Mens Tennis Forums banner

US presidential election 2012

57K views 1K replies 95 participants last post by  Har-Tru 
#1 · (Edited)
obama v. romney.

it's on.
 
#895 · (Edited)
Biden was absolutely bizarre and unprofessional again. And really old. Ryan looked like his grandson. Exactly what they didn't need. Ryan came off as very smart and professional. Just like Romney did. And not as smarmy.

Why did Obama ever pick this guy again? I don't get it.

I still think Obama is going to take the election when something comes up at the last minute, but neither he or Biden looked good in the debates.
 
#896 ·
Ryan point blanked refused to answer any specifics, hilarious.

Biden clearly overcompensated but still comfortably won this one.

Biden is a viable choice for 2016 if none of the high-interest candidates decide to run.
 
#912 ·
Biden clearly overcompensated but still comfortably won this one.
Even if you say it often enough, it still won't be true.

From what I am reading, Biden is being criticised across the board for giving the impression that he thinks eye rolling and snickering are debate tactics. It was obvious from the start that Biden's mission for the evening was to counteract Obama's disinterest in any kind of speech that doesn't involve a teleprompter. But when it is forced disdain, it is glaringly obvious.
 
#897 ·
Overcompensated? He acted like a clown. He's lucky he's a Democrat. A Republican would be ripped apart for acting like that in a debate.

Debates are always overrated. It hurt Obama less than all the complete falsehoods leveled during the summer. I still think the Democrat machine will turn out enough of the scum. Especially in the battleground states where they have assured the ability for people to vote 50 times.
 
#899 ·
:facepalm: at the Republican "the media is biased and demonizes us" conspiracy theory.

All Ryan needed to do was to answer specifics and it would make Biden look (relatively more) foolish.
Except he couldn't, because the Republican plans are utter wizardry. (i.e. make their bullshit mountain up)

Ryan needed to make his points clear and jab back at Biden, interrupt him if necessary. He didn't.

Obama falsehoods :spit:
Mitt Romney's flip flops alone are worse than all the lies Obama have said, and I haven't even started on Romney's lies.
 
#901 ·
I don't see Ryan interrupting him and acting like an immature child (Biden) as being evasive. I agree that he should have been more aggressive. And their plans are wishful thinking. I don't know why Ryan or Romney hasn't just flat out stated that even with a super majority, the Democrats did absolutely nothing but spend and spend. No plans whatsoever for the future is the story of their campaign.
 
#900 ·
What about the U.S. Senate majority leader making now proven false allegations based upon a anonymous source who would be a criminal with illegal access if he even existed and was likely didn't have any credibility at all?

You don't think the fact that Reid hasn't apologized, much less been censured is not a serious problem with double standards and lies?
 
#902 ·
Technically he hasn't been proven false, Romney still hasn't released any tax returns from more than 3 years ago.

Now, I will admit that what Reid said is most likely false (obviously), and he shouldn't have done that (however entertaining and hilarious that was). But you can really take your hypocrisy and shove it. Republican vice president swearing at a Senator? Check. Republican vice-presidential candidate claiming that there are "death panels"? Check.

But honestly. Politicians making up facts and labelling false accusations? Hardly a new thing in american (or any other country for that matter) politics. If you really want to censure anyone, look for those making inside trading deals instead.

I don't see Ryan interrupting him and acting like an immature child (Biden) as being evasive. I agree that he should have been more aggressive. And their plans are wishful thinking. I don't know why Ryan or Romney hasn't just flat out stated that even with a super majority, the Democrats did absolutely nothing but spend and spend. No plans whatsoever for the future is the story of their campaign.
I hate this democratic supermajority nonsense.

The democrats only EVER had a 6 month period where they had a supermajority (and half of that was spent in recess)

With the remaining period, they managed to pass the healthcare bill (which under any other circumstances would not have passed)

So to argue that democrats did failed with their supermajority is nonsense.
 
#904 ·
It's hilarious and entertaining because he said what a lot of people wanted said to Mitt Romney (though it was obviously over the top).

You obviously selectively read and skated over the part where I said it was wrong.

And I see you also selectively chose to ignore the supermajority fact now.

I will say this again: Facts have a liberal bias.
 
#907 ·
I think it was a tied between two guys, but I think personally Biden's reaction was so appalling and so unusual, i mean to me he looked like he had too much drinks before this debate, he was totally unprofessional tonight, i mean smirking and laughing and keep interupting Paul every single time:eek:. To me i thought Biden was better than this, im very disappointed that he didnt deliver it as much as i thought. I thought Paul was calm cool and collected and didn't seemed bothered even though Biden was just plain ol rude. But Biden did a hell of alot better than Obama i give him that, because i also saw the presidental debate and it was one-sided obvious from the beginning. Obama was confused, lost and didnt know what the hell he was doing at all. :tape: And the democrats and the white house still blame the youtube tape, which to me is just unbelieveably ridiculous, its like why are you keep lying to the american people. I tell you what, if Obama and Biden don't get their shit together, i dunno what will happen but it will get so dam ugly if their inconsistencies continue.
 
#909 ·
It's like the draft in 2004. The abortion issue comes up because some social conservatives are against it. And they try to play it off like that should be the issue that women vote on.

But that's not the President's decision anyway. They seem to miss that point. They used that constantly against Bush in 2000 and 2004. It was nonsense. He was never/could never ban abortion.
 
#913 ·
Virtually everyone says it's about even with both bases being happy, so you libertarian assholes can shove it. Gary Johnson will destroy Romney's chances of winning, Ron Paul nut huggers. And Biden's "behavior" alone will not supersede the obvious fact Ryan lacked substance. Ryan is all soundbites.
 
#914 ·
i was sure Biden will kick Ryan's ass..

who would have thought?

i think Biden was looking Arrogant, smug and too pleased with himself so he might "won" but ppl thought it was so uncall for so he lost
 
#916 ·
We all knew Obama was an empty suit and Biden was a buffoon, but to see these facts crystalized on national TV in front of the world, without the benefit of the media sweeping their lies, blunders and gaffes under the rug like they usually do, was disturbing to watch. And to think that this Hope and Change tag team of Dweedledum and Dweedledee are in charge of the most powerful nation in the world? God help us. :scared:

Oh, and on top of that the EU won the Nobel Peace Prize. Bahaha. :superlol:
 
#933 ·
Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

As many of you may know, Salt Lake City, Utah, is the Mecca of the Mormon religion, and Mitt Romney is a Mormon. However, the Salt Lake Tribune has just endorsed Barack Obama over Mitt Romney for president. This Op-Ed makes the best, most concise, case that I've seen why Obama should be re-elected, and why Romney doesn't deserve to be president. If you agree, PASS IT ON.

Link to original: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.csp

Tribune Endorsement: Too Many Mitts

Obama has earned another term

First Published Oct 19 2012 12:13 pm • Updated 3 hours ago

Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state.

But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people.

In short, this is the Mitt Romney we knew, or thought we knew, as one of us.

Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.

More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.

If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found.

And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.

In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.

The president also acted wisely to bail out the auto industry, which has since come roaring back. Romney, in so many words, said the carmakers should sink if they can’t swim.

Obama’s most noteworthy achievement, passage of his signature Affordable Care Act, also proved, in its timing, his greatest blunder. The set of comprehensive health insurance reforms aimed at extending health care coverage to all Americans was signed 14 months into his term after a ferocious fight in Congress that sapped the new president’s political capital and destroyed any chance for bipartisan cooperation on the shredded economy.

Obama’s foreign policy record is perhaps his strongest suit, especially compared to Romney’s bellicose posture toward Russia and China and his inflammatory rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Obama’s measured reliance on tough economic embargoes to bring Iran to heel, and his equally measured disengagement from the war in Afghanistan, are examples of a nuanced approach to international affairs. The glaring exception, still unfolding, was the administration’s failure to protect the lives of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and to quickly come clean about it.

In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.

Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.
 
#934 ·
Re: Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

The Tribune endorsed Obama in 2008 and McCain won by a landslide, almost 2-1.

So, if history is a guide, this is good news for Romney. Being a Mormon, he might win 3-1 this time around.

Just saying!
 
#935 ·
Re: Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

Not even the most reputable polling firms are conducting polls in Utah. They seem to think, very rightly, it would be a waste of time and resources.
 
#936 ·
Re: Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

None of that is the point. The point is that, of all daily newspapers, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board has laid out, in the most concise terms, the best case for Obama and against Romney. The art of compelling concision is a rare attribute. If you agree, then you should take advantage of their communicative skills and pass it on.
 
#937 · (Edited)
Re: Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

None of that is the point. The point is that, of all daily newspapers, The Salt Lake Tribune has laid out, in the most concise terms, the best case for Obama and against Romney.
If Mormonism is not the point, then why is a repeat of their 2008 endorsement of Obama shocking to you? The thread title hoists you on your own petard, I'm afraid. What prompted you to think the Tribune would switch horses this time around, if not Mormonism?

Why did you not choose as a title, "Tribune Endorses Obama Again. No Surprise."
 
#949 ·
Re: Shocking Presidential Endorsement!

If find this to be a compelling case against the Etch-a-Sketch candidate:

"Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

"The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.

"More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.

"If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

"Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found."

************************************************

The answer is, he doesn't exist. Romney is a chameleon who will say anything to anyone to get a vote. The question is begged, why does a capitalist exploiter like Mitt Romney seek a relatively low paying public office? I submit that Romney, like the Bush family, seeks public office for the opportunity to exploit the public trust for private gain. He has no interest in public service, only in self service. It wouldn't surprise me to know that Romney has already heavily invested in war contractors like Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, et al. If Romney can find his way to the White House, the U.S. will be in a new war shortly thereafter.
 
#950 ·
Wow, who censored a bunch of posts in this thread about the correct use of ''your'' and ''you're''? This place is turning into some kind of socialist Gulag. Somebody must have paid someone off to remove all the posts he found embarrassing. Sort of like Obama trying to cover up the Benghazi scandal.
 
#951 ·
Hmmm! It seems that my thread about the Salt Lake Tribune endorsement of Obama has been merged with the numerous irrelevant non-sequiturs deleted. Well done, moderators.

I am also quite pleased with The Salt Lake Tribune's concise and HONEST assessment of Obama's first term as president of the United States, a rare demonstration of journalistic independence and integrity in the age of consolidated, corporate controlled, fascist, talking points, main stream media.

BRAVO SLT:

************************************************

"And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.

"In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.

"The president also acted wisely to bail out the auto industry, which has since come roaring back. Romney, in so many words, said the carmakers should sink if they can’t swim.

"Obama’s most noteworthy achievement, passage of his signature Affordable Care Act, also proved, in its timing, his greatest blunder. The set of comprehensive health insurance reforms aimed at extending health care coverage to all Americans was signed 14 months into his term after a ferocious fight in Congress that sapped the new president’s political capital and destroyed any chance for bipartisan cooperation on the shredded economy.

"Obama’s foreign policy record is perhaps his strongest suit, especially compared to Romney’s bellicose posture toward Russia and China and his inflammatory rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Obama’s measured reliance on tough economic embargoes to bring Iran to heel, and his equally measured disengagement from the war in Afghanistan, are examples of a nuanced approach to international affairs. The glaring exception, still unfolding, was the administration’s failure to protect the lives of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and to quickly come clean about it."

**********************************************************

Magnificently stated.
 
#954 ·
Perhaps you missed one of my commentaries to the Salt Lake Tribune endorsement of Obama. I'll reproduce it for you below. I'm guessing Romney already has a vested interest in war, just in case he wins:

The answer is, he doesn't exist. Romney is a chameleon who will say anything to anyone to get a vote. The question is begged, why does a capitalist exploiter like Mitt Romney seek a relatively low paying public office? I submit that Romney, like the Bush family, seeks public office for the opportunity to exploit the public trust for private gain. He has no interest in public service, only in self service. It wouldn't surprise me to know that Romney has already heavily invested in war contractors like Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, et al. If Romney can find his way to the White House, the U.S. will be in a new war shortly thereafter.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top