs a day for next to nothing. We need to take a good long look at the broader issue or we’re doomed to drive this issue deeper and deeper. Just how far down can we go before there’s no way back?

#24 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 08 November 2012 - 01:24 AM

Debt is not fundamentally bad in the abstract. Debt that exceeds your ability to service it is the problem. Credit is fundamental to the functioning of modern economies. Our national debt was not really a factor in the credit crisis. Some members of the public may have had unrealistic expectations, but the real problem was that unregulated mortgage originators were writing utter garbage loans to people who shouldn't have gotten them. They conned the people into getting in over their heads, much of the time. They immediately flipped these loans to Wall Street, who repackaged them and sold them as "safe" securities. Thus the mortgage originators who wrote the loans had no skin in the game, and no incentive to do anything except write more bad loans and sell them. I find it hard to put much blame on the financially naive public in this case; certainly not equal to the blame that the financial industry bears.

#25 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:50 AM

Debt is not fundamentally bad in the abstract. Debt that exceeds your ability to service it is the problem. Credit is fundamental to the functioning of modern economies. Our national debt was not really a factor in the credit crisis. Some members of the public may have had unrealistic expectations, but the real problem was that unregulated mortgage originators were writing utter garbage loans to people who shouldn't have gotten them. They conned the people into getting in over their heads, much of the time. They immediately flipped these loans to Wall Street, who repackaged them and sold them as "safe" securities. Thus the mortgage originators who wrote the loans had no skin in the game, and no incentive to do anything except write more bad loans and sell them. I find it hard to put much blame on the financially naive public in this case; certainly not equal to the blame that the financial industry bears.


Hmm...

Perhaps you’re right. I know that credit is essential. I also recognize that through inflation that 15 Trillion Dollar Debt will slowly become less and less at a rate likely higher than the repayment.

I still feel that we’re stepping into serious levels of unknown. The US debt is nowhere near breaking the GDP as far as servicing it goes but I still feel like that number is large enough to merit concern. Should we subscribe to failed austerity like they did in the EU? Probably not...

I guess with the price of things rising faster than income eventually we’ll settle out in a place that lines up better with a slower national growth rate. That being said it feels as though we’re walking a fine line between a working system and a full on financial collapse far greater than the 2008 crisis.

Resources will likely remain limited for many more years to come. With population projected to hit 10 Billion can we really say we’re safe with the rate of change we’re currently experiencing? I don’t know. With Obama in office it feels a lot better than it did (thank you to those who voted). Even so I still feel as though in the long run a full on depression would have brought better results. It’s tough to explain why though.

#26 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:29 AM

I still feel that we’re stepping into serious levels of unknown. The US debt is nowhere near breaking the GDP as far as servicing it goes but I still feel like that number is large enough to merit concern. Should we subscribe to failed austerity like they did in the EU? Probably not...


It's not really unknown. It's been seen before in this country, as a fraction of GDP, and has certainly been seen in other industrialized economies. If anyone thinks the US debt is scary, they should see Japan! The US debt is manageable at the moment, but we do need to bring it down. You're right that austerity is the wrong approach. The countries that went that route after the 2008 meltdown have not recovered the way we have. If we had chosen the misguided approach of trying to fight a recession with austerity, we'd be in a depression now.

I guess with the price of things rising faster than income eventually we’ll settle out in a place that lines up better with a slower national growth rate. That being said it feels as though we’re walking a fine line between a working system and a full on financial collapse far greater than the 2008 crisis.

Resources will likely remain limited for many more years to come. With population projected to hit 10 Billion can we really say we’re safe with the rate of change we’re currently experiencing? I don’t know. With Obama in office it feels a lot better than it did (thank you to those who voted). Even so I still feel as though in the long run a full on depression would have brought better results. It’s tough to explain why though.


I think there are people who are trying to sow fear, and they are doing a good job of it. Scared people are easier to manipulate. The US is not the next Greece, and economic disaster is not around the corner.

#27 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:35 PM

I believe in austerity for banksters.

I wonder how real this "fiscal cliff" is. I wonder if this is more professional wrestling with a predetermined outcome. Obama somehow couldn't reverse the Bush tax cuts in four years but he could push through unpopular programs like Obamacare, the Stimulus Package and the Bank Bailout. Anyone know more about the mechanics of the fiscal cliff and what will happen if there is no deal?

#28 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:24 AM

The way I understand it they essentially took everything both sides hate and packaged it with a predetermined ship date. There’s Tax increases for the rich and social program cuts for the poor. There’s cuts in military spending and there’s many closures of many tax loopholes.

I doubt it will be quite as bad as they make it out to be though politically speaking it could be a disaster. It has to be said that a vastly majority of republicans signed Grover Norquists “Americans for Tax Reform” Pledge which blocks them from agreeing to any raises in taxes. This “Cliff” may be a convenient way for Republicans to allow for tax increases without breaking the pledge.

Perhaps for that reason it may go through. We’ll see.

#29 Luminosity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 647
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:31 AM

That would be beneficial. Which makes me question if it could happen.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#30 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:32 AM

Obama holds all the cards here, and Boehner is bluffing. I don't care if we go off the "cliff". It would cause a small recession, which we could deal with, and the country would promptly be on the road toward fiscal health. Who the hell elected Grover Norquist god, anyway? Why does he hold such power over Republicans?





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: presidential debate

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users