Abc News/washington Post Poll: Obama Leading Romney Ahead Of First Debate

[koheesti]

If Romney uses this in the debates, Obama will be flustered and stutter his way to early retirement (and multi-million dollar speaking engagements)

The 6 Biggest Debate Promises Obama Failed to Keep

Warm up for tomorrow night's empty promises with some of 2008's forgotten pledges.

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/02/the-6-biggest-lies-obama-told-last-time

[koheesti]

As for his spending, you are just quoting another tired and fabricated old mantra which does not bear scrutiny:

Can you post a link to tax receipts and govt spending each year since 2009?

[Jingthing]

I hereby make my debate prediction: Romney will score some hits. Obama will score some hits. Some analysts will say Romney "won" the debate. Some analysts will say Obama "won" the debate. Romney will get a one point bounce just for being on the same stage as THE PRESIDENT but will still be uncomfortably behind Obama in the swing states. No game changer.

[koheesti]

I hereby make my debate prediction: Romney will score some hits. Obama will score some hits. Some analysts will say Romney "won" the debate. Some analysts will say Obama "won" the debate. Romney will get a one point bounce just for being on the same stage as THE PRESIDENT but will still be uncomfortably behind Obama in the swing states. No game changer.

Just to clarify, I don't really "like" that post, but I tend to agree with it. I would like it more if the result were that Obama's mask fell off, he was seen by the nation and press for what he really is, he loses so badly that the Dem ticket changes from Obama-Biden to Biden-Pelosi because a shamed Obama drops out of the race. Now THAT is something I could "like"!

[keemapoot]

Romney's and Obama's position on Iran are almost identical.

This seems true, though I understand the reason why Romney has been posturing so strongly to differentiate his position during this election. And, Romney and Netanyahu have a long history, and even some common donors. Overall, It's obvious Romney is closer to Netanyahu than Obama is, but how much this will help with the traditionally-Democratic Jewish vote is uncertain.

Netanyahu and Romney share ideology - and donors

http://www.haaretz.com/news/u-s-elections-2012/netanyahu-and-romney-share-ideology-and-donors.premium-1.467469

[Chicog]

Romney's and Obama's position on Iran are almost identical.

This seems true, though I understand the reason why Romney has been posturing so strongly to differentiate his position during this election. And, Romney and Netanyahu have a long history, and even some common donors. Overall, It's obvious Romney is closer to Netanyahu than Obama is, but how much this will help with the traditionally-Democratic Jewish vote is uncertain.

Netanyahu and Romney share ideology - and donors

http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.467469

Ironically, I think Obama's stance with Netanyahu is actually helping him with the Jewish vote. Not all Jews are in favour of the settlements and sabre rattling.

[Chicog]

As for his spending, you are just quoting another tired and fabricated old mantra which does not bear scrutiny:

Can you post a link to tax receipts and govt spending each year since 2009?

There is a fairly illustrative write up here:

http://www.factcheck...inferno-or-not/

While it does suggest Obama could do more to cut spending, it also clearly illustrates that a lot of the increases since 2009 are not of his making.

I'd like to hear your opinion when you've read it.

Oh and a decent article from Rolling Stone.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Chicog

[Chicog]

Since Health Care may come up in the first debate, these numbers won't be comfortable reading for Romney:

• Romney’s plan covers fewer people than under Obamacare.
  
• Romney’s plan has 54% higher out of pocket expenses than under Obamacare.
  
• Romney’s plan doesn’t reduce the deficit or bend the cost curve like Obamacare.
  
• Romney’s plan would bring back pre-existing conditions if you lapse on your insurance whereas under Obamacare pre-existing conditions do not exist ever. Ever.
  
• Romney’s plan would likely reduce consumer choice whereas Obamacare would expand it. Romney’s plan would eliminate the tax credits for small businesses provided under Obamacare.
  
• Romney’s plan would increase costs for Medicare beneficiaries and make Medicare insolvent by 2016. Obamacare reduces out of pocket expenses for seniors completely by 2020.
  

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Washington-Watch/ElectionCoverage/35061

[coma]

Unfortunatley we won't get to see Romney defending these sort of comment he made recently during the up and coming round of debating. These comments were spoken like a true American diplomat. He is a blumbering idiot that will get people killed shooting his mouth off the way he does.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/romney-fire-comments-london-olympics/story?id=16862325

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/us/politics/romney-angers-palestinians-with-comments-in-israel.html?pagewanted=all

And my favorite : Last week, Romney was infamously caught on tape saying what Republicans have said all along, only he said it a bit too bluntly, behind closed doors and in front of a crowd of very rich people. His claim? " Nearly half the electorate are lazy moochers ".

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/09/24/romney-offends-donors/

He gets my vote for " Jackass " of the year award. Haha !

[chuckd]

As for his spending, you are just quoting another tired and fabricated old mantra which does not bear scrutiny:

Can you post a link to tax receipts and govt spending each year since 2009?

There is a fairly illustrative write up here:

http://www.factcheck...inferno-or-not/

While it does suggest Obama could do more to cut spending, it also clearly illustrates that a lot of the increases since 2009 are not of his making.

I'd like to hear your opinion when you've read it.

Oh and a decent article from Rolling Stone.

The 2009 federal budget as proposed by GWB in 2008, prior to leaving office in January 2009, requested a total of $3.107 Trillion for fiscal year 2009.

However since Democrats were in complete control of both the House and Senate at the time, they chose to operate the government with continuing resolutions until such time as their man (Obama) was inaugurated in January 2009 before attempting to pass the fiscal 2009 budget

After Obama was inaugurated on 20 January 2009, the Pelosi/Reid twosome took over the reins of the budget and a budget was signed into law on 11 March 2009, nearly two months after Obama took office.

The amount requested by Bush....$3.107 Trillion

The amount signed into law...........$3.518 Trillion

An increase of $411 Billion over the previous request. In addition to the $411 Billion increase, Bush left roughly half of the TARP money from the 2008 budget on the table for Obama to spend...another $350 Billion.

FactCheck's argument is that the use of the word "inferno" by Romney relating to spending is overkill. I will let others decide that issue but it was at the very least a rather large brush fire.

PS: Rolling Stone is not accessible on my server. Don't know why.

Edit in: Forgot my link to the budget process: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

Edited October 3, 2012 by chuckd

[koheesti]

Obama is a big spender. Even with the media in his back pocket, not challenging a thing he says, he cannot change that fact. He thinks that four years later he can just keep blaming Bush for everything and his legions of adoring fans will lap it up.

I wonder if Obama will try to blame Bush for all the recent spending during that debates? I doubt it, he wouldn't impress the voters with that one bit.

[Ulysses G.]

Unfortunatley we won't get to see Romney defending these sort of comment he made recently during the up and coming round of debating.

Google "Obama Bloopers" and you will soon see that everyone makes them. However, the press often ignore them if they support the candidate.Today, Joe Biden said that the middle class have been "buried" for the four years that Obama has been president, but that was no gaffe.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[chuckd]

Unfortunatley we won't get to see Romney defending these sort of comment he made recently during the up and coming round of debating. These comments were spoken like a true American diplomat. He is a blumbering idiot that will get people killed shooting his mouth off the way he does.

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=16862325

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

And my favorite : Last week, Romney was infamously caught on tape saying what Republicans have said all along, only he said it a bit too bluntly, behind closed doors and in front of a crowd of very rich people. His claim? " Nearly half the electorate are lazy moochers ".

http://www.addicting...offends-donors/

He gets my vote for " Jackass " of the year award. Haha !

1. From your first link to ABC News:

"You know, it's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC. "There are a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials… that obviously is not something which is encouraging."

These were the same sentiments that were being expressed in the media at the time. The security problems addressed by Romney were in all the papers, particularly since the military had to deploy 18,200 troops to insure security. What's the big deal?

http://edition.cnn.c...view/index.html

2. From your second link from the NY Times:

This is what Romney said:

“Culture makes all the difference,” Mr. Romney said. “And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things.”

He added, “As you come here and you see the G.D.P. per capita, for instance, in Israel, which is about $21,000, and compare that with the G.D.P. per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality. And that is also between other countries that are near or next to each other. Chile and Ecuador, Mexico and the United States.”

What part of his statement is incorrect?

3. His comments made some five months ago at a fund raiser concerning the 47% he could never reach because they are hard core Democrats is borne out by the polls over the past few months. Check it out and see if Obama hasn't been rather consistently around that dreadful 47% number in most every poll since polling began. Much ado about nothing.

Now let me pose a question to you.

Which individual would you prefer to have as sitting President?

Romney, who speaks his mind and tells the truth as he sees it.

Or Obama who handles foreign policy like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aWFxSNMguk

[maidu]

Some Romney quotes: Brace yourselves for some more gems eminating from the debates.

"Corporations are people, my friend… of course they are."

Mitt Romney to a heckler at the Iowa State Fair who suggested that taxes should be raised on corporations as part of balancing the budget (August 2011)

"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there." —Mitt Romney (January 2012)

"I should tell my story. I'm also unemployed." —Mitt Romney, speaking in 2011 to unemployed people in Florida. Romney's net worth is over $200 million.

"He [Obama] says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It's time for us to cut back on government and help the American people." —Mitt Romney at a campaign event in Council Bluffs, Iowa, June 8, 2012

"I'll take a lot of credit for the fact that this industry's come back." –Mitt Romney, on the American auto industry, despite having written a New York Times op-ed in 2008 titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt," in which he said if GM, Ford and Chrysler got a government bailout "you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye"

"I get speaker's fees from time to time, but not very much." —Mitt Romney, who earned $374,000 in speaking fees in one year according to his personal financial disclosure (January 2012)

Maidu's comment: it's a tough row to hoe, for the Romney campaign, to try and shirk the glaring image of him being a silver spoon elitiist.

[Chicog]

1. From your first link to ABC News:

"You know, it's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC. "There are a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials… that obviously is not something which is encouraging."

These were the same sentiments that were being expressed in the media at the time. The security problems addressed by Romney were in all the papers, particularly since the military had to deploy 18,200 troops to insure security. What's the big deal?

No they weren't. The sentiments being expressed in the media were how G4SA f***ed up so badly. This issue was how much extra it was going to cost. The constant union whinging is something we've had in the UK for a few years, every since we started cutting the fat from local government.

He further compounded his insult to the British with comments like ""Do they come together and celebrate the Olympic moment? That's something which we only find out once the Games actually begin."

Hence acquiring the nickname "Mitt the Twit".

So I think a Republican candidate who manages to piss off one of America's closest allies should come under the microscope for his foreign policy abilities - something which I believe will come up in the debate.

[keemapoot]

Certainly Romney has blundered and squandered every opportunity he's had at showcasing whatever foreign policy talents he may have. I believe that foreign policy will be in debate 2 or 3, so he has time to prepare, but it's hard to see how he will shine at this element.

[Ulysses G.]

He did fine with Israel and Poland. He did piss off the Palestinians, but they are not allies in any regard.

[nurofiend]

He did fine with Israel and Poland. He did piss off the Palestinians, but they are not allies in any regard.

and let's keep it that way?

[Ulysses G.]

Until they sign a peace treaty.

[geriatrickid]

Until they sign a peace treaty.

Right..... And Boehner, McConnell, Pelosi and Reid are all going to put aside politics and put the best interests of the USA first.

The worst part of this election campaign is that for the better part of a year, the emphasis has been on an election and not on fixing the economic problems. Hundreds of millions of $$ wasted on ads and campaigning, time taken away from solving a debt crisis etc. The sad part of all this is that if it was just Romney and Obama sitting down, these two guys could get a deal together that would be a big step in the right direction. They are both pragmatists and understand reality. Not all of what Romney says is wrong, nor is what Obama has tried to achieve wrong.

My big fear is that once the US election is over, and then the German election is over, the shoe drops and the real numbers come out. It doesn't matter who's in charge come 2013, we're in for one ugly global economy. If the citizenry don't get it now, they will, especially when the missiles start flying in the middle east. I've been looking at booking some travel in December and I see that flights are getting near capacity on some routes already. My friends can't book their preferred times on BKK-HKT routes as the TG flights are sold out. For fun, I had a look at the hotel rates for Phuket for high season and not only are the rates up, but many hotels are sold out and it is only October. Europeans are back to spending and the EU is economy is teetering on collapse. The US economy is still weak and would be hit hard by a disruption in energy supplies. Japan is on the edge and the Chinese economy is rotting from the inside. The debates are a plaster over a very nasty abscess that's going to get nasty very soon.

[Chicog]

He did fine with Israel and Poland. He did piss off the Palestinians, but they are not allies in any regard.

*Nearly*. Except one of his aides pissed off the press corps by telling them "Kiss my ass".

Which went down like a lead balloon.

In fairness:

However, it's likely that for all the media bluster, Romney's 'gaffes' on his foreign trip will effectively zero impact on his chances in the November election.

A poll in May found that only one percent of voters said foreign policy was the most important issue in the race.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Chicog

[nurofiend]

The thought of him taking the reigns of US foreign policy in todays current climate of hate, war and aggresion is just down right scarey. His careless comments have stirred up already angry Arabs in the Middle East. Him getting elected would be waving the proverbial red rag at a bull. I pray this doesn't happen for the sake of relative world peace.

Which careless comments by Romney have stirred up the Middle East? When I turn on the TV, I see the mobs burning effigies of Obama, not Romney.

http://proof-proofpo...constantly.html

There are plenty of photos on that site which I won't post here for obvious reasons.

plenty?

the article then says

"Obama gets burned in effigy (B-i-E), at least once a week somewhere around the world"

that wouldn't be just biased hyperbole now would it? oh no sir.

[Ulysses G.]

My big fear is that once the US election is over, and then the German election is over, the shoe drops and the real numbers come out. It doesn't matter who's in charge come 2013, we're in for one ugly global economy.

We certainly agree on that.

[chuckd]

1. From your first link to ABC News:

"You know, it's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC. "There are a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials… that obviously is not something which is encouraging."

These were the same sentiments that were being expressed in the media at the time. The security problems addressed by Romney were in all the papers, particularly since the military had to deploy 18,200 troops to insure security. What's the big deal?

No they weren't. The sentiments being expressed in the media were how G4SA f***ed up so badly. This issue was how much extra it was going to cost. The constant union whinging is something we've had in the UK for a few years, every since we started cutting the fat from local government.

He further compounded his insult to the British with comments like ""Do they come together and celebrate the Olympic moment? That's something which we only find out once the Games actually begin."

Hence acquiring the nickname "Mitt the Twit".

So I think a Republican candidate who manages to piss off one of America's closest allies should come under the microscope for his foreign policy abilities - something which I believe will come up in the debate.

Were you offended when Obama returned the Churchill bust? Now...THAT's a real insult to the British people.

[Chicog]

Were you offended when Obama returned the Churchill bust? Now...THAT's a real insult to the British people.

I would have been, had he actually done it. But since this was another hysterical tea party lie, I wasn't.

President Barack Obama shows Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom a bust of Sir Winston Churchill in the private residence of the White House, July 20, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

[Neurath]

1. From your first link to ABC News:

"You know, it's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC. "There are a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials… that obviously is not something which is encouraging."

These were the same sentiments that were being expressed in the media at the time. The security problems addressed by Romney were in all the papers, particularly since the military had to deploy 18,200 troops to insure security. What's the big deal?

No they weren't. The sentiments being expressed in the media were how G4SA f***ed up so badly. This issue was how much extra it was going to cost. The constant union whinging is something we've had in the UK for a few years, every since we started cutting the fat from local government.

He further compounded his insult to the British with comments like ""Do they come together and celebrate the Olympic moment? That's something which we only find out once the Games actually begin."

Hence acquiring the nickname "Mitt the Twit".

So I think a Republican candidate who manages to piss off one of America's closest allies should come under the microscope for his foreign policy abilities - something which I believe will come up in the debate.

Were you offended when Obama returned the Churchill bust? Now...THAT's a real insult to the British people.

Not really. After all, they the were the ones that kicked Churchill's ass out on July 5th1945 and installed a Labor government bent on introducing universal health care coverage for all UK citizens regardless station in life.

[Jingthing]

Romney mixing it up with his peeps, the fast food workers:

[nurofiend]

The debate should be interesting. I wasn't impressed with Romney during the primary debates, but I can't wait to see Obama speak without reading off a teleprompter. I predict, that when the media shows clips of Obama from the debate, they will edit out his long pauses, and "uh"s and stuttering. The man is NOT a great speaker by any stretch of the imagination. He isn't as bad as Bush, and Bush still won a second term so you never know.

just watch it live on youtube and you won't have to worry about pro obama editing........

[Ulysses G.]

Were you offended when Obama returned the Churchill bust? Now...THAT's a real insult to the British people.

I would have been, had he actually done it. But since this was another hysterical tea party lie, I wasn't.

Hysterical Tea Party Lie? I don't think so. The White House apologized to Charles Krauthammer because they did send the bust back and they had originally denied it after Charles wrote about it in column..

Charles,

I take your criticism seriously and you are correct that you are owed an apology.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/31/churchill-bust-charles-krauthammer

[coma]

Pull up a sandbag and let the games begin.