In my opinion, it was all a monotonous mush of a debate. Other than a line here or there, neither did much.
Interesting. I'd think environmental policy jobs would be booming in the private sector. But what do I know. Certainly sounds like a good long term career tract.
You must be fairly narrow in your thoughts on your career. I work in health and safety, and I did far better under Bush than I did under Clinton. I'm at a point now that I don't have to worry as much about getting into and staying in the field. There are plenty of jobs in private industry that deal with environmental compliance.
Tonight reminded me of why Republicans are so successful at winning elections; they circle the wagons much better than the Democrats. I pretty much ruled the second debate a slight Obama win, at best, notable for its stopping of Obama's bleeding. Tonight, Romney looked pretty terrible, yet the narrative already being pushed across by Republicans is that he "looked presidential" or "held serve". Sorry, he got his ass kicked tonight in the same manner in which Obama lost the first debate. Yet, the Democrats fret over the first debate, worsening the narrative for Obama while Republicans hit their talking points for tonight. Still, I imagine that Obama holds his slight lead in the electoral college and tries to ride his GOTV advantages to a second term. Friday's job report could be critical in that effort and I also see the women's vote returning to a larger Obama advantage to offset the large lead for Romney with men. It should be an interesting two weeks, although I think the polls have mostly settled.
Wow... Romney is the best they could get... At least Bush would show you the shit basket he was selling you... This guy is a strictly a special interest candidate... Were in deep trouble if we elect this guy... But hell were still up the creek with Obama... The one who's already in office can't hurt us any more. But Romney must be kin to Billy in family circus!
hold up. You're calling last night the corollary of the opening night ass beating? Are you serious? Was there a good point made by Obama about how his future plans won't increase our national debt by 60% again? The difference is, the first time around, everyone knew that Obama had been schooled by a brighter guy. This time, there is some drum beating by hard left, a la you, but generally nobody is moved by either side. I think Romney made a mistake by avoiding the hammer, but he did what he was clearly coached to do. Obama leaned on two points all night - Romney the flip flopper and OBL and he should have. Both guys suck. One sounds like he'd prefer limiting government to the extent possible and one would prefer that the government provide all solutions.
No one thought Romney was the brighter guy in the first round, they thought Obama was disengaged and indifferent on auto pilot. The idea that Obama isn't as intellectually capable as Romney is some fiction creation by a small group of right wingers. Once again, you're perception of the debate is clouded by your personal beliefs, thinking that they are universally shared, but they aren't. Romney was lost on foreign policy and it was obvious, which is why he needed to pivot back to the economy or agree with Obama at nearly every turn. No amount of bullshit spin will counter that fact. Again, at least be intellectual honest and admit the obvious. Romney was subdued, nervous, bumbling and uncomfortable in the stated topic of the debate lat night. The fact that you, and all other Republicans, try to characterize last night's debate in terms in anything else not relating to foreign policy demonstrates Romney's schooling by a brighter guy on that topic. Now, if you want to argue that last night's debate will have little effect on the overall election, I can go with this. Most people have decided by now and foreign policy isn't a great decider of people's votes this time around. But, spare me the nonsense above and fail to note the obvious ass whipping Romney got on foreign policy last night.
I don't like either guy... Obama won the FP debate, Romney has to come across as agreeing with him on it so it can be neutralized and everyone will focus on economy. I've always thought that the sitting President always has the upperhand in any FP debate due to the fact they have all of the inside info. I think I've ended up with, do I want 4 years of a guy utterly destroying the economy or 4 years of a guy wanting to do nation building and mildly destroying the economy.
2 Points Romney could win the night with. 1. Libya 2. The economy and debt (as it pertains to Foreign Poilicy) Romeny and the Mod stayed clear of Libya. Adv. Obama The economy/debt was tied into foreign policy very well by Romney. Adv. Romney Romney had the chance to step on Obama's throat with Libya. I would not have been overly aggressive with the approach but I would have had Obama on the record in the debate.
I was surprised that Romney didn't attack on Libya. Perhaps he lacked confidence if pressed on details or the waters had been muddied to the point where it was just too unclear a point to make to the American people in that format. I disagree on Romney tying the economy to foreign affairs. His forays there were pretty tepid and he tried more to highlight domestic economic concerns rather than foreign. Romney was a fish out of water all last night in regards to anything beyond our borders. Luckily for him, the election has become more of a referendum on the domestic economy.
I just don't buy the "Obama destroyed the economy" rhetoric. I am more than 4 years old. I know that the economy was crumbling badly months before Obama took office. He may have failed to magically restore it, but he didn't destroy it.
thank goodness you're here with your unwavering centrism to keep me centered toward your representative view. The beauty is that Romney has all the credentials to prove he's a brighter guy and Obama sealed the embarrassment of his away. Remind me about the topics where Obama schooled someone? His entire platform is a referendum on Romney, as it has to be, because his personal record blows at almost every turn. Shockingly enough, that's someone else's fault.
his policies unequivocally precluded any business recovery. FED pumping saved his bacon, otherwise, we'd be looking at Hoover.
A small potatoes engagement like Libya would have no traction with the public. Also, hard to make a coherent argument against Libya but for Syria/Iran/Iraq. It'd be like Romney criticizing drone strikes on terror suspects.
Fared Zakaria made a good point last night that the housing markets are projected to rebound and thrive next year, which will be credited to the sitting president. I'm not sure of the veracity of the claim, nor his source, but I do get the general sense that the economy is slowly improving and the dire consequences for the next few years are misplaced. If anything, Obama certainly isn't dragging the US to ruin within the next four years.
