Obama's failure to call out Romney on his lies was ridiculous.
One in particular that got me was Obama failing to point out that Romney's claim that 50% of the green businesses invested in had failed was off by 42%
The poll was of undecided voters. It probably would not much affect the actual election polls. And there are three more debates. It will be interesting, now that Obama has been widely criticised for seeming disinterested, to see how he performs next time around.
Of course, the VP debate comes next, and by then Biden may have made things even worse.
How a nightmare? I don't understand what difference people think they will see. Obama has utterly failed in every aspect of his Presidency. And his DOJ in particular will go down as the most corrupt and divisive in history.
If the DNC had any real integrity and concern about the country, they would never have nominated Obama for a second term. Same as the RNC in 2004. They should never have allowed Bush to receive the party nomination. The political parties only care about their positions, not the greater good.
And don't forget that long before the unprecedented bias of the 2008 election, the press have always twisted the debates to serve their purpose. Kerry was absolutely terrible and transparently false against Bush and yet all we heard about was how he won and he was going to win the election. And of course we know how that turned out.
The debates have always been overrated. It will depend on their ability to use voter fraud in the close states and getting the lowest elements of society to turn out in record numbers to cast votes for Obama again.
McCain had already threw his campaign away by allowing the press to get away with the manufactured financial crisis.
And Obama's performance in that debate is almost overrated as Kerry's. There's wishful thinking and outright lying. And if you give him the benefit of the doubt, then so be it. But Obama has not delivered on anything he was pedaling in 08.
McCain had already threw his campaign away by allowing the press to get away with the manufactured financial crisis.
And Obama's performance in that debate is almost overrated as Kerry's. There's wishful thinking and outright lying. And if you give him the benefit of the doubt, then so be it. But Obama has not delivered on anything he was pedaling in 08.
Foreigners might not remember that big overblown "credit crisis" issue that was somehow spun to mean that Obama and the Democrats had to win the White House. McCain, to his eternal shame, pretty much bought into it and shelved his campaign. It was the most dishonest news reporting I have ever witnessed. The crisis already existed, but the press suddenly decided that it was the major issue of the election and somehow Obama had to be elected.
McCain was actually the best candidate for the Presidency in the last 20 years, in terms of his personal integrity and ability to work with others. Without exception, all of the others have been very far of center. And the Democrats especially. People think Bush was some sort of extremist, but he was a hardline moderate compared to Clinton, Kerry or Obama. They are the most left-wing of all the left-wing politicians. Same with Romney. He doesn't appeal to the most right-wing of the base because he's not an extremist. The media are experts at allowing DNC extremists become viable candidates. The Republicans put up candidates who are not in the center, but are not at the extreme end of their party. The Democrats always put up the most leftist members. Kerry was absolute most liberal member of the senate for decades, more so than Kennedy even.
And instead of that, we get an American Idol contest with tabloid news coverage.
And putting too much stock in a debate is never a good thing. Plenty of intelligent and articulate people are not good in debates. And plenty that are really just babbling idiots can dominate them. Same with speakers. Clinton is the most overrated speaker in history, because the press loves him. In reality, his speeches were/are always about how to say nothing that matters and distorted talking points.
McCain was actually the best candidate for the Presidency in the last 20 years, in terms of his personal integrity and ability to work with others. Without exception, all of the others have been very far of center. And the Democrats especially. People think Bush was some sort of extremist, but he was a hardline moderate compared to Clinton, Kerry or Obama. They are the most left-wing of all the left-wing politicians. Same with Romney. He doesn't appeal to the most right-wing of the base because he's not an extremist. The media are experts at allowing DNC extremists become viable candidates. The Republicans put up candidates who are not in the center, but are not at the extreme end of their party. The Democrats always put up the most leftist members. Kerry was absolute most liberal member of the senate for decades, more so than Kennedy even.
And instead of that, we get an American Idol contest with tabloid news coverage.
And putting too much stock in a debate is never a good thing. Plenty of intelligent and articulate people are not good in debates. And plenty that are really just babbling idiots can dominate them. Same with speakers. Clinton is the most overrated speaker in history, because the press loves him. In reality, his speeches were/are always about how to say nothing that matters and distorted talking points.
The Republican congress he had throughout his terms that practically had to put a gun to his head to sign any of the successful economic reforms of the 90's is what left America is a deceptively strong economic position. And strong state economies, the opposite of now. Clinton as this great economic President is just utter myth that his people continue to try and make into fact. Newt Gingich had far more to do with the economy than Bill Clinton ever did. The man's only legacy is being a non-convicted felon with no dignity and a compulsive liar.
And also the fact that the prosperity came from (at the time understandable) gutting of programs that would need to be built again after 9/11. The military specifically. Clinton came into office after the Cold War. But the country was well on it's way to a recession by the time Clinton left and this was the major topic of the 2000 election. What's going to happen with the economic down slide. Then 9/11 and the huge economic hit we took. Also the massive amount of money needed to rebuild the military and domestic security programs.
Study Clinton's presidency and tell me which of his economic policies was responsible for the paper surplus? There is none. The man was the ultimate example of how a U.S. President a figurehead who gets credit or blamed for things have nothing to do with him. That's why I say it makes little difference if it is Obama or Romney. The congress decides on policy. The President's biggest power is appointments.
He lied about sex. We all do. Unless, you are Newt Gingrich who truthfully told his wife, who was in hospital after cancer surgery, that he wanted a divorce so that he could move on to a second wife.
wasting money on tax cuts and military spending was stupid though. Accepted the Dot.com bubble no doubt swelled government revenue in the late nineties.
I'll never understand the philosophy that taxing the population is something commendable. It's a mockery now, but the U.S. was founded on the idea that the government should have as little interference in our lives as possible. It's a joke now. Income tax itself is inherently anti-American.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mens Tennis Forums
18.5M posts
87.7K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to male tennis players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the ATP, NSMTA, to college Tennis and even everything about equipment. It's all here!